The Book of Abraham: exposing the fraud of Joseph Smith, Mormon prophet.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 авг 2024
- Joseph Smith, who claimed to translate Reformed Egyptian to produce his Book of Mormon, and also claimed to be a Seer (one who can translate all ancient records), claimed to translate some Egyptian papyrus he acquired. He said it was literally the "writings of Abraham, by his own hand." He published his "translation" as The Book of Abraham. Few in 1835 could understand Egyptian hieroglyphics. Today, thanks to the Rosetta Stone, we now can read Egyptian hieroglyphics. Numerous Egyptologists have reexamined Joseph's 1835 translation, and all agree, that his Book of Abraham is a fraud. #josephsmith #bookofabraham #lds #mormon
When I was a TBM. I did a deep dive into the life of Joseph Smith. My deep dive into the Book of Abraham was the last straw. My shelf broke.
Lol does your "deep dive" just include reading the CES Letter once or twice? The narrative about the translation of the Book of Abraham that many critics of our church like to say is based on a false idea of what Joseph Smith used to translate it. When he bought the scroll that had the Book of Abraham on it he also bought multiple other pieces of papyrus. After Joseph Smith died, all that went to his mother and after she died, it went to Emma. Emma got rid of them immediately and sold them to a man named Arthur Combs. He sold some of it and it went to the Chicago museum which burned down in the 1871 Chicago fire.
The papyrus we have now are a separate set of papyrus that were mounted in glass and were passed down to Arthur Comb's caretaker in 1892 Philadelphia. The caretaker's son-in-law sold it to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1946. It was then discovered by a University of Utah professor in 1966. And he helped to get those back to the Church in 1967.
Why did I tell you the history of the papyrus?
Because Joseph Smith in his journal described the papyri he used in translation "The record found with the mummies is beautifully written on papyrus, with black, and a small part red, ink or paint in perfect preservation." There is even an account that it was pretty long.
The papyrus mounted in glass or what is The Book of Breathings papyrus which has no writing in red ink and is in an extremely poor state of preservation, nothing like what is described. And considering most of you guys point out that Joseph Smith filled in what the papyrus should have looked like wrong (which wasn't even him, he asked someone else to do it) and you can see some of the same damage in the pictures which we put for the facsimiles then it must have been in a similar condition when Joseph Smith had them. The papyrus we have today is in no way, shape or form what Joseph Smith used when he translated the Book of Abraham from both details by Joseph Smith himself of what he said the papyrus the Book of Abraham looked like vs what the book of breathings we have looks like, the fact that the facsimiles would be way too small to produce the Book of Abraham and the fact it doesn’t translate to the Book of Abraham.
To even add further on this, there are many details that are in the Book of Abraham about Abraham that are not said in the Bible and were not known in Joseph Smith's day but have later been corroborated by ancient text that have been found like the Dead Sea Scrolls. Details about Abraham's father, Abraham almost being sacrificed to the Egyptian gods, that God saved him from being sacrificed, that God was the reason why Abraham called his wife his sister, etc. Pretty interesting that if Joseph Smith "made up" the Book of Abraham that it has been confirmed to be pretty historically accurate about Abraham
@@dylanwilliams2202 Amusing Ignorance--Grasping at straws to verify a fraud, conjurer of cheap tricks.
@@paulbrungardt9823 Grasping at straws? Lol If I was grasping at straws then you could have refuted what I said instead of trying to act arrogant. Being arrogant isn't an argument.
@@dylanwilliams2202 A stretch, to be sure--The book of Abraham Hoax was proof of Smith's lust for riches and power over those more illiterate & ignorant than he.
@@dylanwilliams2202 Doesn't the BOA directly connect itself to the facsimile that was filled in? if it does, then that alone defeats your entire argument.
Can you imagine, Joseph didn't get even one word correct. What a seer and revelator
hahaha you are lying.....anytime you want to debate me in public let us do it.
If you believe in Joseph Smith I think we better plan on a ecsersism
@@jwinfrey6298 I belief in facts. anyone who says Joseph Smith did not translate the text correctly is a liar. Tell me what "Determinative translation" means...Tell us what "representative translation" means. Why do these translation styles apply to the LDS Book of Abraham.. Are there other Books of Abraham which used the Egyptian Book of the Dead as a template? Are there other Books of Abraham which used the narrative structure to tell events in the life of Abraham? What is a Ascension text? What is a Descension text? Do they apply to LDS Book of Abraham translation? Did the ancient Egyptians use such texts? Was it used by ancient Jewish scholars? humm let us see what you know.
Joseph Smith took notes from Muhammad 👀
Right 😂
Take it back and relearn
That's a fact
He definitely did
There are huge similarities between smith writings and Muslim writings
Smith was banking on the fact that at the time nobody could translate ancient Egyptian
This is funny, but a Mormon would point out that "interpretation" probably means God's true meaning for the translation. Or they would just ignore it altogether
Or they'd tell you that the "true meaning" is something completely different than what the text plainly says.
By Joseph Smith's standards, anyone could be a prophet.. all con artists that is..
Thank you for the truth!!!!
It's, lies, all lies
But be careful not to read what the book of Abraham actually says or you might start believing. There's too much evidence when you do actual research. Just stay away from other apocryphal writings about Abraham which also talk about the same things Joseph Translated. Just stick with what your pastor tells you. He NEVER lies.
right?
What ? Joseph Smith was a proven fraud lol
Be careful to just blindly believe nonsense because it’s not backed up by people who know how to actually read hieroglyphics
This goes about ½" deep into the real data and it contains numerous partial quotes out of context.
In my high school debates, these were called "strip quotes" and would get you tossed from any event.
So if we read the Egyptologist's full quotes in context, they all agreed Joseph got it right... ??
Or you could read the book.
What do we do when The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints acknowledges that the papyri do not say what Joseph claimed they said?
@@alienwarex51i3 That's not what the Church said. The Church acknowledged that the surviving papyri do not appear to contain. The info in the PofGP.
So what?
Every eye witness description of the enrolls say they were MUCH longer that what remains we now have.
@@paulfurse2288 You're right in that I should have clarified that I was talking about the surviving papyri. You're referencing this portion of the Gospel Topics Essays, correct? "The discovery of the fragments meant that readers could now see the hieroglyphs and characters immediately surrounding the vignette that became facsimile 1. None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. Latter-day Saint and non-Latter-day Saint Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham, though there is not unanimity, even among non-Latter-day Saint scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments." The point is that among the surviving papyri is Facsimile 1, which I have in my triple combo. The Church is now acknowledging that the translation given in my triple combo is incorrect, that's all I'm saying.
LOL
false.
Wow, this video and the person who made it are completely dishonest. The narrative about the translation of the Book of Abraham that many critics of our church like to say is based on a false idea of what Joseph Smith used to translate it. When he bought the scroll that had the Book of Abraham on it he also bought multiple other pieces of papyrus. After Joseph Smith died, all that went to his mother and after she died, it went to Emma. Emma got rid of them immediately and sold them to a man named Arthur Combs. He sold some of it and it went to the Chicago museum which burned down in the 1871 Chicago fire.
The papyrus we have now are a separate set of papyrus that were mounted in glass and were passed down to Arthur Comb's caretaker in 1892 Philadelphia. The caretaker's son-in-law sold it to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1946. It was then discovered by a University of Utah professor in 1966. And he helped to get those back to the Church in 1967.
Why did I tell you the history of the papyrus?
Because Joseph Smith in his journal described the papyri he used in translation "The record found with the mummies is beautifully written on papyrus, with black, and a small part red, ink or paint in perfect preservation." There is even an account that it was pretty long.
The papyrus mounted in glass or what is The Book of Breathings papyrus which has no writing in red ink and is in an extremely poor state of preservation, nothing like what is described. And considering most of you guys point out that Joseph Smith filled in what the papyrus should have looked like wrong (which wasn't even him, he asked someone else to do it) and you can see some of the same damage in the pictures which we put for the facsimiles then it must have been in a similar condition when Joseph Smith had them. The papyrus we have today is in no way, shape or form what Joseph Smith used when he translated the Book of Abraham from both details by Joseph Smith himself of what he said the papyrus the Book of Abraham looked like vs what the book of breathings we have looks like, the fact that the facsimiles would be way too small to produce the Book of Abraham and the fact it doesn’t translate to the Book of Abraham.
To even add further on this, there are many details that are in the Book of Abraham about Abraham that are not said in the Bible and were not known in Joseph Smith's day but have later been corroborated by ancient text that have been found like the Dead Sea Scrolls. Details about Abraham's father, Abraham almost being sacrificed to the Egyptian gods, that God saved him from being sacrificed, that God was the reason why Abraham called his wife his sister, etc. Pretty interesting that if Joseph Smith "made up" the Book of Abraham that it has been confirmed to be pretty historically accurate about Abraham
Yes, please, let’s do an honesty check…
It is possible that a portion of the papyrus burned in the fire. But we have plenty surviving to make a determination that Joseph did not correctly translate Egyptian hieroglyphics.
1. The facsimiles were copied from the papyrus.
2. The Kirtland Egyptian Papers corroborates this. (Funny how Smith devotees never mention the KEP). We have a direct link between the surviving papyrus, Joseph’s working translation, and the Book of Abraham.
3. Joseph would translate dozens of words from a single hieroglyphic. At that rate, even the small surviving Fragment XI would contain the entire Book of Abraham.
4. Given Smith’s propensity to not even look at the Gold Plates when “translating” the Book of Mormon, it’s highly possible Smith started with his Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar (KEP), but then dictated the rest of his Book of Abraham without even referencing the papyrus (making the “lost papyrus” excuse moot).
5. The surviving pieces all date to around the 2nd century BC. And devotees would have us believe that in the mix (but now evidently lost) was a piece dating to the 18-16th century BC that was “written by the hand of Abraham”. Preposterous.
Honesty check, did Joseph interpret the facsimiles correctly?
According to your theory, it's too bad that we didn't have the fragment Joseph used to translate. Man that would have been a bullseye. It could have been that way. It just wasn't.
@@terrillmel Yea, it sucks that it is a historical fact that a fire happened in Chicago that burned the papyrus that Emma gave to the Chicago Museum.
It is a good thing we have the text to go off of to compare to other sources about Abraham to see if that information is accurate. If you want another bullseye then look up a comparison of the Book of Enoch and the last 2 chapters of Moses.
@@dylanwilliams2202 I understand that oversimplified explanations can be reductive and miss the mark. But I'm going to tell you that I'm personally of the belief that there was no papyrus that reflected the book of Abraham. It seems much more probable that Joseph created it than the happenstance of receiving a mummy with some scrolls that happened to be the writings of Abraham that happened to reveal important truths about heaven and pre-Earth life not found in any other document. I think it's a spiritual text. It's one that should be taken on faith If one chooses to, but it doesn't have the same weight as something that can be verified empirically.
Even when I was believing, I came to the conclusion that Joseph received it by revelation and I was much more convinced by the catalyst theory. Now I just see all faiths as equal in as much as they don't do harm. But I also recognize they can help people.
I'm rambling. I guess if I were to describe, my major qualm with historical events in Mormonism, is that they are presented as fact to the membership. And then with these oversimplified pieces of a puzzle, the member puts them together to form a picture. But they were only given the pieces that fit together. There are just as many pieces that don't fit as do fit. But they're not shown those and then they base their entire life on these fragments
@@terrillmel _"It seems much more probable that Joseph created it"_ No it doesn't. There are many details that are in the Book of Abraham about Abraham that are not said in the Bible and were not known in Joseph Smith's day but have later been corroborated by ancient text that have been found like the Dead Sea Scrolls. Details about Abraham's father, Abraham almost being sacrificed to the Egyptian gods, that God saved him from being sacrificed, that God was the reason why Abraham called his wife his sister, etc.
I don't understand why you all ignore this. How can you explain Joseph Smith getting these details right when he had no access to this information because they weren't even discovered yet? A lucky guess? Maybe one thing, but multiple things? It is much more probable that God was helping him translate a piece of papyri that was lost in a fire than Joseph Smith making this up and it turning out to be historically accurate.
Even if the catalyst theory is true (despite literally every source about the translation going against it), the Book of Abraham is still an inspired work of God and is still true.
_"my major qualm with historical events in Mormonism, is that they are presented as fact to the membership"_ Please give me an event that you think the Church has not presented as fact. Having asked a variation of this question to multiple Exmo's, there has not been anything that I couldn't find that wasn't said by the Church in some publication from 1830 - 2000 (I say that because after 2000 it just becomes a blatant lie).
Be aware that just because we don't go up every Sunday or every general conference and talk about history and the like doesn't mean we are hiding or not being honest about something.
_"There are just as many pieces that don't fit as do fit"_ No, all the pieces fit together. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is God's and Jesus Christ one and only true church here on earth. Joseph Smith was a true Prophet of God. The Book of Abraham is true scripture. All this was true and will be true. Whether you are in it or not doesn't change this fact. The only thing you have affected is you.
There are multiple sources from Fairmormon, Jeff Lindsey, Saints Unscripted, LDS Truth Claims, Latter Day Saints Q&A and more that talk about the Book of Abraham
I found this tedious and bushwa