Reorganized LDS

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

I wouldn't think so. I would think though, that there is a contingent of people who lose faith in the BOA and subsequently lose faith in the BOM.

Then these are people who don't understand how the BoM was translated, not to mention don't understand the nature of faith and personal revelation.

How we come to belief is different for different people. If your belief is based on logic, explanations, etc. you are very likely to reject notions of Kolob, Book of Abraham, etc. If your belief is based on a process of personal revelation (which is hardly based in logic) then that is something entirely different.

You have two mains kinds of non-believers:

1. This stuff doesn't make sense.
2. God told me this stuff isn't right.

That is why I would submit that someone who states belief in Book of Mormon, but rejects Mormonism based on the Book of Abraham is likely of the 1st category. In which case, I would argue, they were likely to end up falling away anyway (or at least never have reached a high level of faith).

I explain this from the perspective of someone who believes in personal revelation (God to Man).

If one want reasons to leave, one is sure to find them. But don't tell us how smart you are to have found them.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

For a non-believer, it serves as 'evidence' that Joseph was a fraud.

For a believer, it, IMO, calls into question the translation of the BOM. How authentic was the translation of the BOM when Joseph was unable to translate a different text?



I wouldn't think so. I would think though, that there is a contingent of people who lose faith in the BOA and subsequently lose faith in the BOM.

You act like the case against the Book of Abraham is a done deal. It's no more open and shut than the case against the Book of Mormon.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by All-American

You act like the case against the Book of Abraham is a done deal. It's no more open and shut than the case against the Book of Mormon.

Not at all.

But would you not agree the the facsimiles do not represent, Abraham, Kolob, Abraham, but represent, Osiris, funery amulet, and Osiris?

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You have two mains kinds of non-believers:

1. This stuff doesn't make sense.
2. God told me this stuff isn't right.

That is why I would submit that someone who states belief in Book of Mormon, but rejects Mormonism based on the Book of Abraham is likely of the 1st category. In which case, I would argue, they were likely to end up falling away anyway (or at least never have reached a high level of faith).

Do you not believe in further light and knowledge? Some people and sincerely believe a certain way only to receive further light and knowledge that lead them to chase different rainbows.

That's the beauty of the restored gospel, Joseph taught us the the heavens aren't seperated by prophets and apostles who hold the keys of heaven, he gave us those keys and taught that one can unlock the mysteries of godliness and have a direct relationship with God, bypassing the prophets and apostles.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Do you not believe in further light and knowledge? Some people and sincerely believe a certain way only to receive further light and knowledge that lead them to chase different rainbows.

That's the beauty of the restored gospel, Joseph taught us the the heavens aren't seperated by prophets and apostles who hold the keys of heaven, he gave us those keys and taught that one can unlock the mysteries of godliness and have a direct relationship with God, bypassing the prophets and apostles.

nice non sequitur.

yes, there are all kinds of crazy. I like my crazy best. and not all craziness is equal.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

nice non sequitur.

Mike's on a religious roll.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Not at all.

But would you not agree the the facsimiles do not represent, Abraham, Kolob, Abraham, but represent, Osiris, funery amulet, and Osiris?

I would not agree to that. Rather, I would flatly state that I have not the slightest clue what the facsimiles represent, having absolutely no knowledge or background in egyptology.

I would also suggest that there may be symbolism being utilized in the facsimiles. I wouldn't freak out if some of the images used seem to have other meanings.

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by All-American

You act like the case against the Book of Abraham is a done deal. It's no more open and shut than the case against the Book of Mormon.

So point me to a single non-Mormon Egyptologist who translates the papyri (or even the facsimiles which cannot be argued to be different items than what Smith was looking at) the same way as Joseph Smith, Jun.

And do GA's write or edit "Ensign" at all? Apparently not if one is to say they don't comment on it.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by hyrum

So point me to a single non-Mormon Egyptologist who translates the papyri (or even the facsimiles which cannot be argued to be different items than what Smith was looking at) the same way as Joseph Smith, Jun.

And do GA's write or edit "Ensign" at all? Apparently not if one is to say they don't comment on it.

Tell you what. You point me to the papyri that Joseph Smith used to translate the Book of Abraham, and then I'll work on your request.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by hyrum

So point me to a single non-Mormon Egyptologist who translates the papyri (or even the facsimiles which cannot be argued to be different items than what Smith was looking at) the same way as Joseph Smith, Jun.

And do GA's write or edit "Ensign" at all? Apparently not if one is to say they don't comment on it.

okay, show me the article in the Ensign. Let's say for purposes of argument that any article in the ensign is the equivalent of a First Presidency signed statement.