Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

ClarkGoble wrote:Not to state the obvious but that quote doesn't identify the Hor papyri. We may infer that from other things like the vingettes. But I don't think that quote clarifies things as much as you think. Thus my wanting to get a clear statement from Joseph. More importantly though how God communicated this to him. There is after all a big difference between a revelation "one of these scrolls has Abraham material on it" and "this particular scroll has Abraham material on it."


The Hor papyrus is documented as the very material in which Joseph Smith dissected his Book of Abraham. The Kirtland Papers attest to this but more importantly, the Book of Abraham narrative makes it crystal clear that the Hor papyrus to include Facsimile No. 1, is the very roll which contained the ancient record, the writings of Abraham, written by his own hand.

Book of Abraham wrote: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.


Image
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

Shulem wrote:I have a question for you, Clark:

The Translation of Smith, was it from heaven, or of men?

ClarkGoble wrote:Obviously I believe in part from heaven (acknowledging ever present human fallibilism in the production)


So you give Mormon God a little credit "in part" for the translation from Egyptian to English. How much, 10%, 20%, more? How much credit to you care to give to the Holy Ghost?! The translations of texts and vignettes are all wrong -- utterly and completely false.

You know, Clark, it's a proven fact that everything Smith translated (Egyptian into English) is wrong. Is it any wonder that NOBODY (NOT A SINGLE SOUL) outside of the world of Mormonism believes Joseph Smith knew how to translate Egyptian into English as he claimed? The world doesn't believe Joseph Smith and neither do YOU because you know it's not justified in the least.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

ClarkGoble wrote:More what I'm getting at is the distinction between what God said and what Joseph inferred from that and then generally attributed to God. Most people don't get into those subtle distinctions but they're epistemologically quite important. They also tend not to get addressed in the more general statements.


It's safe to conclude that the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 did not come out of the mouth of God or in other words, God never said those things. You see, Clark, God knows how to read Egyptian and can translate it into English at the blink of an eye. Joseph Smith couldn't read Egyptian and wondered and marveled at the papyrus as he imagined to himself on how to create a story he could attribute to God for giving him the ability to translate and divine. There is a clear difference between Smith the man and God the Divine. The Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are not from God. The Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are from man.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

Shulem wrote:We can know best what Smith thought based on what he wrote and based on statements made by others who cited him.


ClarkGoble wrote:That is certainly our best information. I'm not sure it can get at these subtleties I'm raising.


Then you'll have to dream up and create ideas for what you want to believe as you continue to make excuses in justifying your testimony of Joseph Smith. I did that as a Book of Abraham apologist for many years. But in the end, I had to face the truth. I'm proud of myself for taking that big step and learning to accept reality for what it is. I have to wonder how close you are to taking that step yourself.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

ClarkGoble wrote:5. I'd then ask him whether he thought the original meaning of the vignettes was as an illustration for the text or whether it was just used as such.


Oh my, my oh my, listen to what you just asked, Clark.

1. "I'd then ask him whether he thought the original meaning of the vignettes was as an illustration for the text"

2. "or whether it was just used as such"

What kind of circular reasoning is this? Do you realize what you just said? Do have any idea just how lost you are in your apologetic reasoning? My, my, Clark, you need to get out of the trap and free yourself from this delusional loop you're stuck in.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

ClarkGoble wrote:6. Finally I'd ask him when he talks about something written, whether in fac 3 or fac 2 does he think that's what hieroglyphics say or merely that the hieroglyphics identify the figure. That is, does he think the hieroglyphics represent the use or the literal sense of the terms.


Facsimile No. 3 Explanation Fig. 4 wrote:Image

Fig. 4. Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand


Clark, do you not think the name "Shulem" is written in the writing above the hand of the figure identified by revelation as a prince who befriended Abraham?

Don't you believe Joseph Smith at his word? Whether Joseph Smith translates hieroglyphs from papyrus or gold plates -- it is the same. He is translating the Egyptian into English. Names in the Facsimile are on par with names in the Book of Mormon.

Period.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

JOSEPH CLAIMED A "LITERAL TRANSLATION"

JOSEPH SMITH DHC 1:71. (1830.) wrote:I wish to mention here, that the title-page of the Book of Mormon is a literal translation, taken from the very last leaf, on the left hand side of the collection or book of plates, which contained the record which has been translated, the language of the whole running the same as all Hebrew writing in general; and that said title-page is not by any means a modern composition, either of mine or of any other man who has lived or does live in this generation. Therefore, in order to correct an error which generally exists concerning it, I give below that part of the title-page of the English version of the Book of Mormon, which is a genuine and literal translation of the title-page of the original Book of Mormon, as recorded on the plates.


Plug Joseph's views on Book of Mormon TRANSLATION into the Book of Abraham: wrote:
I wish to mention here, that the title-page of the Book of Mormon Book of Abraham

is a literal translation, taken from the very last leaf portion,

on the left hand side of the collection or book of plates papyrus,

which contained the record original account which has been translated,

the language of the whole which I read running the same as all Hebrew writing in general;

and that said title-page is not by any means a modern composition something we made up,

either of mine or of any other man who has lived or does live in this generation our time.

Therefore, in order to correct an error which generally exists concerning it among unbelievers,

I give below that part of the title-page of the English version of the Book of Mormon Book of Abraham,

which is a genuine and literal translation of the title-page of the original Book of Mormon Book of Abraham,

as recorded on the plates papyrus.


Joseph Smith was caught red-handed. The Book of Abraham translations are proof he was a fraud. The modern church will continue to push the catalyst theory-excuse out of necessity but in doing so they throw everything Joseph Smith ever said about how he "translated" under the bus. The key is in the very word "translation" and how Joseph Smith understood it in his day when translating a foreign language into English, such as German into French or English into Hebrew -- the principle is the same:

Webster's Dictionary 1828 wrote:Translate . . . . To interpret; to render into another language; to express the sense of one language in the words of another. The Old Testament was translated into the Greek language more than two hundred years before Christ. The Scriptures are now translated into most of the languages of Europe and Asia.

Translation . . . . That which is produced by turning into another language; a version. We have a good translation of the Scriptures.


Stupid damned Mormons!!!
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

Shulem wrote:The key is in the very word "translation" and how Joseph Smith understood it in his day when translating a foreign language into English, such as German into French or English into Hebrew -- the principle is the same


Joseph Smith and his associates did in fact claim to literally translate "reformed" and conventional Egyptian hieroglyphic characters that were upon the gold plates and the Abrahamic papyrus into the English language.

Smith claimed to translate reformed Egyptian from the golden plates and that he was so familiar with the characters on the leaves that he was able to certify there was no Greek or Latin on those plates. This proves that Smith was vouching for the entire contents of the golden book, every single leaf, there being no other language but reformed Egyptian which he literally translated.

TEACHINGS OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH 299 wrote:There was no Greek or Latin upon the plates from which I, through the grace of God, translated the Book of Mormon.


It's no more difficult to imagine Smith saying this:

There was no Greek or Latin upon the PAPYRUS from which I, through the grace of God, translated the Book of ABRAHAM.


We may confidently assume that Smith would have vouched that there was no Greek or Latin contained in Facsimile No. 3. But out of the other side of his mouth the translator claims to convert Egyptian hieroglyphic characters into English, to include the names: Shulem & Olimlah.

Folks, it's all a lie. Joseph Smith was lying!

You don't think so? Prove me wrong!

I dare you! I double dare you!!

:twisted:
_Amore
_Emeritus
Posts: 1094
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:27 pm

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Amore »

Hey Shulem,
Thanks for the laughs about telling it like it is (regarding the lack of logic in accepting the Book of Mormon as historical and of the warped dogma of Jesus as human sacrifice scapegoat). Often I feel like I’m the crazy one surrounded by people shunning me for not believing in those things. So it’s a healthy, kind of healing laughter as i read some of what you wrote.

In an effort to be fair, I can see truth from both your side and Z’s. One way God is defined is as Truth. So it’s ungodly to deny truth in favor of lies - even if the lies are called faith. Faith should not rob truth. On the other hand, there are types of truth that are not history or factual-based... like love, gratitude and hope. Emotional intelligence plays a part in metaphysics. The placebo effect is another way of saying “As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he” and “faith is evidence of things not seen.”
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith & a LITERAL 3500 Year Old Abraham Autograph

Post by _Shulem »

Amore wrote: The placebo effect is another way of saying “As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he” and “faith is evidence of things not seen.”


BOOK OF ABRAHAM FACSIMILES FEATURED IN PAINTING.

Image

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints think and feel through their faith that the Book of Abraham is true scripture and that Joseph Smith was inspired in producing it. In this very point, both the critic and believer are in total agreement. Note that for the believer the buck stops with faith but for the critic the buck stops with science. Who has the stronger argument in proving their case? The critics do, hands down, it's a cinch or in other words: A slam dunk.

:wink:
Post Reply