Jeff Lindsay praises John Gee's book “Introduction to the Book of Abraham” as a tool to save his testimony

[Shulem]

The same edition of the Times and Seasons that carried the first portion of the Book of Abraham, is also found the "Wentworth Letter" in which Joseph outlined the beliefs of the church. In the outline, Joseph stated, "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God." Even though the first installment of the Book of Abraham was being published, Joseph neglects to mention it as part of the beliefs of the Church.

Joseph smith did not neglect anything at all. He could not have neglected to state the Book of Abraham as scripture because it hadn’t been officially declared scripture and presented to the Church as scripture. It’s line upon line and precept upon precept in the Church of the Latter-Day Saints! It was always that way since he first established the Church in 1830. But to say that Smith “neglected” the Book of Abraham because he didn’t list it in a declaration of what the Mormons accepted as canon is in my judgement, quite unfair. From everything I have ever read about the prophet Joseph Smith, he never neglected anything! (except perhaps his first wife)

And as you said, only the first installment of the Book of Abraham was published within the very same edition in which Joseph Smith made the above declaration about the Bible and Book of Mormon being the canon of the Church. The Book of Abraham in reality had NOT yet been published to the world, only a part. The final installment wouldn’t be published till May and the next opportunity to canonize anything wouldn’t be till the next General Conference held in October. We all know that Smith was very, very, busy with the construction of the Nauvoo temple. There just was no time to assemble the Egyptian records let alone the Book of Moses into a new book of canon.

[MG 2.0]

Joseph smith did not neglect anything at all. He could not have neglected to state the Book of Abraham as scripture because it hadn’t been officially declared scripture and presented to the Church as scripture.

Hi Shulem, thanks for your contributions to this thread.

The PofGP wasn’t canonized until 1880. What was the hang up after the Saints came out to Utah? What was the catalyst story pre 1880 that finally led to its canonization?

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

Joseph smith did not neglect anything at all. He could not have neglected to state the Book of Abraham as scripture because it hadn’t been officially declared scripture and presented to the Church as scripture.

Hi Shulem, thanks for your contributions to this thread.

The PofGP wasn’t canonized until 1880. What was the hang up after the Saints came out to Utah? What was the catalyst story pre 1880 that finally led to its canonization?

Regards,
MG

MG,

Great to see you back and I will fully answer your questions. But first, I will continue to remark on your original post and then meld into the above. There was a lot to unpack in your opening post. You gave me a punch and a lot to think about!



I hope you weren’t irked by my strong opposition for using the word “neglected” as far as Smith not canonizing the Book of Abraham or even the Book of Moses with what little time he had left in his busy ministry. But it stood out like a sore thumb to me and I had to speak up! I think a better word to apply in that instance would be “elected” rather than neglected. I think you’ll find that agreeable.

[MG 2.0]

Hi Shulem, thanks for your contributions to this thread.

The PofGP wasn’t canonized until 1880. What was the hang up after the Saints came out to Utah? What was the catalyst story pre 1880 that finally led to its canonization?

Regards,
MG

MG,

Great to see you back and I will fully answer your questions. But first, I will continue to remark on your original post and then meld into the above. There was a lot to unpack in your opening post. You gave me a punch and a lot to think about!



I hope you weren’t irked by my strong opposition for using the word “neglected” as far as Smith not canonizing the Book of Abraham or even the Book of Moses with what little time he had left in his busy ministry. But it stood out like a sore thumb to me and I had to speak up! I think a better word to apply in that instance would be “elected” rather than neglected. I think you’ll find that agreeable.

And along with the questions asked above, what would have happened if those events that slowly(?)/quickly(?) led up to the canonization would have happened/transpired a little bit differently? It’s interesting to me that so much time went by between the Times and Seasons publication and official canonization in 1880.

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

Two months prior to Joseph Smith's death, an article was published in the Times and Seasons which stated, "If any man writes to you, or preaches to you, doctrines contrary to the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or the book of Doctrine and Covenants, set him down as an impostor." [Times and Seasons, vol 5, No.7 (April 1,1844), pg 490] What is interesting is that there is no mention of the Book of Abraham, even though it had been published two years prior while Joseph was the editor of the Times and Seasons.

Right, I get your point that Smith did not move to have the Book of Abraham or the Book of Moses (given in 1831) published into book form or added to the ever growing Doctrine and Covenants. The canon of the Church consisted of the following:

1) Bible
2) Book of Mormon
3) Doctrine and Covenants and Lectures on Faith

Now, if you think about it, the inclusion of the Book of Abraham or the Book of Moses into canon would require a specialized bound book of its own accord. Including them into the ever expanding Doctrine and Covenants would be out of place and time because those revelations pertain to latter-day events. The Latter-Day Saint Church used the published Bible provided by the Gentiles. So really, the only recourse that makes sense would be to publish a separate book like the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith elected to not do that. By the time the Book of Abraham was published in the Times and Seasons, Smith was over burdened with other projects to include the construction of the Nauvoo temple as well as the Nauvoo House. All hands were on deck just to handle those responsibilities and even that was not enough.

Two failures are quite evident:

1) Construction of the Nauvoo House
2) Translation of the Book of Joseph

[Shulem]

Two months prior to Joseph Smith's death, an article was published in the Times and Seasons which stated, "If any man writes to you, or preaches to you, doctrines contrary to the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or the book of Doctrine and Covenants, set him down as an impostor." [Times and Seasons, vol 5, No.7 (April 1,1844), pg 490] What is interesting is that there is no mention of the Book of Abraham, even though it had been published two years prior while Joseph was the editor of the Times and Seasons.

I’m going to go out on a limb and state that if a man in Kirtland or Nauvoo were to write or preach against the published doctrines of the Book of Moses or the Book of Abraham, they would have met resistance or a direct confrontation with President Joseph Smith who would publicly defend his revelations.

Just because Smith’s revelations aren’t included in bound books of canon doesn’t mean he won’t stand up for the word! To my knowledge, the only persons who were critical or questioned the validity of the published Book of Abraham were nonmembers of the Church. Those who witnessed the Egyptian relics and took part in the exhibition supported Smith’s revelations and are on record for quoting him to the effect that it was a revelation from on high.

[Shulem]

If Joseph Smith was responsible for both the Inspired Translation of the Bible (Inspired Version) and the Book of Abraham AND IF he considered both scriptural, why didn't he modify both to teach the same thing ( either a monotheistic God or plurality of Gods. The abrupt difference would suggest that his translation of the Book of Abraham was simply an honest human effort by one interested in ancient languages. Because his perceptions of the Egyptian alphabet gave rise to the translation that discusses plural gods it does not necessarily endorse that belief. Compare KJV Genesis 1:1-5 with the Inspired Version Genesis 1:3-8 which inidcate monotheism and the Book of Abraham 4:1-5 which indicates polytheism.

Full stop!

There is no “if” about it. Joseph Smith *was* responsible for both the Inspired Translation of the Bible (Inspired Version) and the Book of Abraham, PERIOD. That is a matter of record and is fully established in historical context.

There is no doubt that Smith claimed his work was inspired and of a sacred nature and therefore given to him from God. Smith always claimed his work of translation was inspired by the Holy Ghost. There is no “if” about that.

Smith’s presentation of the singularity of God in the Book of Moses was a work given in 1831 prior to his understanding of a plurality of gods that he later understood through studying the Hebrew and incorporated that viewpoint into the Book of Abraham. Smith let both records stand on their own feet as revelations given to the Church at the time they were given. Line upon line and precept upon precept.

I have to admit, however, Smith contradicted himself in his evolving doctrines and not just with the plurality of gods but other things as well.

[Shulem]

During the 1880 semiannual conference of the LDS Church, the Pearl of Great Price was accepted as one of their standard books of scripture. Along with it, the Book of Abraham was elevated to scriptural status. As canonized scripture, the LDS Church committed itself to the accuracy and validity of the book.

https://2think.org/hundredsheep/Book of Abraham/rlds.shtml

Yes, the Church canonized the Pearl of Great Price in General Conference of October 1880.
Apparently, the link you provided does not work.

I think it’s fair to say that the Church committed itself to the accuracy and validity of the book long before it was canonized by President Taylor. The Church was committed to the Book of Abraham as being an inspired and accurate work of God when it was first published in the Times and Seasons. But now, the Church was committed to publishing the work in its own bound cover and added it to the canon as another testimony given of Jesus Christ to his founding prophet, Joseph Smith.

[Shulem]

I think it’s fair to say that the Church committed itself to the accuracy and validity of the book long before it was canonized by President Taylor. The Church was committed to the Book of Abraham as being an inspired and accurate work of God when it was first published in the Times and Seasons.

Since Brigham Young did not canonize the Book of Abraham does that suggest that he didn’t fully support it or believe it? Young believed the revelations contained in the Book of Abraham and things that are SPECIFIC to that book. The sacred hymn “If You Could Hie to Kolob” was part of the Latter-day Saint worship service and it should be noted that the word Kolob is exclusive to the Book of Abraham. Brigham Young was known to have preached that Kolob is “the planet nearest unto the habitation of the Eternal Father.”

Why cannot we behold all things in space? Because there is a curtain dropped, which makes them out of sight to us. Why cannot we behold the inhabitants in Kolob, or the inhabitants in any of those distant planets? For the same reason; because there is a curtain dropped that interrupts our vision. So it is, some thing intervenes between us and them, which we cannot penetrate.

[Shulem]

Might we consider the possibility that all the hoopla in regards to the Book of Abraham controversy may be unnecessary? We are living with the results of a possibly mistaken canonization of this serialization project in the early Times and Seasons that may have been looking for ways to up its subscription base? The Book of Abraham may have been more or less a midrash or riff from the mind of Joseph Smith?

Let me ask you a question, MG. Do you think it was a “mistake” when Joseph Smith formerly published the Book of Abraham in the Times and Seasons? No, of course not. It was a revelation given to Joseph Smith directly from God to publish the Book of Abraham! And yes, I can prove it.

A Revelation to the twelve concerning the Times and Seasons . . .

1842
January 28

A Revelation to the twelve concrning the Times
and Seasons.

Verily thus saith the Lord unto you
my servant Joseph. go and say unto the Twelve
That it is my will to have them take in hand
the Editorial department of the Times and
Seasons according to that manifestation. which
Shall be given unto them by the Power of
My Holy Spirit in the midst of their counsel
Saith the Lord. Amen

The publication of the Book of Abraham in the Times and Seasons was a commandment given by God. But it was just the beginning. The Book of Joseph was to one day follow. And who can tell what God would have performed and published through Joseph Smith? From the revelation above given to the Twelve Apostles we can ascertain that God positively endorsed Joseph Smith’s Book of Abraham translation and it was a revelation to the whole world. Here, let me quote Joseph Smith from the above revelation with boldness and magnification: