“Our religion will not clash with nor contradict the facts of science in any particular.”

― Brigham Young

The papyrus was translated correctly after all.

http://mormonismdisproved.blogspot.com/2010/12/book-of-abraham-fraud-explained.html

Were it not so, the Brethren would remove the Facsimiles from the Mormon canonical volumes, immediately after such a fraud was discovered.

The other problem with the Book of Abraham is its utter nonsense regarding astronomical things. The sun does not borrow its light from anything else. The stars are far more "glorious" than our sun when you get close to them. There is no planet/star at the center of the universe. There may be a big black hole, but that's different. And so on (it's been a while since I read it). One would expect that a real Abraham, if he were really inspired by God, would have gotten at least a few things right about nuclear fusion and black holes, and that JS, if he were really inspired by God, would have translated Abraham's texts properly. Let's face it: Abraham is a made-up person, and so there could have been no Abraham to write a Book of Abraham. Full stop.

That doesn’t get me my foreskin back.

The science in the text (or rather, the "translation") is nonsense.

The age of the papyri is 2,000 years too young, based on carbon-14 dating. Two to ten thousand years is the "sweet spot" for C-14 dating, where the dates are most reliable.

We can now read the original text. The style of writing is from the time of the Roman Empire, not from the time of Abraham. The content of the text has nothing whatsoever to do with JS's so-called translation.

Conclusion: there is no way this bit of third rate OT fan fiction was written by the hand of Abraham. JS pulled it out of his, um, rock in a hat.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/07/2018 08:49AM by Brother Of Jerry.

He didn't use the rock during the fabrication of the BoA...just sayin'. :)


The fact that the papyrii are part of an elaborate afterlife spell, the inclusion of any of the content JS invented would be as inappropriate as baptizing someone in an Elmer Fudd voice.

"Shh. Be vewy vewy quiet--I'm baptizing Anne Fwank!"

The Mormonites have infected YouTube searches at times, but here's the video I was looking for... I think you can still get a free copy from IRR...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcyzkd_m6KE

that's a nice documentary, I haven't seen, Thanks for posting.

Religion has been overriding science for thousands of years.

Using science to prove a religious claim has always been a good con job.

Science didn’t start until 500 years ago.

You're doubtless referring to Galileo and the Copernican "Revolution," but the ancient Greeks had a considerable body of knowledge, and not all of it was superstition or religious dogma.

The Socratic Method (i.e. the dialectic) was an early form of the scientific method, and merely because much of the knowledge was "codified" during the Renaissance doesn't mean it wasn't being put to practical use.

Native Americans, for example, discovered that a fish carcass planted along with their crop seeds would increase their harvest.