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.
Post Reply
_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 »

zerinus wrote:
Philo Sofee wrote:Ha! I beat ya posting the same information by a mere two minutes Shulem........ just call me fast fingers Fred.... :biggrin:
He is just parroting you, since he has nothing else left to say.


Zerinus, would you like to discuss the details of Facsimile No. 2, the Hypocephalus and how Joseph Smith didn't know how to translate, he having simply made up everything about it out of thin air? Would you like to debate that and defend your prophet? Just make a thread and send me an invite. But I don't think you will because you're a coward and you know your prophet was wrong.

All you can say is, "I know the Book of Mormon is true", like an uninformed Mormon cult member.

You are in a cult, zerinus.
_Philo Sofee
_Emeritus
Posts: 6660
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:04 am

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

Post by _Philo Sofee »

Shulem, the Mormons also accused critics of making stuff up about the priesthood revelation being a revelation instead of a policy for decades, and many other topics such as it is an anti-Mormon lie that Joseph Smith married 14 year olds and other mens wives. The church essay now admits these things are not anti-Mormon lies. There is literally no defense for it anymore. The lame apologetic defense demonstrates this day in and day out now. The prophets have turned to the apologists for their answers! That in itself is utterly staggering.
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
_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 »

zerinus wrote:Couldn’t resist pointing out that dumb comments, especially yours! :biggrin:


If you were honest, you'd point out dumb comments made by Joseph Smith about Facsimile No. 3. You know:

1. Turning a girl into a boy
2. Turning a girl into a king
3. Turning a god into a slave

Dumb, dumb, dumb, Joseph Smith was dumb.
Last edited by Guest on Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_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 »

Philo Sofee wrote:Shulem, the Mormons also accused critics of making stuff up about the priesthood revelation being a revelation instead of a policy for decades, and many other topics such as it is an anti-Mormon lie that Joseph Smith married 14 year olds and other mens wives. The church essay now admits these things are not anti-Mormon lies. There is literally no defense for it anymore. The lame apologetic defense demonstrates this day in and day out now. The prophets have turned to the apologists for their answers! That in itself is utterly staggering.


Philo, it's so good we woke up and in the end our honest hearts led us out of the cult.

I want to congratulate you!
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

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

Post by _sock puppet »

Shulem wrote:
Philo Sofee wrote:Shulem, the Mormons also accused critics of making stuff up about the priesthood revelation being a revelation instead of a policy for decades, and many other topics such as it is an anti-Mormon lie that Joseph Smith married 14 year olds and other mens wives. The church essay now admits these things are not anti-Mormon lies. There is literally no defense for it anymore. The lame apologetic defense demonstrates this day in and day out now. The prophets have turned to the apologists for their answers! That in itself is utterly staggering.


Philo, it's so good we woke up and in the end our honest hearts led us out of the cult.

I want to congratulate you!

I congratulate you both. But being honest men looking at Mormon history and truth claims, it was only a matter of time.
_Philo Sofee
_Emeritus
Posts: 6660
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:04 am

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

Post by _Philo Sofee »

Zerinus
I bet he wasn’t interested in you and Shulem’s nonsense, which is what I had in mind, since you hadn’t figured.


Dumb comment.
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
_Philo Sofee
_Emeritus
Posts: 6660
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:04 am

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

Post by _Philo Sofee »

Zerinus
Show me the record.


Why? You won't believe it anyway. The record of Shulem's claim is clearly and unmistakably in my paper which I referenced in the very first post of this thread. You know, the one you won't read and comprehend because in your mind it's anti-Mormon, which in reality is a serious and sincere attempt to look at the historical situation. We see nothing but you making silly and worthless comments. In other words, you Mormons really are bankrupt on this issue. If apologists were so sure of their stance, they could remain here and defend it. Where are they all? You certainly don't qualify to even that standard however, since you refuse to engage in the actual information. You refuse to read and grasp and discuss the historical situation we have evidence for and can discuss. You simply want to bear testimony. Well, do that in church, here we discuss, analyze, and assess claims to the truth. Some of us actually thought you were just goofing around a bit, but now we are not so sure. I am seriously questioning whether you know much of anything about Joseph Smith and early Mormonism, especially in regards to the Book of Abraham.
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
_zerinus
_Emeritus
Posts: 1858
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:45 pm

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

Post by _zerinus »

Shulem wrote:Me make stuff up? Isn't it rather you're just not informed? So you read one quote in proMormon context and that's it. You've been deceived by proMormon apologetics. The matter was settled, many statements (at least 8) were made and Joseph Smith was ALWAYS wrong about anything he ever said about the mummies and their papyrus. Everything Joseph Smith ever said was wrong! Dead wrong.

I'll just start with the conclusion which your own religious institution admitted back in the day but has since covered up. You choke on it.

THE ACADEMIC REVIEW (BYU Academy)
Vol. 1, No. 6, March,1885

"The mummies were identified as those of a king, a queen, a princess, and a slave."


Also, Mormon scholar Jay Todd the author of "The Saga of the Book of Abraham", grudgingly sums it up:

"We certainly seem to have a king in our midst"

"Her (Emma Smith) report that one of the mummies was a pharaoh cannot be easily dismissed, however. It seems clear that one of the Lebolo mummies had been identified by the Prophet ― tentatively or otherwise ― as a pharaoh"
(Ibid p. 258,292)


Zerinus, what was that about me making stuff up?
I have to take that against what Joseph Smith said in his Documentary History that he was not willing to identify the personality of the mummies. I don't have that book with me right now to be able to give a direct quote, but do recall that that is what he said. So where is that information you presented coming from? Is it hearsay, or what Joseph Smith actually said? Can those references be pinned down to what Joseph Smith actually said? When you have pinned it down, then I will accept it; otherwise it is nothing more than hearsay.
_zerinus
_Emeritus
Posts: 1858
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:45 pm

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

Post by _zerinus »

Shulem wrote:Zerinus, would you like to discuss the details of Facsimile No. 2, the Hypocephalus and how Joseph Smith didn't know how to translate, he having simply made up everything about it out of thin air? Would you like to debate that and defend your prophet? Just make a thread and send me an invite. But I don't think you will because you're a coward and you know your prophet was wrong.
I accept the translation that Joseph Smith made of it (as far as he intended to make it) to be correct. There is nothing more to add to that. If you disagree with that translation, then I think you are wrong and he is right. I think Joseph Smith knew something that you don't know. What else is there left for me to say about that?
_zerinus
_Emeritus
Posts: 1858
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:45 pm

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

Post by _zerinus »

Philo Sofee wrote:Why? You won't believe it anyway. The record of Shulem's claim is clearly and unmistakably in my paper which I referenced in the very first post of this thread. You know, the one you won't read and comprehend because in your mind it's anti-Mormon, which in reality is a serious and sincere attempt to look at the historical situation. We see nothing but you making silly and worthless comments. In other words, you Mormons really are bankrupt on this issue. If apologists were so sure of their stance, they could remain here and defend it. Where are they all? You certainly don't qualify to even that standard however, since you refuse to engage in the actual information. You refuse to read and grasp and discuss the historical situation we have evidence for and can discuss. You simply want to bear testimony. Well, do that in church, here we discuss, analyze, and assess claims to the truth. Some of us actually thought you were just goofing around a bit, but now we are not so sure. I am seriously questioning whether you know much of anything about Joseph Smith and early Mormonism, especially in regards to the Book of Abraham.
Debate is about presenting and discussing evidence, not about reading somebody's lengthy, boring chapters.
Post Reply