DiscussMormonism.com

Will Schryver, the shrill mopologist dogged by the KEP, has himself mused that perhaps the Facsimiles might be removed from the LDS canon. The reason is clear. Those Facsimiles are the clearest, most palpable evidence of the religious fraud perpetrated by JSJr.

The explanations don't line up with what Egyptology has discovered about ancient Egyptian writings that appear on those Facsimiles. JSJr 'restored' them in the most inventful ways. Using hieratics to replace missing hieroglyphics in the ring of Facsimile 2, and placing them upside down at that. And those borrowed hieratics were drawn by JSJr from the mid 1960s found Sensen papyrus, just as those in the left hand margins of the damning KEP were too.

Of course, there is the problem with Facs 3 that Paul Osborne repeatedly points out: 'There is no king's name above Isis and neither is the name Shulem found in the writings' re Figure 5 in Facs 3.

As Kevin Graham laid out this week on MD&D, and now on MDB, Schryver's 'substantial word study' supports Chris Smith's argument that Abr 1:1-3 were developed from the GAEL, not the other way around. (by the way, thanks Will for providing that extra nail for the BoAbr's coffin.)

If the Brethren take away the Facs, what do they do with Abr 1:12 that reads: "and that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation at the commencement of this record."

Also, some of Mormonism's unique doctrines depend on the BoAbr:

• the exaltation of humanity (Abr 2:10)
• the plurality of gods (Abr 4:1)
• priesthood (Abr 1:1-4)
• pre-mortal existence (Abr 3:18-28) and
  other inhabited worlds in the cosmos (Pearl of Great Price Student Manual, Book of Abraham, pp 28-40)

The Brethren hardly mention the BoAbr at GCs or other fora. That's been the case for decades. But the internet discussions just go on and on. One mopologist after another has come up to the plate, only to swing and miss the pitch of criticism. Gee, Hauglid, Schryver. Makes one wonder who will be next.

Since the PoGP is the weakest link in the chain of the Mormon truth claims, and the 'net discussions about the PoGP persistently continue, what does the LDS Church do next to diffuse this problem? Will going mainstream Christian and ignoring these BoAbr "truths" take enough attention off of the BoAbr?

What's the next mopologetic attempt to salvage the BoAbr going to be?

I believe there is still this weird defense that Wade has recently suggested.

Even if one believes that Joseph and others thought the Book of Abraham was derived from the extant portion of the papyri, one may believe that these men were mistaken, which then leaves open the question of where else on the papyri the Book of Abraham may have been derived, thus making relevant the issue of the missing scroll.

One can phrase this proposition such that one never has to admit that one believed it yet at the same time one can use in in the defense of a position that one wants desperately to defend.

I would offer the opinion that the Church has but two choices.

1. Carry on regardless
2. Discount and decanonise the whole thing

Anything inbetween would be leapt upon as an admission that Smith got it wrong. At least with option 2 the Church can portray it in the same way as the Journal of Discourses and the Book of Commandments - time moves on, what was important then isn't important now, it's a sign of ongoing revelation etc etc etc.

As the indefensable problems with the Book of Abraham and facsimilies reach more and more of the membership, option 2 becomes more and more likely.

Fence Sitter wrote:I believe there is still this weird defense that Wade has recently suggested.

Even if one believes that Joseph and others thought the Book of Abraham was derived from the extant portion of the papyri, one may believe that these men were mistaken, which then leaves open the question of where else on the papyri the Book of Abraham may have been derived, thus making relevant the issue of the missing scroll.

One can phrase this proposition such that one never has to admit that one believed it yet at the same time one can use in in the defense of a position that one wants desperately to defend.

Wade's apologetic may be the most brash throwing under the bus of the 'Restoration Prophet' that I've ever heard. "JSJr was so out of touch with what was really going on that he genuinely believed that the BoAbr translation he performed was from the right hand side of the papyrus when in fact it was from the left hand side. But because JSJr was so out of touch with what was really going on, he didn't even realize he'd translated the BoAbr from different part of the papyrus from which he thought he had."

Wade, I think if Mormon claims are true despite all the holes in it, when you meet JSJr in the hereafter he's going to bitch-slap you for that one.

The world is getting smarter and smarter with each passing decade and communication between the masses continues to grow -- there is no going back. Before too long the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 will be a household word in every country of the world and Mormonism will be clearly known as a false revelation.

There is nothing the First Presidency can do to save it. The revelation was false. The revelation about the revelation was false. Everything about it is false. Therefore, the First Presidency is stuck and can't do a damn thing about it. But do they care? Not really -- they enjoy the position of power and security, being adored by the faithful saints where ever they go.

But there will come a day when the news media will challenge the church openly about Facsimile No. 3 and the First Presidency will appear like clowns not knowing what to say. Keep ramming Facsimile No. 3 down the throat of the Church. They can't swallow it and there are no excuses they can rightly offer. Facsimile No. 3 is the key in exposing the nakedness of the Church and it's false revelations.

Paul O

sock puppet wrote:Wade's apologetic may be the most brash throwing under the bus of the 'Restoration Prophet' that I've ever heard. "JSJr was so out of touch with what was really going on that he genuinely believed that the BoAbr translation he performed was from the right hand side of the papyrus when in fact it was from the left hand side. But because JSJr was so out of touch with what was really going on, he didn't even realize he'd translated the BoAbr from different part of the papyrus from which he thought he had."

Wade, I think if Mormon claims are true despite all the holes in it, when you meet JSJr in the hereafter he's going to bitch-slap you for that one.

I am not sure but I think this is not an idea original to Wade. Maybe Nibley suggested it at one time?

Eventually they're just going to have to drop it. There is too much baggage. Perhaps before they do it they'll come up with a new section to D&C that covers the critical Book of Abraham doctrines.

Fence Sitter wrote:

sock puppet wrote:Wade's apologetic may be the most brash throwing under the bus of the 'Restoration Prophet' that I've ever heard. "JSJr was so out of touch with what was really going on that he genuinely believed that the BoAbr translation he performed was from the right hand side of the papyrus when in fact it was from the left hand side. But because JSJr was so out of touch with what was really going on, he didn't even realize he'd translated the BoAbr from different part of the papyrus from which he thought he had."

Wade, I think if Mormon claims are true despite all the holes in it, when you meet JSJr in the hereafter he's going to bitch-slap you for that one.

I am not sure but I think this is not an idea original to Wade. Maybe Nibley suggested it at one time?

Well, then, maybe JSJr has already bitch slapped Nibley in the spirit world.

Drifting wrote:
1. Carry on regardless
2. Discount and decanonise the whole thing

I think they will continue with #1, but will the Book of Abraham more and more. Not necessarily the doctrines, but they wont really go into where those doctrines originate. Joseph Smith didn't mind changing things and members mostly didn't mind or take much interest. I think the LDS leadership today thunks a little different, and it would be hard to go the route of #2. It would be an admission Joseph got it wrong and would take a generation or two before you might see some benefits. The problem here is that the historical events have been recoded and the Book of Abraham will continue to be a major changer in LDS beliefs as long as there are LDS beliefs that resemble those of today.

The problem is the Book of Abraham explains why blacks can't have the priesthood. If you decononize that, it just makes the early church leaders look like racists.