http://www.amazon.com/Traditions-about-Abraham-Brigham-University/dp/0934893594

I wrote a blank check and to a guy if he could name the book he was getting his bullshit from, I would buy it and discuss it with him. I was not expecting 80+ bucks, but now I'm intrigued.

Supposedly the book "proves" that every significant element of the Book of Abraham can be found in ancient sources, at least one element per source. I doubt the book Abraham will have any more in common with any one source than one vague element here or there and that all the sources chosen have no relation to each other except that a tbm apologist thinks they corroborate the Book of Abraham somehow. That's my prediction moving forward, but I wonder if someone could spare me the time and the money.

Anyone have a run in with this book ever?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2015 11:15AM by Cold-Dodger.

As per usual, the timeframe of the "traditions" are all wrong. Hebrews and Greeks brought traditions into Egyptian culture where much crap comes from. Secondly, Joseph was being instructed by the Hebrew professor who had all kinds of "Abraham" beliefs. As per usual, Joseph is reiterating what others believe after he has mixed them together in his own special way.

You could buy all three books in the series for $260.00

There are many legends about Abraham. Several apocryphal books have been around for centuries, there are also the writings of Josephus.

If you are spending the cash check the references used. List those that are tradion/legends and those that are scholarly research.

Anything by Nibley is trash. I wouldn't believe him if he told me water was wet and the sun rose in the east.

I think you should ignore this whole interaction, & save your money. It's not worth it.

Can't you borrow it from him? Chances are he hasn't read it himself nor owns a copy. Probably dug up the reference at FAIR and thinks he's an intellectual.

Remember that if you work from the premise that Mormons are full of shit, you are more often right than wrong.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2015 12:48PM by rt.

I've had mormons tell me that "Abrahamic sources" tale numerous times.
The thing is, all of the "Abrahamic sources" are very late, apochryphal stories dating from the 2nd century BCE to the 8th century CE. They were essentially much the same as the mormon "Book of Abraham" -- people making up stories about "Abraham," and writing them as if Abraham himself had written them.

And, of course, what's a "significant element" is entirely subjective. If you take a more objective view, there is a great deal in the mormon "book of Abraham" that is not in any bible tradition, ancient Abraham tradition, or myth of Abraham earlier work. Not to mention the clearly incorrect "translation" of the facsimiles, etc.

The FAIR article on the subject (http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Abraham/Evidence_for_antiquity) lists some of these texts, but of course they don't always provide references so the reader can see the entire texts...the reason is simple: anyone who compares the entire ancient texts to the mormon "Book of Abraham," rather than a few select sections that can be made to "match" if you work at it hard enough, can see that the stories don't match up at all.

there is proof, and there is MORmON *proof*, MORmONS can not tell the difference when it suits them.

assigning detractors to endless tail chases is a favorite MORmON tactic for dealing with detractors .......just as it is a favorite MORmON tactic for dealing with MORmON believers, the point being that a person has to be a real MORmON in order to accept such an assignment.

Paul wrote that the story of Abraham and Sarah was an allegory. I suspect there were about as many "traditions" about Abraham as there were those about Jesus' years in Egypt. The Book of Jude mentions the fight between Satan and the archangel over the body of Moses. JS was clueless.

If you get suckered into an argument like that, you'll never win. The apologists throw out so much garbage that it will take forever to combat them, and they never respond to real points.

They never answer the arguments which you bring. Go through Mormon Think and the other websites which are linked there, and see how well your friend can respond. I doubt that he will give honest answers.

The first problem is that Abraham never existed.

From wiki article on Abraham

"The Bible's internal chronology places Abraham around 2000 BCE.[3] Despite this, "there is nothing specific in the Genesis stories that can be definitively related to known history in or around Canaan in the early second millennium B.C.E."[4] As a result, "it is now widely agreed that the so-called 'patriarchal/ancestral period' is a later literary construct, not a period in the actual history of the ancient world" (Professor Paula McNutt).[5] The majority of scholars believe that the Pentateuch was composed in the Persian period (roughly 520–320 BCE),[6] as a result of tensions between the Jewish landowners who had stayed in Judah during the Babylonian captivity and claimed Abraham as the "father" through whom they traced their right to the land, and the returning "Priestly" exiles who based their claim to dominance on Moses and the Exodus tradition.[7]"

However, your friend will simply reject this and say that scholars don't know squat, while turning around and using the same scholars for evidence when it is convenient for him.

FAIR and their ilk love to find parallels, but if you dig too deeply, then horses are tapirs and steel swords are wooden clubs.

No spin on any sort of parallel can change the fact that JS's translation of the facsimiles are completely bogus. They try to say that he gets close on one to two things, but the vast majority so completely misses the mark that it's absurd.

It's like if someone were writing the story of Mormonism, placed the story in Ireland in the 14th century, had Patty Oneal as the protagonist getting the BoM from a leprechaun.

Apologists would knock themselves silly pointing out that the "O" in an Irish last name means "son of," how could a simple farm boy know that and that parallel with Joseph Smith Jr. is a home run.

Meanwhile you are tearing your hair out saying it was New England not Europe, the 19th Century and an angel not a leprechaun.