Facsimile 3

[_Tobin]

I believe changes to the Egyptian facsimile WERE NOT a mistake. When the Church "corrected" these changes to the depictions and used the original Egyptian depictions instead - THAT WAS the mistake.

??? LOL You are still talking gibberish.

Again, when the Church corrected the changes to the Facsimiles, they were mistaken to do so. The changes, I believe, were an attempt to restore the original depictions made by Abraham.

[_Tobin]

Themis, you are welcome to speak with God any time you wish about it. Mormon claims have a Trump card in that regard. I find your shocking lack of familiarity with Mormon claims silly. Afterall, we are talking about people who claim to have seen God, Angels, and had Gold Plates land in their lap. Most Mormon understandings of subsequent teachings and revelations stem from this belief (which you don't honestly hold nor share).

Funny you didn't even address my post. You assume I never asked, yet it's ironic that this is what you want to argue with Joseph that he didn't seek God about the papyri. You also don't understand the LDS church and what it teaches and doesn't teach. It doesn't teach that God will personally show up, but that the HG is the one who is supposed to reveal truth. One wonders why God would show up to tobin uninvited yet doesn't show up to others who actually are diligently seeking him. Maybe God didn't really show up.

You don't have a point. You don't believe in God. You believe that Joseph Smith was a false prophet and a fraud, you believe Moses was a false prophet and a fraud, you believe Muhammad was a false prophet and fraud, and you believe Jesus Christ was not the son of God and a fraud. You believe ALL religions are a hoax. There is nothing a Mormon (or any religious person), who believes in a God, can possibly learn about God, the gospel, or the truth from you.

Sure it does. The narrative is that Abraham made some original writings and depictions. The Egyptians would have no reason to preserve these writings or depictions in their original form. Instead they would have substituted their own stories and mythic characters in place of what Abraham wrote and depicted. If Joseph Smith was trying to restore these original depictions, then his changes would be perfectly plausible.

I see you are moving your position again. Now the explanations for the facsimiles are inspired. You sure are inconsistent, and others are right that you are not making any sense. OH well, it's hard trying to defend Joseph and God as dumb and dumber.

Just because you are incapable of understanding what I've said on numerous occasions (over pages of threads with you) is not my problem. The only dumb and dumber being here is you.

[_Samantabhadra]

Tobin, you're missing the part where those vignettes are thousands of years old. The vignettes are not unique to the Sensen papyrus, they are a standard element of the immortality magic used by Egyptians.

[_Tobin]

Tobin, you're missing the part where those vignettes are thousands of years old. The vignettes are not unique to the Sensen papyrus, they are a standard element of the immortality magic used by Egyptians.

I'm not missing a thing. As I said, the Egyptians would have used their OWN stories and myths in place of anything Abraham would have written. They were pagans and did not believe the things Abraham believed. It is complete non-sense to believe otherwise (and why I strongly disagree with the approach many apologists use towards the papyri). However, I do believe Joseph Smith was trying to restore the original depictions before his death.

[_Samantabhadra]

I'm not missing a thing. As I said, the Egyptians would have used their OWN stories and myths in place of anything Abraham would have written. They were pagans and did not believe the things Abraham believed. It is complete non-sense to believe otherwise (and why I strongly disagree with the approach many apologists use towards the papyri). However, I do believe Joseph Smith was trying to restore the original depictions before his death.

Just to be clear: you are asserting that

1) Abraham lived in Egypt (where does it say that in the Bible?)
2) Abraham wrote down some sort of record
3) This record was found by the Egyptians
4) The Egyptians "paganized" the record and made it the basis of their entire religion

I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. Is this what you're asserting?

[_Tobin]

I'm not missing a thing. As I said, the Egyptians would have used their OWN stories and myths in place of anything Abraham would have written. They were pagans and did not believe the things Abraham believed. It is complete non-sense to believe otherwise (and why I strongly disagree with the approach many apologists use towards the papyri). However, I do believe Joseph Smith was trying to restore the original depictions before his death.

Just to be clear: you are asserting that

1) Abraham lived in Egypt (where does it say that in the Bible?)
2) Abraham wrote down some sort of record
3) This record was found by the Egyptians
4) The Egyptians "paganized" the record and made it the basis of their entire religion

I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. Is this what you're asserting?

3) The Egyptians wrote their own copies preserving their own stories and myths. They did not preserve Abraham's original record (nor would they have).
4) Joseph Smith was attempting to restore these original writings (at least the depictions that Abraham made).

[_Samantabhadra]

3) The Egyptians wrote their own copies preserving their own stories and myths. They did not preserve Abraham's original record (nor would they have).

Are you saying that the Egyptian stories and myths are completely unrelated to Abraham's (putative) record? What is it that they are writing "copies" of? What are the copies of?

[_Tobin]

3) The Egyptians wrote their own copies preserving their own stories and myths. They did not preserve Abraham's original record (nor would they have).

Are you saying that the Egyptian stories and myths are completely unrelated to Abraham's (putative) record? What is it that they are writing "copies" of? What are the copies of?

Yes, the papyri are Egyptian. They have nothing to do with the Book of Abraham. The depictions in the facsimiles may or may not of however. Since I do not know what the original depictions were, I can not tell you. As I said, I believe Joseph Smith was trying to restore these depictions (hence the changes that were thought to be mistakes by the Church).

[_Darth J]

Themis, you are welcome to speak with God any time you wish about it. Mormon claims have a Trump card in that regard.

No, they do not. Anyone can assert that God told them facts that are contrary to objective reality. The fact that Mormons do so on a consistent basis does not make them unique among the religious people of the world. Many people claim to receive messages or inspiration from God, and more often than not, these claimed messages are contrary to Mormon truth claims.

[_Samantabhadra]

Yes, the papyri are Egyptian. They have nothing to do with the Book of Abraham. The depictions in the facsimiles may or may not of however. Since I do not know what the original depictions were, I can not tell you.

Again, I think you're missing the point here. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). The facsimiles are the papyrus. There is no "papyrus" that exists independently of the facsimiles. The facsimiles are facsimiles of pictographic vignettes, representing the mummification process and the journey to the "far shore" of the next life.

The papyri were magical texts. Egyptian immortality magic required the use of these kinds of magical texts. It's not as though "the papyrus" is one thing (i.e. the hieroglyphic text) and the vignettes/facsimiles are another thing. The vignettes/facsimiles are the papyrus.

Given that, how can you assert that "the depictions" in the facsimiles "may or may not have had" anything to do with the Book of Abraham, since as you readily admit, the papyrus did not?

As I said, I believe Joseph Smith was trying to restore these depictions (hence the changes that were thought to be mistakes by the Church).

If the papyrus has nothing to do with the Book of Abraham, then ipso facto the facsimiles do not have anything to do with the Book of Abraham, either. In which case, my original question stands: how could the facsimiles, even after being "corrected," have anything to do with the Book of Abraham?

Also: which "changes" are you referring to, specifically? Do you mean the fact that Anubis is represented as being just a regular black man, with a little pointy thing on his head, as opposed to the Jackal-Headed God? I'm not sure which "changes" you're talking about.