Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-02-2010, 08:33 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,082 posts, read 20,545,443 times
Reputation: 5927

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
Arequipa, you have yet to encounter all the various theories that the Mormon apologists on FAIRLDS offer for why the interpretation of those facsimilies don't match up.

They claim there is hidden mystic meaning that cannot be found in a literal translation. They claim that the facsimilies have been altered through the years as they were copied by Egyptian priests, and that Joseph restored the original meaning, etc. And many other theories. Back in my questioning days, I clung to any possibility that preserved Joseph as a Seer and translator. But, then I showed that those theories don't work.
Thank you. I didn't know that. However, it doesn't work as Papyri texts are pretty reliable from Middle Kingdom to late - there is no question of them having been altered to such an extent. Also, the Abraham story is a straightforward one that hardly needed mystical interpretation. However, I take your point that something has to be done in order to maintain the belief that these fragments are anything to do with Abraham. At the least, our pal Justamere can hardly expect it (after what I posted) to convince skeptics.

Quote:
Facsimilie 2 was actually missing portions due to damage before Joseph ever saw it for the first time. One of Joseph's scribes
Not unlikely. Many papyri are damaged or fragmentary. However, it's just a bit too convenient that fragment Fig1. has just those bits missing. Though maybe Smith would have been content with an 'Idolatrous priest' with a jackal's head and and angel with an elaborate crown. So yes, maybe those bits were missing when Smith got hold of them.

P.s Read the rest of your text. Excellent. I am no expert in Mormon apologetics, though I do know a bit about Egyptology. Your analysis revealed not only that that mystical interpretation does not work, but that he did, knowingly, decieve people.

P.ps!

Quote:
for what he "restored" was not only incorrect judging by an actual Egyptian translation of the text, but the characters he "restored" were hieratic rather than hieroglyphic characters and from a different time period
Hieratic or demotic? Hieratic was a cursive form used from ancient times as a quick way of writing Hieroglyphs but Demotic was later, 600 B.C I think, during the Saite period.

Could we identify the added characters and I'll see which they are? In any case, the maker of the Papyrus would not have used the two together, and it's a bit too far - fetched a coincidence that just the bits that were missing were in the cursive script.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-02-2010 at 09:03 PM.. Reason: More Kudos.

 
Old 02-03-2010, 08:32 AM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,369,195 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
...Please, please, do understand that there is no way that Smith's 'Abraham' papyrus (as we see, from two different papyri) is anything to do with Abraham.
Beg all you will to persuade readers to accept your or someone else's opinions and interpretations, I continue to suggest that anyone interested in the Book of Abraham actually read it for themselves and after some pondering and praying ask God if it's of value to Him or not.

Abraham



"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." James 1: 5

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/james/1/5#5
 
Old 02-03-2010, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,369,195 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by juj View Post
I am an ex-Lutheran Roman Catholic and joyfully and proudly so. Peace be with you and all Mormons.
Peace to you Juj. I am a convert from Roman Catholicism and will always be grateful for growing up with moral values similar to those I have today as a Latter-day Saint.
 
Old 02-03-2010, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,369,195 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
...In my opinion, Joseph knowingly, actively defrauded us in his "restoration" of Facsimile #2.
So what you're saying is that your scholar is bigger than my scholar?

There are huge arguments among scholars about this or that in the books of the bible too but I don't allow that to keep me from God or from studying and learning from the bible and from the Spirit of God that can come with such activity. Nor can your scholars persuade me that Joseph Smith was not God's chosen Prophet of the Restoration, I know that to be true, as do millions of other faithful Latter-day Saints who continue to be in touch with God and His Holy Spirit.
 
Old 02-03-2010, 09:28 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,082 posts, read 20,545,443 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
Beg all you will to persuade readers to accept your or someone else's opinions and interpretations, I continue to suggest that anyone interested in the Book of Abraham actually read it for themselves and after some pondering and praying ask God if it's of value to Him or not.

Abraham
This is what was analysed and found to be dead wrong. You may reject the entire body of Egyptology, but can you convince anyone else?

Quote:
"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." James 1: 5

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/james/1/5#5
I'm afraid that asking people to brainwash themselves when you can't deal with the strongest possible evidence does not make you look very good.

In the end, people must make up their own minds, evidence or faith?.
 
Old 02-03-2010, 04:21 PM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,369,195 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
This is what was analysed and found to be dead wrong. You may reject the entire body of Egyptology, but can you convince anyone else?

I'm afraid that asking people to brainwash themselves when you can't deal with the strongest possible evidence does not make you look very good. In the end, people must make up their own minds, evidence or faith?.
I have been around the block enough times to know for myself that for every arm of flesh scholar with an opinion that appears to be sound there is another just as qualified scholar with an equally 'sound' opinion to refute the other. (As evidenced in the field of religion by the existence of tens of thousands of Christian denominations.) Huef believes those scholars who 'prove' what he wants proven to support his new beliefs. I'm certain that there are other scholars who could easily refute the scholars he puts his trust in.

When it comes to religion, in particular things I consider important to my eternal salvation, I'll follow the tried and true way to knowledge that is satisfying to me: I'll do my homework as best I can, reach a conclusion, and then humbly and sincerely ask GOD if it's true or not. That method works for me much better than putting one's trust in the ever changing opinions of scholars, especially those who have an ax to grind as appears to be the case with any scholar who would take the time to 'analyze' and report negatively on such an obscure book as the one we are discussing.

I too am suggesting that people find out for themselves about the things that are pertinent to their eternal salvation. I doubt that the Book of Abraham is among one of those things, it's just another of many inspired books of scripture. But why not at least read it with an open mind yourself, instead of blindly accepting the opinions of possibly biased scholars? I believe the book to be of value however it came into print, as I do the books of the Bible and the Book of Mormon.


And I know that Joseph Smith is God's chosen prophet leader of this the dispensation of the fulness of times, just as Enoch, Moses, and others were in their time.

"That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:" Ephesians 1: 10

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/eph/1/10#10


http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display/topical.php?cat_id=308

Last edited by justamere10; 02-03-2010 at 05:42 PM..
 
Old 02-03-2010, 04:54 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
27,930 posts, read 29,774,299 times
Reputation: 13075
Quote:
Originally Posted by juj View Post
I am an ex-Lutheran Roman Catholic and joyfully and proudly so.
I figured you weren't an evangelical Christian. You've been too civil.

Quote:
Peace be with you and all Mormons.
And with you. (I've attended mass. )
 
Old 02-03-2010, 06:44 PM
 
2,981 posts, read 5,441,456 times
Reputation: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
This is what was analysed and found to be dead wrong. You may reject the entire body of Egyptology, but can you convince anyone else?



I'm afraid that asking people to brainwash themselves when you can't deal with the strongest possible evidence does not make you look very good.

In the end, people must make up their own minds, evidence or faith?.
Well, he's trying like mad to make up their minds for them, by "internet words of coercion" to make them just refuse to look at facts and to follow him, blindly, into the ditch.
 
Old 02-04-2010, 04:38 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,082 posts, read 20,545,443 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
I have been around the block enough times to know for myself that for every arm of flesh scholar with an opinion that appears to be sound there is another just as qualified scholar with an equally 'sound' opinion to refute the other. (As evidenced in the field of religion by the existence of tens of thousands of Christian denominations.) Huef believes those scholars who 'prove' what he wants proven to support his new beliefs. I'm certain that there are other scholars who could easily refute the scholars he puts his trust in.
In the end it is going to be down to the individual to decide whether they believe the translations of egyptologists or of Mormons. I just think that it is important to put both sides, or all sides rather than just one side.
However, when you have representations of 'Pharaoh' in all sorts of context shoing that it is really a goddess and when you get parallel translations of Egyptian into demotic and greek (I suppose you at least suppose we can translate greek, correctly) how can you reasonably say that Egyptologists are wrong and Smith's translation is right?

Quote:
When it comes to religion, in particular things I consider important to my eternal salvation, I'll follow the tried and true way to knowledge that is satisfying to me: I'll do my homework as best I can, reach a conclusion, and then humbly and sincerely ask GOD if it's true or not. That method works for me much better than putting one's trust in the ever changing opinions of scholars, especially those who have an ax to grind as appears to be the case with any scholar who would take the time to 'analyze' and report negatively on such an obscure book as the one we are discussing.
Allright, I'll play it your way. If eternal salivation is important to you, isn't it important that you have the right religion rather that some faked up distortion of it? Shouldn't be pretty damn' sure that you have good reason to stick to LDS when there is so much evidence that it was all faked up by Joseph Smith? You'd better be sure you got it right.

Quote:
I too am suggesting that people find out for themselves about the things that are pertinent to their eternal salvation. I doubt that the Book of Abraham is among one of those things, it's just another of many inspired books of scripture. But why not at least read it with an open mind yourself, instead of blindly accepting the opinions of possibly biased scholars? I believe the book to be of value however it came into print, as I do the books of the Bible and the Book of Mormon.
An open mind is looking at all the factors, not just accepting it on Blind faith. The fact is that there is so much support for Egyptian now being understood - you can get checks from parallel texts, even Coptic, still spoken today. When the Abraham fragments are so wildly variant in both visual imagery and text -and remember, Smith knew nothing about Egyptian, it has to be supposed that it was all inspired - objectivity has to come down on the side of Egyptology. What you are doing is denial. have you even tried to find out for yourself why Egyptian can be taken as well and truly translatable?

Quote:
And I know that Joseph Smith is God's chosen prophet leader of this the dispensation of the fulness of times, just as Enoch, Moses, and others were in their time.

"That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:" Ephesians 1: 10

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/eph/1/10#10


http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/disp...php?cat_id=308
You know nothing of the kind. This is blind faith based on a refusal to look at the evidence - that Smith was a faker, a manipulator, a deceiver and demonstrably so and LDS is in denial about it to this day.

Speaking of which, have a nice one.
 
Old 02-04-2010, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 3,369,195 times
Reputation: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post

1. In the end it is going to be down to the individual to decide whether they believe the translations of egyptologists or of Mormons. I just think that it is important to put both sides, or all sides rather than just one side. However, when you have representations of 'Pharaoh' in all sorts of context shoing that it is really a goddess and when you get parallel translations of Egyptian into demotic and greek (I suppose you at least suppose we can translate greek, correctly) how can you reasonably say that Egyptologists are wrong and Smith's translation is right?

2. Allright, I'll play it your way. If eternal salivation is important to you, isn't it important that you have the right religion rather that some faked up distortion of it? Shouldn't be pretty damn' sure that you have good reason to stick to LDS when there is so much evidence that it was all faked up by Joseph Smith? You'd better be sure you got it right.

3. An open mind is looking at all the factors, not just accepting it on Blind faith. The fact is that there is so much support for Egyptian now being understood - you can get checks from parallel texts, even Coptic, still spoken today. When the Abraham fragments are so wildly variant in both visual imagery and text -and remember, Smith knew nothing about Egyptian, it has to be supposed that it was all inspired - objectivity has to come down on the side of Egyptology. What you are doing is denial. have you even tried to find out for yourself why Egyptian can be taken as well and truly translatable?

4. You know nothing of the kind. This is blind faith based on a refusal to look at the evidence - that Smith was a faker, a manipulator, a deceiver and demonstrably so and LDS is in denial about it to this day.

5. Speaking of which, have a nice one.
1. The way I see it, in the end it is going to be down to the individual to decide whether they believe the translations of a certain group of egyptologists and ignore other just as qualified groups of egyptologists, or to exercise some faith and believe what GOD tells them! (James 1:5)

2. It is my belief that all good people will end up in heaven. However, I am perfectly content, as I have been for more than four decades, to be a faithful Latter-day Saint. I have seen reams of misinformed or ignorant bigoted criticisms about Joseph Smith and other things pertaining to the Latter-day Saints and find little if any objective truth or value in them, most are just groundless repeats over and over and over again from anti-Mormon websites.

Probably almost everything anyone has ever writtten negatively about the Saints has been thoroughly explained or refuted by scholars who are just as well or better qualified as are those who write negatively about the Latter-day Saints. Some of those scholarly articles can be found at such websites as:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/

www.fairlds.org


3. I understand. You put down faith and blindly accept the arm of flesh intellectual understandings and words of people who spent a bit more time in college than most did. I know from personal observation that those words of scholars are constantly shifting and that you can always find another scholar to oppose any specific scholarly point of view. You might be surprised to find quite a few faithful Latter-day Saints among those "egyptologists" you speak so highly of.

4. That in my opinion is a groundless bigoted and hopelessly false statement. I DO know, because God has told me many times in ways that I personally recognize as from Him that Joseph Smith is the chosen and called prophet leader of this the final dispensation of times. I know too that he was a fallible man and that applying principles of presentism those who look for faults in him will certainly find them, as they would with Moses, Abraham, the Founding Fathers of the USA etc.

We're all humans, some of us are doing our best to proclaim beautiful uplifting things we have come to know, others blindly reject such pearls of truth and work hard to press them into the mud and out of sight.

Do you have something against faith? Wasn't there something written somewhere about a mustard seed and moving mountains?


5. You too Are, enjoy the day...

Last edited by justamere10; 02-04-2010 at 11:14 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:57 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top