While growing up we didn't really read the book of abraham as a family. But I very clearly remember my grandma (Ultra TBM), who claimed that it is a LITERAL translation. She'd say that sometimes even the smartest people don't get the true meaning, only the prophet could (here's the excuse for the BS).

NOW, here's my confusion. Even tho we know it's a random funeral text and it has nothing to do with abraham, I remember being taught that IT IS RELATED TO ABRAHAM. Now it seems like TSCC says that the book of abraham and the papyri associated with it aren't the actual papyri (...what..?). What's the current stand on it? I understand god can change his stand on it next week...

Relax, (the Mormon) God works in mysterious ways, we'll understand All things 'later', when s/he cares enough to explain...

Actually, you're less confused than the believers.

Haha, both are really good points. Challenging my mormon family on this matter is really fun

The Book of Abraham is a crock, Joseph Smith never translated anything correctly.

That also goes for the Book of Mormon, which is refuted by DNA.

No Semites landed in America, at least not until after Columbus. DNA shows that the American Indians came from Asia instead.

Everything about Mormonism is fiction.

Succinct

The Bible is mostly in Asia. I wish you Americans would learn geography in school.

The phrase you are looking for is north east Asia. Asia borders on the Mediterranean and Black Sea and is joined to Europe and Africa.

What's the current stand on it?
You can get that from the "essay" the church published on the topic a while back.
From which I quote:

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the book of Abraham as scripture."

First sentence in the essay. Sets the stage -- they've already reached a conclusion, no matter what the evidence says.

"The book originated with Egyptian papyri that Joseph Smith translated beginning in 1835. Many people saw the papyri, but no eyewitness account of the translation survives, making it impossible to reconstruct the process."

Well, ok, it did originate about the time Smith got some Egyptian papyri. But it wasn't "translated" (and they admit as much later in the essay, making that line a blatant contradiction), and the "Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar" that Smith made up DOES survive (along with descriptions of how it was made), so the last line is also a blatant lie.

"Only small fragments of the long papyrus scrolls once in Joseph Smith’s possession exist today. The relationship between those fragments and the text we have today is largely a matter of conjecture."

Another blatant lie. The surviving portions match up perfectly with the "facsimiles" published in the book itself, and with what Smith and others say he "translated." And what survived is much more than "small fragments." This lie gives the foundation for their position: that we don't have the stuff Smith "translated." When we do.

" The word translation typically assumes an expert knowledge of multiple languages. Joseph Smith claimed no expertise in any language. He readily acknowledged that he was one of the “weak things of the world,” called to speak words sent “from heaven.”1 Speaking of the translation of the Book of Mormon, the Lord said, “You cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.”2 The same principle can be applied to the book of Abraham. The Lord did not require Joseph Smith to have knowledge of Egyptian. By the gift and power of God, Joseph received knowledge about the life and teachings of Abraham."

Above, they try to re-define what "translation" means -- they have to, since the book's introduction claims the book was translated from the papyrus (it also says the papyrus was written by Abraham's "own hand," and it most certainly was not, it's at least 1500 years later than when Abraham could have existed). But to try and save the book they have, they re-define "translation" to not mean going from one language to another, but to mean "god told him what to write." And that the papyrus itself wasn't even necessary. Which isn't, of course, what "translate" means at all.

"The book of Abraham’s status as scripture ultimately rests on faith in the saving truths found within the book itself as witnessed by the Holy Ghost."

A dodge, to get the reader to ignore all of the facts & evidence showing the BoA isn't what Smith claimed, or what the church claimed, and wasn't translated, and wasn't written by Abraham, etc. Never mind all that -- just go by feelings and it's true. They use the same dodge with the BoM.

The essay does give their "stand" on the BoA.
Trouble is, the essay is full of obfuscations, half-truths, dodges, and outright lies. So it's not at all a stretch to say that their "stand" is that they're dishonest purveyors of bullshit.

You can read the whole thing for yourself here:

https://www.lds.org/topics/translation-and-historicity-of-the-book-of-abraham?lang=eng

And then read a more honest appraisal here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_appraisal_of_the_Book_of_Abraham

This is great! Thanks

"The book of Abraham’s status as scripture ultimately rests on faith in the saving truths found within the book itself as witnessed by the Holy Ghost."

I love this one. The BoA is true. The Holy Ghost says so! End of story.

Basically the essay says, "...don't ever let facts get in the way of what the church tells you to believe. No critical thinking, no using your own intelligence. Never ask questions."
Whoever wrote the essay should be ashamed.

I seriously wonder how long it took them to put this BS together. Every word is carefully selected. The last sentence is the best. It comes back to what tons of TBMs say: "Even if there's a proof the church isn't true, it doesn't matter to me cause I prayed about it and know it's true"

Why isn't a declaration from the Holy Ghost published in the front of the book like those of the "witnesses" of the BoM, then?

"saving truths" LMAO. Like this?

Abraham 1:23-24

23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;

24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

There's so much provably wrong with this, it's hard to know where to begin. Egyptus? Chaldean? Discovering an underwater land? "Translation" aside, the BS masquerading as history by itself indicts the BOA as a miserable fraud.

That book is f#####cked up. Kokobeam and kolob, that book will f#ck the sh#t out of your mind that's all i know.

Badassadam1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That book is total kaka de toro. Kokobeam and kolob,
> that's all i know.

Good thought Badadam.

Maybe rename that whole farrago of nonsense "Cocoa Beans and Bolloks."

At my trial for apostasy, I challenged the Council: "Do any of you actually believe in the Book of Abraham?"

No-one answered.

What's all the confusion about???

The Reorganized LDS Church (Now community of Christ) completely rejected the BoA.

Question: why would the decedents of Joseph Smith Jr reject the BoA IF it were true????????

Joes first string hat was laid up with a sprained hat band...when joe put the rock in his second string hat...not one play got transmitted correctly...time would prove his go to hat wasn't any better...bull shitters be tripping...continued research is getting ever closer to revealing the entire fraud...joe plagiarized almost every thought or idea he had from a source available at the time...the rest he pulled out of his flowery but ridiculous imagination...read up on zelph...or Adam ondai ahmad...or running through the bush carrying 200 pounds while fighting off three guys...not even chuck or Dwayne could do that...silly pecker...

The only "D" grade that I ever got, in my life, was in Pearl of Great Price class at BYU.

I've taken some far-out philosophy classes and Bible classes, but I could not make sense of the Book of Abraham.

Well, it was partly that I usually fell asleep in class. Lies tend to render me unconscious.