How anti-mormons lie concerning the Book of Abraham....

[_ldsfaqs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMVX-Km_G6Y

I've said these things all along, but anti's ignore the actual truth.

1. The real Book of Abraham wouldn't have been given to a house keeper.
2. The real Book of Abraham was put under glass.
3. The real Book of Abraham was a part of the Long Scroll, while the found fragments are from the Short scroll.
4. Joseph gave away a lot of the scrolls, clearly the found fragments are from what was given away.

Conclusion, the found Fragments never were the Book of Abraham as anti-mormons claim.
The Fascimlees are dime a dozen, if anything they appear to be Joseph's "working copy's" (given they were written on) or simply related and useful information that he wanted to include with the Book of Abraham.

Now, the only real evidence anti's have of the fragments being the actual Book of Abraham is the fact that some of the symbols next to the facsimilees match the symbols that are in the "margins" of the translations, translation which by the way are paragraphs long, which simply couldn't at all be actual "translation" of the symbols. Further, it is entirely possible that those same symbols were on the original Book of Abraham scroll, but still not the actual Book of Abraham text.

In the end, the historical record clearly shows that the found fragments could not be the actual claimed Book of Abraham, and the anti's case entirely rests on two big fat "assumption" from the found and related texts.

Win for the actual truth.

[_Brackite]

From Brent Metcalfe's recent podcast interview:

We don't have a single example of authentic Egyptian characters appearing in those documents, any of the Book of Abraham translation manuscripts that come from anywhere other than the papyri fragments that we have now.

Link: http://mormonstories.org/brent-metcalfe ... f-abraham/



The Original Length of the Scroll of Hôr

Formulas and Facts: A Response to John Gee

[_SteelHead]

I shouldn't reply to this stupidity but....

Abraham 1:

12 And it came to pass that the priests laid violence upon me, that they might slay me also, as they did those virgins upon this altar; and that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation at the commencement of this record.

13 It was made after the form of a bedstead, such as was had among the Chaldeans, and it stood before the gods of Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah, Korash, and also a god like unto that of Pharaoh, king of Egypt.

References this


See the guy on the bed? That is the commencement of the record as per the narrative. It even goes so far as to describe the bed.

And see this part:

6 For their hearts were set to do evil, and were wholly turned to the god of Elkenah, and the god of Libnah, and the god of Mahmackrah, and the god of Korash, and the god of Pharaoh, king of Egypt;
.
.
.
.
14 That you may have an understanding of these gods, I have given you the fashion of them in the figures at the beginning, which manner of figures is called by the Chaldeans Rahleenos, which signifies hieroglyphics.

The facsimiles produced by Joseph Smith say these names refer to the 4 little jars with heads.

And see this:

15 And as they lifted up their hands upon me, that they might offer me up and take away my life, behold, I lifted up my voice unto the Lord my God, and the Lord hearkened and heard, and he filled me with the vision of the Almighty, and the angel of his presence stood by me, and immediately unloosed my bands;

Joseph said the angel is represented by the bird.


So while your theory is nice.... it is full of crap.

[_ldsfaqs]

What you stated does nothing to what I stated....

I know the fascimilees relate to the Book of Abraham, not what I was arguing.

I'm also well familiar with all the various anti-mormon arguments like Metcalf.... boring.

[_Brackite]

From Fence Sitter:

More on the missing scroll theory & the length of the missing scroll.

As has been already mentioned, the canonized version of the Book of Abraham translation is only partially complete. There are numerous references to significant portions left to translate or whose translations had been completed or lost. Oliver Cowdery expected the completed translation to fill volumes. In 1843 Joseph Smith promised to furnish further extracts from the Book of Abraham beyond what we have now, and there are several involved descriptions of those future (lost?) translations from people like Anson Call, William West, Sarah Leavitt, William Clayton and William Appleby.

If the Book of Abraham was written in hieratic characters by the same scribe and on an extension of the same scroll it would take around 16'-0' (511 cm) more of scroll to do so. (See Cook & Smith "The Original Length of the Scroll of Hor".) Allowing for about 2'-6" of extant pieces results in a minimum scroll length of 18'-6" just to write the current text of The Book of Abraham,The Breathing Permit of Hor and the 2 facsimiles. We haven't begun to factor in how much more papyri would be needed to include the unplublished references mentioned above. So now we have a papyri roll that by any reasonable standard must exceed 25'-0" to contain all the extant pieces, all the current Book of Abraham and all there other references (excluding Oliver Cowdery's) and it must fit within the diameter defined by the length of the first winding. The length of the first winding is around 4 1/4" so the diameter is about 1 1/3". The question becomes, is it even possible to roll up a 25'-0" piece of papyri into a 1 1/3" diameter roll?

viewtopic.php?p=634130#p634130

Recently I discovered another issue which is interesting. We know that there were two scrolls connected to the old man mummy who was Hor. (Pharaoh himself according to contemporary descriptions.) They are a Book of Breathings (the Hor scroll and the generally accepted source of the Book of Abraham) parts of which are still in the possession of the Church and a Book of the Dead. The Book of the Dead papyrus which was prepared for Hor is in the Louvre. These two scroll date to about 150 BCE.
The Louvre Hor Book of Dead is also badly damaged but its dimensions are about 58" long and 12-13 1/2" tall.
Somewhere between Lebolo removing Hor from his tomb in Egypt and Chandler selling the remaining artifact collection in Kirtland, the Hor Book of the Dead was separated from the mummy and made its way to the Louvre. It would be interesting to compare the two scrolls to see if they were created by the same scribe, but I digress.

In addition to the Hor scroll, the Joseph Smith collection contained another scroll, which he identified as the Book of Joseph. This is actually a Book of the Dead prepared for someone named Ta-sherit-Min which I presume was one of the female mummies; in any case it was not from Hor. The age of this scroll is somewhere after 500 BCE.

So in order for The Book of Abraham and The Book of Joseph to reach Joseph Smith one is required to believe the following:
1.Two complete, long, unknown works by Abraham and Joseph were kept in Egypt for around 2000 years.
2. Egyptian scribes would take common vignettes from Egyptian funerary documents and just slightly change them so they represented scenes from the Book of Abraham. Note that an Egyptian scribe would not have included a vignette of a sacrifice scene (someone holding a knife) as part of a funerary document because the Egyptians believed these scrolls had actual power and a knife wielding caricature would not be included as it would be a threat to the deceased. Maybe we have a Jewish scribe?
3. Two different scribes working hundreds of years apart took two different extremely rare Jewish texts and inscribed them in the middle portions of common burial documents for members of a different religion, in the case of the scroll with Facsimile #1 that scribe would been able to place the scroll unexamined by anyone else on the mummy because of note#2 above.
4.The two scrolls are buried hundreds of years apart on separate mummies neither of which had reason to have Jewish texts like these included as part of their funerary documents.
5. These two mummies make their way to Joseph Smith two thousand years later with the only known copies of these two texts.
6. Joseph Smith translates a portion of one scroll and promises volumes to come from the rest of both scrolls.
7. After Joseph Smith's death every single piece of text from both scrolls that contained either the Book of Abraham or the Book of Joseph was lost, in spite of the fact that the length of the scrolls required to contain those books would far exceed those portions in existence. None of the extant fragments or torn piece, of which there are dozens have anything to do with Abraham or Joseph.

In the end, we are not asked just to believe that we happen to be missing the entire portion of a one of a kind scroll that was buried with Hor which made its way to Joseph Smith and then was lost, we are asked to believe this happened twice, once with Hor and once with another mummy buried at a different time, perhaps hundreds of years apart.

Fool me once.

viewtopic.php?p=640599#p640599

[_Maureen]

ldsfaqs, if that's how you see it then the Improvement Era magazine must be anti-mormon.

https://archive.org/stream/improvemente ... 3/mode/2up

M.

[_ldsfaqs]

ldsfaqs, if that's how you see it then the Improvement Era magazine must be anti-mormon.

https://archive.org/stream/improvemente ... 3/mode/2up

M.

You clearly have no idea what I'm talking about, nor the issue in question.

[_Maureen]

ldsfaqs, if that's how you see it then the Improvement Era magazine must be anti-mormon.

https://archive.org/stream/improvemente ... 3/mode/2up

M.

You clearly have no idea what I'm talking about, nor the issue in question.

You're not even going to read the article I linked to? Why not?

M.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Educate thyself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5FAFVVv_os

[_Fence Sitter]

#1 is 100% correct. The real book of Abraham would not have been given to a housekeeper, nor would it have been sold to a traveling salesman 2 weeks after Lucy Mack Smith died, it would not have been sold to a museum to be lost in a fire, nor would it have been given to Indians on the western side of the Mississippi, nor would it have been cut up and pasted on paper used for temple drawings. It would not have been placed under glass and kept in a wooden chest of drawers while it traveled around in a wagon being displayed, while its true owners tried to get it back since Joseph Smith never paid anything for it out of his own money.

None of those things happened to the real book of Abraham because it never existed. Now the papyri from which Joseph Smith pretended to translate the book of Abraham, well that is a different story. That went through all those events and many more.


Let's pretend for a moment that somewhere on the Egyptian artifacts was a section of text that actually contained the book of Abraham and that was part of the collection that Lucy inherited (stole?) when Joseph Smith died. (Clearly Joseph Smith would never have given away anything actually written by Abraham himself so that is a safe assumption.) Since Joseph Smith was the only one who supposedly could read Egyptian and he is now dead, how in the world would anyone be able to tell what those parts that ended up with the housekeeper said?