Mormon Egyptologist Debunks the Book of Abraham

[Guest]

Dr. Stephen Thompson is a member of the LDS church and a qualified Egyptologist. He received his Bachelors of Arts in Near Eastern Studies from Brigham Young University in 1984. He received his Masters of Arts and hisvPhD in Egyptology from Brown University in 1988 and 1991, respectively. As such, we should regard him as reasonably well informed on matters of Egyptology and his opinion of the document represented by his own church as the supposed original autograph of the “Book of Abraham”, allegedly written by Abraham himself. Had Dr. Thompson concluded his study of the Book of Abraham manuscript by endorsing it as authentic, certainly Mormons everywhere (including here in this forum) would be trumpeting his findings and proclaiming his un-questionable authority to draw informed conclusions about the authenticity of the Book of Abraham.

But as we shall see, Mormons will simply ignore any established scholarship that debunks the claims of their organization and their "prophets", even when the scholars are their very own.

So what does this Mormon Egyptologist and scholar say about the Book of Abraham?

The link below is to Dr. Thompson's article entitled, “Egyptology and the Book of Abraham”:

http://www.lds-mormon.com/thompson_book ... aham.shtml

Dr. Thompson provides numerous clear and substantial reasons to dismiss the Book of Abraham as a fraud. Rather than repeat the entire linked article, I have posted his conclusion below. It reads as follows:

quote:>> "In the preceding I have argued that (1) Joseph Smith's interpretations of the facsimiles in the Book of Abraham are not in agreement with the meanings which these figures had in their original, funerary, context; (2) anachronisms in the text of the book make it impossible that it was translated from a text written by Abraham himself; and (3) what we know about the relationship between Egypt and Asia renders the account of the attempted sacrifice of Abraham extremely implausible. If one accepts that Joseph Smith was using the facsimiles in a fashion which was not consonant with their original purpose, it does not make sense to then insist that "the Prophet's explanations of each of the facsimiles accord with present understanding of Egyptian religious practices." I see no evidence that Joseph Smith had a correct conception of "Egyptian religious practices" or that a knowledge of such was essential to the production of the Book of Abraham." <<:unquote

Mormons ...please explain why we should think that your so-called “prophet” really did translate the “Book of Abraham” correctly when, in fact, literally every single qualified non-Mormon Egyptologist who has ever examined the language and images from which the Book of Abraham was translated –supposedly by miraculous, divinely inspired means- has concluded that Joe Smith had no idea what he was talking about and LDS Egyptologists have consistently failed to present any evidence to the contrary to their peers. Why is it that the universal consensus of qualified dispassionate experts remains that the original papyrus from which the LDS "prophet" rendered the contents of the Book of Abraham was, in FACT, nothing more than just another example of the normative funeral documents uniquely associated with the pagan religion and mythology of 1st century Egypt. In fact, even all LDS experts (including BOTH Mormon Egyptologists – Dr. Thompson and Dr. Gee) have failed to substantiate the Book of Abraham translation and Dr. Thompson even provides several clear and fully substantiated reasons to conclude that Smith’s “divine revelation” was a fake.

Again, if Thompson had confirmed some portion of the Book of Abraham as having actually been correctly translated from the original papyrus, we most certainly WOULD be hearing about it ad-nausem. The LDS SILENCE and/or avoidance here in this thread will tell us all we really need to know about their own insecurity and inability to deal with the FACT that their beloved “scripture” is nothing but a silly hoax.

-BH

.

(edited to correct the link above)

[_Fence Sitter]

Brian,

You will probably find that most people here agree with you.

[_DrW]

Brian,

This is quite interesting. I was unaware of this work. What would be great is to re-cast this in a non-threatening way, post it over on MDD (if you can get access), and ask your questions of the TBMs who hang out over there.

Most here would agree with you and those who might not are unlikely to respond, because, well, really - what can an apologist say when confronted with such statements by a qualified LDS scholar?

[_BrianH]

...Most here would agree with you and those who might not are unlikely to respond, because, well, really - what can an apologist say when confronted with such statements by a qualified LDS scholar?

I am new here and thought there would be more Mormons trying to defend the claims of their organization. It appears I was mistaken.

You can see precisely what LDS apologists try to say when confronted with scholarship that debunks their whole religion HERE: http://www.waltermartin.com//forums/sho ... yptologist

...at the Walter Martin board, where I posted substantially the same material.

Note the desperate flailing, the automatic retreat to the subjective and the pathetically anemic attempts to change the subject - all so endemic in the LDS world.

Apparently there is no valid LDS response to the facts born out by their own scholars on this critical matter.

ta

-BH

.

[_Buffalo]

...Most here would agree with you and those who might not are unlikely to respond, because, well, really - what can an apologist say when confronted with such statements by a qualified LDS scholar?

I am new here and thought there would be more Mormons trying to defend the claims of their organization. It appears I was mistaken.

You can see precisely what LDS apologists try to say when confronted with scholarship that debunks their whole religion HERE: http://www.waltermartin.com//forums/sho ... yptologist

...at the Walter Martin board, where I posted substantially the same material.

Note the desperate flailing, the automatic retreat to the subjective and the pathetically anemic attempts to change the subject - all so endemic in the LDS world.

Apparently there is no valid LDS response to the facts born out by their own scholars on this critical matter.

ta

-BH

.

Only a few believing Mormons post here. Most are intimidated by open, uncensored discussion. The believers that do post here tend to be Mormons on the fringe, like Why Me and until recently, Daniel C. Peterson.

[_Wisdom Seeker]

...Most here would agree with you and those who might not are unlikely to respond, because, well, really - what can an apologist say when confronted with such statements by a qualified LDS scholar?

I am new here and thought there would be more Mormons trying to defend the claims of their organization. It appears I was mistaken.

You can see precisely what LDS apologists try to say when confronted with scholarship that debunks their whole religion HERE: http://www.waltermartin.com//forums/sho ... yptologist

...at the Walter Martin board, where I posted substantially the same material.

Note the desperate flailing, the automatic retreat to the subjective and the pathetically anemic attempts to change the subject - all so endemic in the LDS world.

Apparently there is no valid LDS response to the facts born out by their own scholars on this critical matter.

ta

-BH

.

Interesting discussion board. Why do you suppose that the LDS topics on that discussion board takes up over 90% of all the posts, when the site is not really about the LDS religion?

[_BrianH]

Interesting discussion board. Why do you suppose that the LDS topics on that discussion board takes up over 90% of all the posts, when the site is not really about the LDS religion?

I don't understand. The Walmart board has forums addressing all of the cults, INCLUDING Mormonism. That means that at least the "Mormonism" board really IS about the LDS religion, so it makes perfect sense that 90% of the posts are about "Mormonism". The only prblem is, that percentage is not 100% (if indeed it is not).

-BH

.

[_Wisdom Seeker]

Interesting discussion board. Why do you suppose that the LDS topics on that discussion board takes up over 90% of all the posts, when the site is not really about the LDS religion?

I don't understand. The Walmart board has forums addressing all of the cults, INCLUDING Mormonism. That means that at least the "Mormonism" board really IS about the LDS religion, so it makes perfect sense that 90% of the posts are about "Mormonism". The only prblem is, that percentage is not 100% (if indeed it is not).

-BH

.

I would like to point out that on your Walmart board all of the cults as well as Christian topics are discussed, however, about 90% of all posts on the entire website exist in the Mormonism section. I was seeking your opinion of why Mormonism is such a hot-topic issue compared to other topics?

[_BrianH]

ME>>I don't understand. The Walmart board has forums addressing all of the cults, INCLUDING Mormonism. That means that at least the "Mormonism" board really IS about the LDS religion, so it makes perfect sense that 90% of the posts are about "Mormonism". The only prblem is, that percentage is not 100% (if indeed it is not).

YOU>I would like to point out that on your Walmart board all of the cults as well as Christian topics are discussed, however, about 90% of all posts on the entire website exist in the Mormonism section. I was seeking your opinion of why Mormonism is such a hot-topic issue compared to other topics?

Oh I see. You mean 90% of the whole site, not just 90% of the Mormon section. Yeah, that's true. The Mormon board is the most active one by far. Over at CARM it is the most active cult site too.

Not sure why. Especially since almost 100% of the Mormons who post on these boards completely fail to even TRY to address the topics being raised, much less provide any coherent defense of what their organization has them telling people to believe. I am going to field a guess that Mormons are just such a bloody easy target that its hard to resist. I mean, its fascinating to see them deflect, evade and slither around the way they do.

But those behaviors are not unique to these forums. They are consistently observeable any place where Mormons are publicly being called upon to defend the claims of their religion. And when LDS scholars like Thompson (the Egyptologist who has so totally debunked the Book of Abraham) or even Fergueson (the man who started BYU's archaeology dept.) come out and admit that the claims of their religion are not connected to reality ....well, these LDS behaviors become even more amazing.

-BH

.

[_Corpsegrinder]

....well, these LDS behaviors become even more amazing.

Yeah, and sometimes we dance around with rattlesnakes, drink strychnine, and speak in tongues.