You guys are still at it! (why am I not surprised?)

[Shulem]

This thread is all I thought it would be. And more.

I'm glad you found this thread to exceed expectations. We here at Discuss Mormonism aim to please.

[MG 2.0]

I think members are stupid because they can't or won't count and are spoon-fed lies from apologists and leaders of the Church who claim all is well with the Book of Abraham.

I've discussed the Book of Abraham in other threads and at other times. Not going to rehash a rehashing of a rehash. Going back to the original publication of the serial in Nauvoo and the "vote" in SL to approve the Book of Abraham into the canon.

Gee agrees with me, if I remember correctly, that the church doesn't rise or fall on the Book of Abraham anyway.

It does rise or fall on the Book of Mormon.

I'm not going to rehash what I've already said. Go back and find what I've written. It's not a smoking gun as you would wish.

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

I think members are stupid because they can't or won't count and are spoon-fed lies from apologists and leaders of the Church who claim all is well with the Book of Abraham.

I've discussed the Book of Abraham in other threads and at other times. Not going to rehash a rehashing of a rehash. Going back to the original publication of the serial in Nauvoo and the "vote" in SL to approve the Book of Abraham into the canon.

Gee agrees with me, if I remember correctly, that the church doesn't rise or fall on the Book of Abraham anyway.

It does rise or fall on the Book of Mormon.

I'm not going to rehash what I've already said. Go back and find what I've written. It's not a smoking gun as you would wish.

Regards,
MG

John Gee hardly represents the Church in saying it rises or falls on the Book of Abraham. Gordon B Hinckley solemnly declared in General Conference that the First Vision and the matter of Smith being a prophet or not determines the validity of the truthfulness of the restoration. And it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain (everyone except for Mormons) that the Book of Abraham proves he was not a true prophet and puts everything else in question, including the Book of Mormon!

You are rehashing nothing here, you coward. You've never discussed the questions I posed to you repeatedly in this thread in certain terms which everyone can understand and appreciate.

Run away, you are spineless. I've got you right where I want you -- pinned down and in a box. YOU are the slave, MG. And you are powerless on this board, baby.

[Rivendale]

I think members are stupid because they can't or won't count and are spoon-fed lies from apologists and leaders of the Church who claim all is well with the Book of Abraham.

I've discussed the Book of Abraham in other threads and at other times. Not going to rehash a rehashing of a rehash. Going back to the original publication of the serial in Nauvoo and the "vote" in SL to approve the Book of Abraham into the canon.

Gee agrees with me, if I remember correctly, that the church doesn't rise or fall on the Book of Abraham anyway.

It does rise or fall on the Book of Mormon.

I'm not going to rehash what I've already said. Go back and find what I've written. It's not a smoking gun as you would wish.

Regards,
MG

Akin to the church doesn't rise or fall on Ivermectin?

[Marcus]

This thread is all I thought it would be. And more.

I'm glad you found this thread to exceed expectations. We here at Discuss Mormonism aim to please.

Yes, the troll trolled, and he thinks he succeeded in trolling. Every visit he makes, however, simply cements in stone the opinion of readers about him.

Remember when he referred to people here as "purveyors of sin and sodomy"?

So yes, I agree, when he says this thread is all he hoped it would be, he is revealing that he intended to troll the board. Thank you, mentalgymnast, for revealing yourself. Please, come back and do it again.

[I Have Questions]

Gee agrees with me, if I remember correctly, that the church doesn't rise or fall on the Book of Abraham anyway.

This phraseology is Narcissism 101. A normal person would say something like "I agree with Professor Gee what Professor Gee says about the Book of Abraham...". But not a narcissist. The narcissist has to present as the superior person in the equation.

Separately, Gee is not a General Authority of the Church. He's not a Church spokesperson. He is not authorised to give statements on behalf of the Church. So what Gee thunks about the importance of the Book of Abraham is utterly irrelevant. It's just his own personal opinion. Furthermore, nobody within the field of professional egyptology takes Gee seriously on the Book of Abraham. He's a bit of a joke figure after the two inks fraud that he attempted to perpetrate.

Here's what the Church states about the Book of Abraham...

The Pearl of Great Price is a selection of choice materials touching many significant aspects of the faith and doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. These items were translated and produced by the Prophet Joseph Smith, and most were published in the Church periodicals of his day.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng
So the Church sees the Book of Abraham as "significant" rather than irrelevant.

The Book of Abraham. An inspired translation of the writings of Abraham. Joseph Smith began the translation in 1835 after obtaining some Egyptian papyri. The translation was published serially in the Times and Seasons beginning March 1, 1842, at Nauvoo, Illinois.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng
Then the Church makes the very clear claim that the Book of Abraham is a translation of Egyptian papyri (which we know it isn't).

The game is up for The Book of Abraham. The inclusion of the facsimiles was an unforeseen error that helps sink it below the waterline. Nobody within the field of egyptology takes Gee seriously on the Book of Abraham. He's a bit of a joke figure after the two inks fraud that he attempted to perpetrate.

Interesting that the final defence for the Book of Abraham is that it's irrelevant doctrinally. Brilliant.

[I Have Questions]

I do agree that MG is a shameless coward though.

I've been on a little road trip with my wife visiting family.

Still living by convenience I see.

Here's an example of a couple that practice what they preach, unlike you.

From teaching families in England to preserving records in Denmark to serving in a Marshallese branch close to home, David and Charlene Ottley’s missions for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints reflect the variety of opportunities available for seniors.

“You have a smorgasbord of opportunities,” Elder Ronald A. Rasband of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles told senior couples during October 2023 general conference as he invited them to serve — “and perhaps even serve again.”

David and Charlene Ottley have served three full-time missions and two service missions together for the Church in the last 13 years.

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2025/03/1 ... -missions/

They are living by covenant, not by convenient. They are not cowardly finding excuses not to serve, even when times are challenging at home...

With nine children, 27 grandchildren and 11 great-grandchildren, David and Charlene Ottley know it’s not easy to leave home, but they have seen countless blessings from their service.

Nancy Otte, one of the Ottley’s children, shared an experience that happened while her parents were serving in London.

“I had had four miscarriages, and I was threatening to lose another child,” she recalled. “My mom knew how difficult it was for me, and so she said that she just needed to leave the mission and come to be with me. And I said, ‘No, no, no, you need to stay on the mission. You need to keep serving, and that will bless all of us.’

“I was able to keep that baby. And as a reminder of how important that mission service was, I named my daughter London.”

https://www.thechurchnews.com/members/2 ... -missions/

Nancy Otte said her family has felt the joy of her parents’ service. “As much as I hate them being away — I’m a single mom and they are my right hand — yet when they serve, it just works out. I feel blessings. I feel a part of what they are doing in all of their different missions.”

Why are you denying your family all of these types of blessings by living a selfish life of convenience?

[MG 2.0]

Interesting that the final defence for the Book of Abraham is that it's irrelevant doctrinally. Brilliant.

It's not irrelevant doctrinally.

Regards,
MG

[Moksha]

Gee agrees with me, if I remember correctly, that the church doesn't rise or fall on the Book of Abraham anyway.
Regards,
MG

Good point MG. The Book of Abraham is an obvious and demonstrable fraud made up by Joseph Smith.

What you could do is point to the Mormon people, apart from their leaders and apologists, who are a kind hearted group who try their best to bring good into the world. Brag on the merits of the Mormon people!

[Moksha]

Yes, the troll trolled, and he thinks he succeeded in trolling.

He did succeed. Look at how many posts this thread has garnered. Probably one of the most successful trolling threads in the history of Discuss Mormonism. I think Shulem has made many brilliant points that justify the thread's existence.

Does the Rosebud Megathread fall into the category of trolling?