I am also honestly interested in this topic ...

Liz, I think the missing portions are missing portions of the actual scrolls, where the book of breathings part is what is left over, the Book of Abraham portions are missing. Something about paper thickness measurements come to mind, but I need to find/read much more on this topic.

If the source material that was used for the translation is not available for modern evaluation, then all is well (thank Goodness for fires and angels)

If one is interested in having his wavering faith steadied, MADboard is useful to (a) hear claims that merely mask with sophistry and mystery the troubling issue, and (b) be reassured that much smarter people have examined the same questions and continue with their faith intact. In that way, MST has been a bolster to MABboard.

If one is interested in finding out the truth, MDB (this board) is useful. Here, with virtually open moderation, numerous perspectives are presented on a question that is asked.

If apologists, like Will, wanted to hone their craft, they'd come here where their arguments would face a test that the moderators on the MADboard would shut down before the apologist's argument can really be tested. Will delights in his ad hominems of this MDB (e.g., "The Great and Spacious Trailer Park") and his broad brush strokes that we're all a bunch of rubes. If Will had anything about BoAbr that would be a "watershed" even among the rose-colored glass lookers at MADboard, he'd be here beating the critics like me over the head with it. Rather, Will chooses simply to come here and be condescending. Here's the rub Will, here's my neck stretched wide across the block, pick up your ax of BoAbr apologetics and give me your best whack. Let's see what (if any) substance you have behind all this bluster of the "watershed" in BoAbr apologetics.

Hi Will,

Chris and I eagerly look forward to your 'upcoming scroll-length study'. I hope that you will educate us regarding the hopelessness of our methodology. When might we expect your work to appear?

Warm Personal Regards,

Andrew

I think he basically did already. Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham before the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar (and other KEP works) was put down on paper. Thus the KEP has nothing to do with the Book of Abraham translation and was simply
used by some in the study of Egyptian.

The portions of the scrolls that contained the original source material of the actual Book of Abraham translation is missing from the scrolls and so no modern Egyptologist can dispute the translation.

Consider yourself beheaded.

When I responded to you on another thread about the Book of Abraham it dawned upon me what has caused all the fuss. The Lord commanded Joseph Smith to translate the Bible. He did not translate it from one language to another. He went through the Bible and corrected some verses and added other verses.

He did not translate anything from the papyrus. There was never any translation at all. He called it a translation because that is what he was used to calling his work on the Bible. He got the Book of Abraham the same way he got the Book of Moses. The inspiration for the Book of Abraham was the only thing intended from this. It was a revelation.

And he did attempt to try and read the Egyptian subsequently. Like anyone striving to discover something invention has to seed the process. He invented vividly about his Egyptian characters and probably got a bit heady thinking that he was on to something and could not resist publishing it in Times and Seasons. Anyone who has invented something understands how excitement blinds.

{rethinking}

BOO!

That usually scares Will away....

Nightlion,

One of the problems, for me, over the catalyst theory (which you pretty much just re-iterated), is there are many statements, from Joseph Smith that he was "translating". As you note, this is not what he did with the Bible (nor what he claimed to do).

We used to call that a SWAG.

That's funny, Kevin.

Not sharp enough for the job without the evidence that the Book of Abraham translation was before the KEP.

Sorry that I did not get into the Book of Abraham debate. What does SWAG stand for.

D&C 73: 3-4
3 Now, verily I say unto you my servants, Joseph Smith, Jun., and Sidney Rigdon, saith the Lord, it is expedient to translate again;
4 And, inasmuch as it is practicable, to preach in the regions round about until conference; and after that it is expedient to continue the work of translation until it be finished.


Joseph Smith definitely saw himself translating the Bible by combing through it, looking unto the Lord in every thought.

The Lord told Hyrum Smith while the Book of Mormon was being worked upon how the work is accomplished.

D&C 11: 19, 22
19 Yea, cleave unto me with all your heart, that you may assist in bringing to light those things of which has been spoken—yea, the translation of my work; be patient until you shall accomplish it.

If you think about Joseph Smith's translating techniques he never comprehended the Book of Mormon script and did not pretend to be able to read it. He relied upon revelations.

When Oliver Cowdery attempted to translate he failed because he did not understand the rudiments of getting a revelation from God. The "studying-it-out-in-your-mind" aspect, the same as "cleaving unto me with all your heart".

What that is as per my own experience is a diligence in keeping the intent to received a revelation firm in your mind and purposefully in your heart and else-wise always cooking on the back burner in your desire to know which demands that you apply your faith constantly fixed upon the object of your inquiry. This "study" is floated up before the Lord in your constant prayer for an answer.

Joseph Smith never gave out about being a linguist who could decipher the Book of Mormon glyphs. The sacredness of the Gold Plates would cause him not to want to make it common.

It would appear that he was striving to learn Egyptian. I see him roasting the papyri on the back burner with a desire to unlock a mystery hidden in them. BANG! He gets the revelation of the Book of Abraham. To Joseph's mind getting a revelation while concentrating upon something counts for a translation.

Joseph was told that his name would be had for good and ill. Or that there would be both good and evil spoken of him. The Book of Mormon is that good part and the Book of Abraham has certainly become the evil part, where so many are convinced that he conned everyone, and therefore their faith collapses and they can only think evil of Joseph Smith thereafter.

Back in the days when I was striving to fix LDS problems that arose from scriptural ignorance this Book of Abraham was not the bugbear it is today. For my great love of the prophet Joseph Smith I should take the time to fix this. My faith tells me that there is a purpose here that the Book of Abraham demands.

SWAG == Scientific Wild Ass Guess

Gee thanks. I would not want to come off like a hack if I venture into the fray. Better I get my nomenclature down.

Especially given the extensive evidence that the opposite is true.

ROFL!!! Indeed.

Will says he is publishing a book?

Hmmmm , let's see. His film-making career failed to produce any films, his computer programming career failed to produce any programs, his college studies failed to produce a degree, so I won't be surprised is his career as an author fails to produce any books.

Rock, indeed, I took my work off the web and it remains in the pits of my computer. I've revised some of it on the chance of a moment but for the most part have avoided the whole subject because I got burned. How? I put a lot of effort and time in it. The bottom line is: The BofA is not true. It was created out of Joseph Smith's brain with a little help from his friends.

William, my friend, you need to set yourself free and deny the BofA. Give in, it's the only way to experience real freedom and utter honestly. Don't pledge yourself to those false prophets in Salt Lake. Break out and you'll find there is so much more than Mormonism. Mormonism is not just a pit stop but a great learning experience. But, move on and go to new levels of learning. It is like waking up out of a deep sleep. You, William, are still alseep in the false reality of Mormonism. Snap out of it! Be honest and rise above it. Prove to Kevin that you're not a total looser!

Paul O

It's also in the pits of the web archive. http://web.archive.org/web/200802251058 ... ology.net/

Paul,

Good to hear from you.

When you were defending the Book of Abraham, did you take the missing portion approach, the catalyst approach or something else?

Holy God, dblagent007, I can't believe the website is in the web archive!

http://web.archive.org/web/200710070924 ... le/id3.htm

I was a catalyst apologist and butted heads with my believing fellows over this issue.

Paul O

Siggy.

I would also say that a good part of the Old Testament is a bunch of made up stuff. It's utter nonsense and downright evil, i.e., Killing babies because the bloody God of Moses commands it? The Moses we read about in the Bible was a horrible man. The God as portrayed in the OT is an evil image of everything that is wrong in this world.

The BofA is a lie. A lie makes nothing true and neither is truth established in a lie. Give it up BC.

Paul O