What an amazing rebuttal to Hewart and Tanner. I agree that this is the top criticism of the church that plagues members. Thank you for your hard work discovering this and offering such a sound refutation to their work.
When I first learned of this criticism years ago it shook my faith. But after much prayer on the matter I was led to the conclusion that it was a translation given of God, and God was able to give Joseph whatever words He wanted him to have. Essentially it didn't matter one whit what was written on the papyri. Thank you for this, which strengthens my inspiration. I love the comments on the inspired translation of the Bible as it reinforces this idea.
I must be a little mentally slow. But at least I am willing to let the world know my limitations. Could someone please explain what this scholar said so I can even begin to grasp it. Thank you
He completely dismantled the Hewart and Tanners arguments against the authenticity of the Book of Abraham. They argue that the entire book of Abraham was translated by a small portion of a manuscript called JSP 11. Joseph Smith said specifically that he didn't use JSP 11 he says it right in your copy of the Pearl of great price.
In a nutshell: The enemies of the the kingdom assert that JS translated the BOA from JSP11. JS specifically said he did not translate that text. Also, witnesses of the actual papyri from which JS translated the BOA say it had red ink. JSP11 has no red ink. So, the enemies of the church are wrong and those who left the Church based on the enemies arguments were wrong to leave.
@@Dustin_McNab The eye witness statements describe a very long scroll spread across a table, one said it was as long as the room. They also described some pieces displayed under glass in frames. These were displayed in his home and shown to guests. The long scrolls were eventually sent to the museum of Chicago. The collection framed under glass ended up at the metropolitan museum of art in New York. The papari in Chicago was burned in the Chicago fire in 1871. I assume the critical text of the Book of Abraham was destroyed.
@stevenrussell2431 who cares if these "witnesses" said the ink was red or the scroll was very long, what matters is what is on the facsimiles and its interpretation in canonized scripture. Joseph failed the test, his translation was incorrect. This leaves 2 options, he really believed he was translating actual Egyptian or he was a fraud and making it up on the fly. If he believed that he was translating, then he must've been mentally ill to be imagining all the stories he told. You know what it means if he was a fraud.
It is sad to me that an upstanding member would turn away and believe sources not of our faith on comments made at face value. Thats like someone walking to my door and telling me I'm not my parents son and me choosing to just accept that narrative. Why would I believe such a thing and turn away from my parents and the evidences they provide me of my relations and the foundational relationship established over years? The invitation to doubt our doubts seems valid and acceptable as it gives a chance to research facts in context and come to a proper conclusion. The most important thing above all in reaching an answer is to seek a spiritual witness which is a blessing members hold sacred as it allows us to turn to God for answers rather than just accept the opinions and influence of others, inside or outside the church. Great presentation.
Kind of like, if my wife was cheating on me, and my friend says he has proof, but I wholeheartedly believe and trust my wife to never cheat. She told me she wouldn't. I believe her beyond a shadow of a doubt. I feel it in my bones. That doesn't stop my friend from having proof my wife cheated. Feelings don't mean as much as facts, and facts show, if studied objectively, that Joseph Smith was most likely a fraud, not an ordained prophet of God with special mystical God powers.
My concern is different than any I have heard which is why would Heavenly Father allow this to become canonized scripture when it is clear that Joseph was unable to translate egyptian. It makes no sense to me that He would allow this to become scripture. I do not know how or where Joseph got the book of Abraham from but that doesn't change the fact that He allowed an obvious incorrect document to become canonized LDS scripture.
@@fairldsorg what about the Alphabet A document that is in Joseph Smith's own handwriting that has characters and then English translations next to them. These translations are incorrect....in his own handwriting. Figures 2, 4, and 5 of facsimile 3 are direct examples also. I think these two examples make it clear that the assumption is valid.
@@elderigloo The same thing applies. Here is one possibility: www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/conference/august-2010/the-meaning-of-the-kirtland-egyptian-papers-part-i
@@fairldsorg I'm very familiar with the idea of the reverse translation theory, lots of assumptions there as well. Let's say that is what happened. Then does not the Alphabet A still demonstrate that JS did not actually know how to translate Egyptian? Either way the characters do not match. I've still never seen a good explanation for the incorrect translation in the canonized Figures 2, 4, and 5 of facsimile 3. How much more direct can that piece of data be?
@@elderigloo maybe you are thinking about the term "translation" too much in its literal meaning. It seems like the "translation/revelation" process of Joseph Smith was something very specific. They talk about it on the Q&A after the presentation, around 35 minutes in. For example, we talk about JS "translating" the BoM, when we know that he wasn't even looking at the plates. Why would the "translation" of the BoA be a literal translation?
I believe it’s fair to say that most members are not leaving the church for 1 or 2 reasons but rather all the things that they are learning about church history and continuing to see today. The book of Abraham was troubling to me but when I take the 30k ft view and take into account other things like Joseph’s treasure digging, financial troubles, story telling, seer stones, existing texts that existed and were influential at that time like view of the hebrews, burnt over district history. Then messy polygamy, polyandry problems with things showing up the BOM that didn’t exist in the americas…..the lost goes on and on. For some, like me, the book of Abraham was just the final straw.
Wow. You realize these issues have been debunked many times over😂. You are leaving the most precious beautiful tree with the fruit that makes one happy because you think this tree has bad roots. 😢
@@commoncents5191 debunked? Not sure your definition of debunked, but there are so many problems and the fact that members are leaving more now than ever before is strong evidence that these issues have not been debunked. Allow yourself to explore and read some of that “anti Mormon” propaganda and you might see some of this stuff has not been debunked.
I wonder if B of A critics actually believe no one, in the last 50 years, has worked through the false conclusions and assertions put forth as valid or sound arguments. Seriously... The Book of Abraham is another evidence of Joseph Smith's calling as a prophet. This gentleman has presented additional information that supports Joseph Smith's actual statements regarding the B of A. And the content of the B of A is another arguments supporting Joseph. But then, the critics don't often want to talk content, just assumptions and nefarious speculation to justify their lack of actual objective, rigorous investigation. It's always easier to tear down than it is to build.
@@UtahKent 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. Scholars have identified the papyrus fragments as parts of standard funerary texts that were deposited with mummified bodies. These fragments date to between the third century B.C.E. and the first century C.E., long after Abraham lived.
Smith demonstrably invented the meaning of the pictures and text that we have access to. He ignorantly vandalised the picture to "complete" it according to his desired meaning. This is apologetic tapdancing.
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii No offence but Paul Gregerson is a mentally disordered person who thinks the LDS church can be proven to be true based on a secret mathematical code buried in the Bible. And he's not an Egyptologist either.
The list is growing, every single year. But, the dirt will continue to be flung, especially as Satan sees momentum shifting in his direction as we near the last days.
@@awfulwaffle1341the standard apologetic is that some rogue scribe tried to reverse translate the text 😂😂😂 to this crowd joseph can never be wrong, they're willing to throw God under the bus if their beloved prophet is proven to be a fraud.
