It’s amazing how the apologists continue to delude themselves. Much easier than admitting you’ve been ‘had’.

It's disgusting how they try to make it fit when this has NOTHING to do with Abraham.

It must be a very daunting job to be a Mormon apologist these days with Dan Vogel around !

I'm kind of surprised that Joe didn't claim the mummies were Abraham and Joseph.

See what kills me is the RLDS ignore this book but yet accept the Book of Mormon. Either JS was all right or wrong.

It's unfortunate how much time must be spent pointing out all the lies, omissions, and faulty logic in LDS apologist writings. The LDS tactic is simply to keep spamming BS faster than actual academics can point out its flaws. The LDS faithful are content to know apologist writings exist, without bothering to critically examine them. Thank you Dan Vogel for spending your time fighting all the LDS BS.

Blame it on the 'associates'! do the apologists REALLY believe that Joseph Smith didn't have complete control over what his scribes wrote?

My hats off to Joseph Smith. His career represents the most successful assault on rationality and rationalism in the modern era. Awesome personality and imagination.

After being a member for over 40 years, when I first began questioning the truth claims of the Mormon church, the one thing that really pushed me away the furthest was apologists' explanations of obvious inconsistencies as well as outright lies about Joseph Smith's 'translations' and his concurrent practice and denial of polygamy. They had to stretch the truth so much that it convinced me that no church that had to go that far in rationalizing the obvious could be "true". I appreciate your videos and the light they shed on the murky shadows of Mormonism. I look forward to Part 2.

I love how thorough your videos are, I've watched and shared them all many times.

Thanks for research Dan. The late Robert Ritner, Egyptologist, was commissioned to research the Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham. I'm no expert on matters of Egyptology but with enough knowledge to recognise from first sighting of Facsimile 1, something was very wrong. Anubis is on the left of the papyri and the priest on the lion's couch is not Abraham. The Church knows this, but continues to cover up in one way or another.

Good quality scholarship. Thank you

Something I don't understand: The LDS church has living, breathing apostles, who reportedly seen Jesus and receive revelation directly from God. So why would they have any need for "apologists"? "Well you see, it could have been this" or "It might have been such-and-such..." Why don't the prophets simply ask God himself EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED? Who did what and when? Surely he knows, right?

Thank you so much, Dan, for your hard work.

One word Rosetta Stone 1848

Next time you meet up with a Mormon missionary, ask him or her about the Book of Abraham.

There's a great book by an LDS author that shows that there is perfect harmony between the prophetic statements concerning the garden of Eden being in Missouri and the Old Testament account concerning the garden of Eden. It's called Canaan, Babylon, and Egypt A Comparative Theological Analysis on Creation sold by Eborn Books.

Reformed Egyptian, indeed.

Thanks for your work, Dan. You do excellent work.

I'm a huge fan of your videos. Thank you for the work you continue to do.

To be LDS, you really have to have countless explanations for your faith. You have to come up with some ridiculous way to define what was meant by words/phrases like translation, by his own hand upon the papyrus, etc. All of this to keep your faith alive so that you don't have to leave the church and lose family, friends and business contacts. This whole thing was set up to keep people under the thumbs of the church presidents. Just get out and get free in Christ alone.

Hey Dan, Another bit of evidence that the book of mormon is fake is that it uses names like Abraham. Abraham is a Greek term derived from the name he would have actually used which is spelled Avraham, and pronounced Ah-braw-hawm. Pretty much all of the biblical names used in the BOM are greek translations of the actual names, which is mighty coincidental considering that the entire BOM was supposed to have taken place before the Greek translation of the Torah ever happened

Outstanding discussion of the papers, manuscripts, and evidences we have on this entirely fascinating era of church history and document translations of the papyri and Joseph Smith dictating! I really wish I had watched this FIRST before starting my own series of The Backyard Professor Live on "Getting Clear on the Joseph Smith Papyri." It is with deep gratification though, that I am finding independently the same conclusions you are, even though your depth is unparalleled! That is extremely FUN and PLEASING to know independently of watching you, I am reading the evidence in much the same way. Just WOW...

yay! a new Dan Vogel video!

So good to see you again man! I'm SO PUMPED to watch more of your videos!

The bit about the New England accent of Joseph Smith at 30.40 is an amazing find.

1965 the Mormon church was presented with the actual manuscripts that Joseph Smith use to translate the "Pearl of Great Price." That manuscript was presented by the Museum of Modern Art in New York. The Mormon church hail it as a great discovery. And the Mormon church put one of their greatest scholar in Eygyptology Professor Dee Jay Nelson. Professor Nelson was designated by the head of the church to translate it. He eagerly took the manuscripts which contained the Book of Abraham, and proceeded to translate it. When he finished his translation. He contacted the president of the Mormon church and said, "we have a problem.." president of the Mormon church wanted to know what the problem was. Dr. Nelson said: "the problem is that what Joseph Smith says, is entirely different than what the manuscripts says are two different things." He summited to different eygyptologist, they studied it, and came back with it and said the same thing. Then Dr. Nelson tried to have it published by the Mormon church. They willfully and deliberately suppressed the manuscripts, they will not let the Mormon people see it. And the reason why the Mormon church won't let them see it is in Professor Dee Jay Nelson's letter of resignation from the Mormon church. "I, Dee Jay Nelson, do hereby renounced and relinquish the priesthood which I now hold following my translation (the first to be published) of the bulk of the hieratic and hieroglyphic Egyptian texts upon the Metropolitan-Joesph Smith papyri fragments three of the most eminent Egyptolgist now living published corroborating translations. These amply prove the fraudulent nature of the Book of Abraham, in which lies unjust assertion that Negros are unworthy of participation in the highest privileges of the LDS church. We do not wish to be associated with a religious organization which teaches lies and adheres to policies so blatantly opposed to the civil and religious rights of some citizens of the United States. By affixing our signatures to this document we exercise our constitutional rights of religious freedom and separate ourselves from the church Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints. Signed: Dee Jay Nelson Katherine G. Nelson Kim Cherie Nelson. December 8,1975

The Book of Abraham was what pushed me over the cliff and I could no longer accepted the LDS church's claims. I saw the new guy on the block Smoot do an unconvincing review of Gee's introduction to the BOA in the Interpreter. I wonder when he gets his PHd from the University of Toronto he will end up employed in the Religious Education Dept of BYU like the others. Dr Ritner might find him employment :) .

thanks for this i have been going through this with family members, i quit the church when i was 14 years old and now i am 53 and i would like to see the church crash and burn in my lifetime

Continue to be amazed at Vogel's scholarly work.

fantastic work dan!

I'm always amazed at the critical details you uncover in your research. Well done as always, Dan.

It would have be /wa.t@`/ (err, not ah) in the example you gave. When non-rhotic accents repair the loss of @` sounds, they do it always before a vowel sound. So "The waters flow south" = /T@"wa.t@z"floU"saUT/ "the watuhz flow south" but "The water is cold" /T@"wa.t@`.r\Iz"ko5d/ "the watuh-r-is cold"

I think brother Jake and Dan Vogel are doing some excellent work.

To be a mormon, you must toss logic and reason and facts out the window

If the Church can ever get past the claims of literal translation is it too generous to place the Book of Abraham in a tradition similar to that of the Jewish midrash?

Excellent work. I did not need this much detail to know Joseph was a fraud. Still, I enjoy your videos with all the in-depth analysis. Thanks Dan

Once again a superbly researched video by Mr Vogel.

Dan, I love your videos. May I provide some constructive criticism? Lower your voice register and add voice inflection.

The Salt Lake City Spin Doctors working overtime on this Hindenberg

love these videos. so good. thank you for making them

I grew up in Southern Alberta Canada where the Mormons have a very large presence. It didnt take me long to realize that behind their smiles and politeness was a smug condescending elitism that bordered on discrimination towards non Mormons. And I saw that discrimination manifest when slowly but surely one position at a time the Mormons took over the Board of Education of the county, that is, they finally got the veto vote on the board and then gone was the smiles. By the time I reached my final grade in high school 7/8 of my teachers were Mormons and there was such blatant favoritism of those teachers towards mormon pupils it was outrageous. But the worse part was when my mother - also a teacher in town at the junior high school, in response to a national magazine's big "expose" of unwanted teenage pregnancies in rural Canada, listed my county in 2nd place of having the most such pregnancies in the country, developed a short 2 hr birth control workshop and introduced it at the junior high one year. The Mormon controlled County Board of Education fired my mother immediately; 2 years short of the years required to get her teacher's pension. Replaced her with a Mormon of course. And those unwanted teenage pregnancies? The vast majority were Mormon girls who would suddenly vanish half way thru the school year; never or rarely to be seen again in the county - so much so that by that final year in high school - boys outnumbered girls by 3 to 1. The financial stress wrecked upon my family by the Mormons firing my mother was significant and as financial stress often does lead to my final year in that small town having to see and hear terrible fights between my parents. It was awful. And I have never forgiven the Mormons ever since. Whenever a Mormon missionary comes to my door I dont hear a word they say - I instantly hear my parents fighting as clear as i fwas 17 years old again in my bedroom in that small town in southern Alberta. If i have any isms surely its anti-Mormonism and that is an ism I will always have towards that cult.

tell us what "determinative translation" means. It is how Joseph Smith did it.

Why is it that you all still present the wrong way to interpret this revelation/explanation?

I appreciate you so much

Too good to say something serious about it ...

Hi Dan - love your videos, I watch them during long shifts at work. All the best

So technical and complex that a 'person not intimately familiar with the "Book of Abraham" and the papyrus fragments associated with it that an "ignorant layman: such as myself cannot make head or trail of it,

In the meantime, where did they stash "Abraham's mummy"? Sh, don't tell anyone that Abraham died in Hebron. I can't wait for the sequel: Isaac, Son of Abraham.

He made it all up. This is proof that he did.

LOL - how do you get so many words from 1-2 little characters?! Something seems off.

If I take the characters, papyrus and facsimiles and hand to an egyptologist without mentioning anything about the Church and ask to translate or interpret or explain, will the answer matches what JS claimed to be?

Excellent as usual

Excellent video! Thank you

Facsimile 1 is not an Egyptian funerary scroll.

The concept of reformed Egyptian just makes me laugh

16:00 is the greatest point!

Are there transcripts of these videos available?

great work dan

Ed Goble over on the MAD board says "I hate when people do KZfaq videos to push the debate. If it's something new do a quick paper. Put it up on Medium if you don't have a place to publish it. Footnotes, endnotes and so forth are important. Videos are fine for summations of stuff or introductions but lousy for cutting edge stuff. At least give us a transcript." Is there a way we could access at least some footnotes?

Thank you for this great explanation.

The facsimiles were called Explanations. Also your information is twisted. I mean you don’t ever finish your work on a single accusation.

Hi @Dan Vogel, how's my favorite BofA critic? I've been so busy, and thought it best to review this before attempting to continue our conversations (I admit I skipped some parts, as always). Either I never understood, or you've edited some of your opinions (which is understandable, as I'm editing my questions now, and I'm sure you've grown over time, and I'm sure Nibley would edit some of his and Gee, if they weren't in print, etc.) So are you of the opinion that Abr. 1:1-3 in Phelps's hand was dictated before work on the GAEL began? This is great news for truth seekers : ). If so, could you possibly be agreeing with Gee and Muhlestein, etc. that the GAEL is reliant upon the BoA? One thing I respect about you is you may be willing to change your mind in the face of evidence. Hoping : ).

Talk of Joseph’s myth....

Not LDS IT'S church of LSD

Hey Dan, thanks for these informative and detailed videos. One thing I was left wondering about is the dating of the GAEL. Presumably Gee needs the translation manuscripts mostly finished in July 1835 because it's difficult to date the GAEL much later than that. What are the main reasons we can date the GAEL so early that Gee is not even trying to push the date later? I know that joseph's history tells us when he was working on it (starting in July), but I would expect Gee to argue that they only "reverse engineered" the first few verses by then, and finished the rest later. Is the fact that so much of the GAEL is in Phelp's writing a forcing function? Also, why does Gee need the whole BoA to be completed in 1835, rather than just 1-2:18, given the translation manuscripts stop there anyway?

I find it incredible that in this age of unlimited access to information and scholarship, so many otherwise intelligent people still cling to a religion so thoroughly debunked!

At time 16:28 You say that the JSP excludes the Phelps manuscript, but it is there in Volume 4 on page 218. Am I missing something?

I guess it has to do with do you want to by faith or do you want to disbelieve by signs

If Joseph Smith rendered a translation matching the one from that of the arrogant Egyptologists, how could the translation be true? This proves Joseph Smith right, the Egyptologists wrong.

Actually the god that's standing behind or at the foot of the lion bed is actually Anubis, the drawing depicted of the figure does not have to hands in front of its face, isis is flying above the man's stomach it was another false god and there's another bird by the man's head and the birds head is a man's head clearly depicting that that is another god of some sort. It is not a pagan servant standing there try to kill someone with a knife, it's actually a full on mummification going on. Even the mummification of a mummy's leg sticks out when they were being mummified and their arm was up in front of them it's a picture sun every single mummification hieroglyph in Egypt I've seen it. Even the civilizations of Mormonism don't even exist I Josephson has said that the native Americans were ancestors of the lamanites, they went and checked the bones of the lamanites and the lamanites and the native Americans are not even the same people that was a lie. I'm in the Bible there are ancient civilizations that have existed evidence to prove that they existed just like the Bible has said and we have actually checked it to make sure it was true and the Bible is true, and we have found evidence of the Bible being true so the Bible is 100% accurate. Not only is it 100% accurate is 100% factual because we have all the evidence to prove what we have found from the Bible. But the book of Mormon Joseph Smith talks about the civilization to everything I can't remember what ancient civilizations in the Americas and half of those civilizations didn't even exist they didn't exist at all actually. He also stuck his Stone instead of a hat to get money nobody knew that, until his wife and his father-in-law found out and he said yes I was lying the whole time just to find where to get some money at. And he made multiple contradictions with the book of Mormon and he contradicted the Bible as well. I'll give you an example, he says that there are multitude of gods and there was another god that created God the Father, Isaiah 45:5 says there are no other gods before me nor are there any other gods after me God is saying this there are no other gods before me nor are there any other gods after me I am the only one, there's a contradiction right there because Joseph Smith said that there was a goddess wife with sex with God the Father to create Jesus and Satan that's not the case either that was a lie. The Bible makes it very clear that God is triune that there are three persons in all three of those persons are one God, now I did not say that there are three gods I said there is one God who exists eternally as three persons Father Son and Holy Spirit. So he made another contradiction here he said that Satan and Jesus are brothers, if Jesus is God in the flesh and he created the devil who is a fallen angel and they wouldn't be brothers that was wrong. He also said that kids who are born cannot commit sin, that was a lie, because in the Bible says you are born into sin yes I will admit thatbabies don't have the capability of understanding who Jesus is or know who he is yet that is true but they are born into sin because they will sin when they get older and start to have the knowledge of him. Now I'm going to explain the Trinity to you all and what Christians believe. The word “trinity” is a term used to denote the Christian doctrine that God exists as a unity of three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each of the persons is distinct from the other yet identical in essence. In other words, each is fully divine in nature, but each is not the totality of the other persons of the Trinity. Each has a will, loves, and says “I” and “You” when speaking. The Father is not the same person as the Son, who is not the same person as the Holy Spirit, and who is not the same person as the Father. Each is divine, yet there are not three gods but one God. There are three individual subsistences or persons. The word “subsistence” means something that has a real existence. The word “person” denotes individuality and self-awareness. The Trinity is three of these though the latter term has become the dominant one used to describe the individual aspects of God known as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Included in the doctrine of the Trinity is a strict monotheism which is the teaching that there exists in all the universe a single being known as God who is self-existent and unchangeable (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6, 8). Therefore, it is important to note that the doctrine of the Trinity is not polytheistic as some of its critics proclaim. Trinitarianism is monotheistic by definition and those who claim it is polytheistic demonstrate a lack of understanding of what it really is. The Trinity God is three distinct, simultaneous persons Each person is divine There is only one God Many theologians admit that the term “person” is not a perfect word to describe the three individual aspects/foci found in God. When we normally use the word person, we understand it to mean physical individuals who exist as separate beings from other individuals. But in God, there are not three entities nor three beings. God is a trinity of persons consisting of one substance and one essence. God is numerically one. Yet, within the single divine essence are three individual subsistences that we call persons. Each of the three persons is completely divine in nature though each is not the totality of the Godhead. Each of the three persons is not the other two persons. Each of the three persons is related to the other two but each is distinct from the others. The word “trinity” is not found in the Bible, but this does not mean that the concept is not taught there. The word “bible” is not found in the Bible either, but we use it anyway. Likewise, the words “omniscience,” which means “all-knowing,” “omnipotence,” which means “all-powerful,” and “omnipresence,” which means “present everywhere” are not found in the Bible either; but we use these words to describe the attributes of God. So, to say that the Trinity isn’t true because the word isn’t in the Bible is an invalid argument. Is there subordination in the Trinity? There is, apparently, a subordination within the Trinity regarding order but not substance or essence. We can see that the Father is first, the Son is second, and the Holy Spirit is third. The Father is not begotten, but the Son is (John 3:16). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15:26). The Father sent the Son (1 John 4:10). The Son and the Father send the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 15:26). The Father creates (Isaiah 44:24), the Son redeems (Gal. 3:13), and the Holy Spirit sanctifies (Rom. 15:16). This subordination of order does not mean that each of the members of the Godhead is not equal or divine. For example, we see that the Father sent the Son, but this does not mean that the Son is not equal to the Father in essence and divine nature. The Son is equal to the Father in his divinity but inferior in his humanity. A wife is to be subject to her husband; but this does not negate her humanity, essence, or equality. By further analogy, a king and his servant both share human nature. Yet, the king sends the servant to do his will. Jesus said, “For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me,” (John 6:38). Of course, Jesus already is King; but the analogy shows that because someone is sent, it doesn’t mean they are different from the one who sent him. Critics of the Trinity will see this subordination as proof that the Trinity is false. They reason that if Jesus were truly God, then He would be completely equal to God the Father in all areas and would not, therefore, be subordinate to the Father in any way; but this objection is not logical. If we look at the analogy of the king and the servant, we certainly would not say that the servant was not human because he was sent. Being sent does not negate sameness in essence. Therefore, the fact that the Son is sent does not mean that He is not divine any more than when my wife sends me to get bread, I am not human. Is the Trinity confusing? Another important point about the Trinity is that it can be a difficult concept to grasp, but this does not necessitate an argument against its validity. On the contrary, the fact that it is difficult is an argument for its truth. The Bible is the self-revelation of an infinite God. Therefore, we are bound to encounter concepts that are difficult to understand-especially when dealing with an incomprehensible God who exists in all places at all times. So, when we view descriptions and attributes of God manifested in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, we discover that a completely comprehensible and understandable explanation of God’s essence and nature is not possible. What we have done, however, is derived from the Scripture the truths that we can grasp and combine them into the doctrine we call The Trinity. The Trinity is, to a large extent, a mystery. After all, we are dealing with God Himself. It is the way of the cults to reduce biblical truth to make God comprehensible and understandable by their minds. To this end, they subject God’s word to their own reasoning and end in error. The following verses are often used to demonstrate that the doctrine of the Trinity is indeed biblical: Matt. 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

For more information - kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hbh-jLiqrc2XoI0.html

I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell, too. Just another part of Joseph's Myth.

Hi Dan, Do you think that Abraham 1:1-3 were originally written down on a nonextant paper, and then later copied into the translation book? or was it dictated right into the translation book?

"Ki-Abra-oam-Zub-Zool-Oan" Ha! Ha! Ha! Every time I hear you read this out loud I laugh so hard I can't breathe!

Excellent. Reality: the antidote to fantasy

He be right I don't have enough knowledge but why tear down somebody else's faith why not tell why he has faith in Christ just saying

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping a to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

Surah 14. Abraham 47. Never think that Allah would fail his apostles in His promise: for Allah is Exalted in power, - the Lord of Retribution. 48. One day the earth will be changed to a different earth, and so will be the heavens, and (men) will be marshalled forth, before Allah, the One, the Irresistible; 49. And thou wilt see the sinners that day bound together in fetters;- 50. Their garments of liquid pitch, and their faces covered with Fire; 51. That Allah may requite each soul according to its deserts; and verily Allah is swift in calling to account. 52. Here is a Message for mankind: Let them take warning therefrom, and let them know that He is (no other than) One Allah. let men of understanding take heed.

“Sold by his widow” lol which one there was 30

If the presidents of the church were true prophets then they would have no need of apologists to “explain” the characters, they would get revelation from “God”, but we know it’s all a con anyhow

Acts 5:39

In response to Vogel's videos, I'm now running into Mormons who claim that JS took a back seat to working with WW Phelps in trying to reverse engineer the translation. It's bizarre that a claimed seer who has the power to translate would defer to Phelps in the process of translating.

It's almost like listening to people nowadays explain their pronouns and what they mean lmao. Xi/xer/xim/ximi/za/zer/=xe/xeer/xium/zaa/zae/zaer=dumdass

usually all I have to say is, "Would you believe a teenager told you that God appeared before them and told them to create the correct religion?" I get stuttering and uh's...

If you ask a missionary if their scriptures have ever changed they will say they were edited for grammar and punctuation. At least that's the answer I have gotten. But now I see that it was changing as it was being dictated. Did God change His mind while he was inspiring it? Doesn't make any sense. That's why I follow Islam. It's books have never changed. It has no contradictions in it.

but we wuz nephites lol

well..... reminds me of the modern daze religion of CO2 induced climate change. Or modern daze worship of the Einstein meme... Or the etc etc et cetera....

The KEP are not translation notes, and were not written by Joseph Smith. That seems like an insurmountable problem.

Here are several comparisons from Christianity and Mormonism. Obviously the book of Mormon is not going to agree with the Bible as a matter of fact the contradicted and here are the contradictions that I'm telling you that the book of Mormon makes. Take up the Bible, compare the religion of the Latter-day Saints with it and see if it will stand the test,” (Brigham Young, May 18, 1873, Journal of Discourses, vol. 16, p. 46). What does Mormonism teach? Well, here are some of the basics, plain and simple. God came from another planet God is a man with a body of flesh and bones There is a mother goddess God and his goddess wife are married You can become gods Following is a comparison between Christian doctrine and Mormon doctrine. It will become very obvious that Mormonism does not agree with the Bible. In fact, Mormonism uses the same words found in Christianity, but it redefines them. So, with a proper understanding of what Mormonism really teaches, you will be able to see past those definitions into the real differences between Christianity and Mormonism. The difference is the difference between eternal life and damnation. Note: When we say “person” in the context of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we do not mean that they are individuals as we people are individuals. Instead, it is meant in the theological sense where a person is seen as one who says “you,” “your,” “me,” “mine,” etc. A person speaks, has a will, recognizes one’s self and others. Topic Christian Mormon GODThere is only one God. (Isaiah 43:11; 44:6, 8; 45:5). “And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light.” (Book of Abraham 4:3).God has always been God. (Psalm 90:2; Isaiah 57:15). “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see,” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345).God is a spirit without flesh and bones. (John 4:24; Luke 24:39). “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s,” (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22; Compare with Alma 18:26-27; 22:9-10). “Therefore we know that both the Father and the Son are in form and stature perfect men; each of them possesses a tangible body . . . of flesh and bones,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 38).TRINITYThe Trinity is the doctrine that there is only one God in all the universe and that He exists in three eternal, simultaneous persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35, 1984).JESUSJesus was born of the virgin Mary. (Isaiah 7:14; Matt. 1:23). “The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood-was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115). “Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers” (Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce McConkie, p. 547).Jesus is the eternal Son. He is the second person of the Trinity. He has two natures. He is God in flesh and man (John 1:1, 14; Col. 2;9) and the creator of all things (Col. 1:15-17).Jesus is the literal spirit-brother of Lucifer, a creation (Gospel Through the Ages, p. 15). Mormonism distinguishes between the Holy Spirit (God’s presence via an essence) and the Holy Ghost (the third god in the Mormon doctrine of the trinity). “He [the Holy Ghost] is a being endowed with the attributes and powers of Deity, and not a mere force, or essence,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 144).SALVATIONSalvation is the forgiveness of sin and deliverance of the sinner from damnation. It is a free gift received by God’s grace (Eph. 2:8; Rom. 6:23) and cannot be earned. (Rom. 11:6).Salvation has a double meaning in Mormonism: universal resurrection and . . . “The first effect [of the atonement] is to secure to all mankind alike, exemption from the penalty of the fall, thus providing a plan of General Salvation. The second effect is to open a way for Individual Salvation whereby mankind may secure remission of personal sins,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 78-79).Salvation (forgiveness of sins) is not by works. (Eph. 2:8; Rom. 4:5; Gal. 2:21). “As these sins are the result of individual acts it is just that forgiveness for them should be conditioned on individual compliance with prescribed requirements - ‘obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel,'” (Articles of Faith, p. 79).BIBLEThe inspired inerrant word of God (2 Tim. 3:16). It is authoritative in all subjects it addresses. “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly…” (8th Article of Faith of the Mormon Church). This is only a sample of many of the differences between Christianity and Mormonism. As you can see, they are quite different doctrines. God cannot be uncreated and created at the same time. There cannot be only one God and many gods at the same time. The Trinity cannot be one God in three persons and three gods in an office known as the Trinity, etc. These teachings are mutually exclusive. This is important because faith is only as good as the object in which it is placed. Is the Mormon god the real one? Or, is the God of historic and biblical Christianity the real one? Mormonism is obviously not the biblical version of Christianity. It is not Christian, and Mormons serve a different god than Christians - a god that does not exist. Paul talks about this in Gal. 4:8, “when you did not know God, you were slaves to those which by nature are no gods.” Only the God of the Bible exists. There are no others. Mormonism puts its faith in a non-existent god.

🤣🤣😂😂😁😁😉😉🤣🤣 !

i don't really want the details or an armchair commentary to Smith's dictation, I just wanted to know what Smith translated ugh

Joseph Smith never said that the Book of Abraham was translated from the pictures. That was made up after his death. He received the words from God. I don't know about Egyptian material. I am no scholar. I do know that the Book is real.

Hugh Nibley you absolute LEGEND!! lol.

Here is more on the trinity, and just remember I'm not saying there are three Gods I never said that. The doctrine of the Trinity is this: there is one God who exists in three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each person is not the same as the other person; that is, the Father is not the same person as the Son who is not the same person as the Holy Spirit. But, each is fully divine in nature. Each person is not a god which would make three gods. Instead, the totality of all three persons comprises the one God. Again, the Trinity does not teach that there are three gods. The Trinity is monotheistic since it is the doctrine that only one God exists in all space and time. Christians believe there are no partners with God because we believe there is only one God in all existence. At first, some may look at this teaching and be confused by it. How can God be three persons in one God? This is a good question because it is a bit difficult to grasp. But that is what we would expect, isn’t it, when we encounter God? Would we not expect to find some things about God’s infinite nature a bit beyond our comprehension? This is not unreasonable. However, we must not make the mistake of saying something as ridiculous as, “It doesn’t make sense. Therefore it is true.” Following is a brief chart that helps clarify how the doctrine of the Trinity is arrived at through the Bible. One of the questions I ask the anti-Trinitarians is “Can you please show me how the Trinity is illogical??” Usually, they respond with something like, “It just doesn’t make sense,” or “It simply can’t be.” But making such statements doesn’t prove or disprove anything. The question is “How is it illogical?” I have yet to hear a logical explanation. It isn’t against logic for God to be three persons. It may be difficult to understand, and some may not like it; but it isn’t illogical. For it to be illogical, there must be some rule of logic that is violated that makes it impossible for God to exist as a Trinity. For example, to say that one god is really three gods is illogical because the quantity of one is not the same quantity as three; and since they (one and three) are mutually exclusive as to quantity in this situation, to say one god is three gods is illogical. But that isn’t what the Trinity is anyway. Remember, it is not that three gods are one god as some critics mistakenly say. The Trinity is three divine persons who comprise the one God. Furthermore, there is no logical reason why God cannot be three persons. Trinitarianism is monotheistic. That means that it is a doctrine that teaches the existence of a single being who is God and that there is only one God in all existence. This is sometimes ignored or not known when people (Muslims, Mormons, and other false religions) criticize the Trinity by asserting that the Trinity teaches three gods. But, it does not. As is stated above, the Trinity is a monotheistic theological position. Mormons and other false religions need to properly understand what they criticize. Most often, they do not. They typically fail to understand what the Trinity really is, make a false caricature of it, and attack the false representation. Then, when we correct them and say that is not what the Trinity is, they often say we don’t know what we are talking about. Mormons need to do their homework. Finally, when Mormons state that the Trinity isn’t logical, it is up to them to demonstrate how. They need to produce logical statements in sequential form that demonstrates the impossibility of the Trinity. If they are not able to do it, then they should stop making the claim.

Interesting. Scientific proof from a layman who distances himself from a professor of Egyptology (Prof. Kerry Muhlestein from BYU). Hard to make a case on opinions and speculations.

aka Mormons btfo, the video

I may not be the brightest of scholars but your image shown at 7:28 and explained as the great Osiris looks nothing like the glyph presented by Smith. Not to mention the fact that the interpretation you use as the old man with the staff being "great" is not correct. It actually means "aged one". That and the man in the original glyph is clearly not holding a full staff and he is not bending over. If the man is meant to be holding a staff and not bending over then it means "official" or authority". If he is holding a shorter object which seems more accurate then it should be better interpreted as the Semitic symbol for "force" or "effort". and the other image looks absolutely nothing like the symbol for Osiris, but rather looks identical to the Semitic symbol for "fire" which is written as the Aleph 'x' and the Shin 'E' connected at the top. this glyph would be more accurate being interpreted as "a priest or someone of official authority used force to burn or light something on fire". not trying to trying to defend what someone else's interpretation might have been but clearly your explanation and interpretation are off the mark. the symbol for Osiris has always been drawn as what looks like a mitten with a head on it and the "Ex" symbol looks nothing like a mitten with a head. poor translations are damaging your credibility. and this is only 7 minutes into your 45 minute attempt to debunk that which even you clearly don't understand. my interpretation may not be perfect but it has to be far closer than yours.

You are barking up the wrong tree by trying to argue with John Gee. Dr Gee obviously didn't pay attention to what the Book of Abraham declared any more than you nor Mr. Osborne. We have been carefully watching Paul Gregesens video part 15. Paul has clearly demonstrated from the text itself what all of you obviously missed. In his new video he points out where Abraham was commanded to teach the Egyptians about a Hebrew astronomy ALONE! It says right in the text why the astronomy itself was nothing but an object lesson to teach the Egyptians about Abrahams family which was Israel. In other words, nothing in the entire Book of Abraham was claiming Egyptian anything unless it was counterfeiting Noah. Chapter one clearly says anything Egyptian was pure Idolatry! WHY DO YOU GUYS, ALONG WITH DR. GEE, AND OTHERS IGNORE THIS TEXTUAL FACT? What this means is this, trying to show discrepancies about Joseph Smith getting anything Egyptian wrong is ridiculous and a complete waist of everyone's time! The text clearly says God told Abraham to teach about Abrahams posterity ALONE!. Cant any of you guys read? watch Gregersen's newest video through, its right in front of your face! Joseph Smith said he only added the facsimiles to the Book of Abraham in order to demonstrate how false gods are fashioned. "Abraham 1:14" Egyptians counterfeiting Gospel truths in order to alter everyone's true understanding. See Abraham chapter one. In other words all Smith was doing is reversing what the Egyptians counterfeited and got wrong back into what God intended. God told him to only teach the Egyptians about his seed which is Israel. Trying to find parallels to Abraham in order to prove how Smith knew nothing about Egyptian by digging up copied similar sources is simply pure speculation without any real evidence. Harold Bloom the famous Jewish Scholar said it was an impossibility that Smith could have copied names and places that were discovered in the dead sea scrolls over a hundred years later. likewise Oleshem is documented name today that no living scholar knew of in 1840. The Book of the giants discovered in the dead sea scrolls document that Smith knew of many things in the Book of Enoch that no man on earth had yet discovered until the dead sea scrolls. The critics all ignore these real LIVING facts. The story about Ahijah is only one of many impossibilities that not only identified an exact characters ancient name but even described the very role he played in Enoch's life story. Joseph Smith obviously wasn't just making things up just because Osborne spends years of his life searching for any long shot similarity that he can discover just so he can call it a perfect match! All yellow journalists do that same thing everyday and always call it truth. Gregersen has connected the real Abraham story by contrasting the Egyptian falsehoods with Hebrew outcomes using exact mathematical connections that cannot be shown to be manipulated. He has demonstrated it to correlate the very same matched history as we see in Daniel chapter two and in Revelation 13:18. The same 666 combines into two separate timelines without a heart beat of deceptive ways to achieve it. GREGERSEN HAS DESTROYED DAN VOGELS THEORIES BY DEMONSTRATING EXACTLY WHY THEIR HAD TO BE A LONG SCROLL.

Something I've been told worth considering I think isn't necessarily HOW he was able to render a nearly flawless Book of Abraham along with accurate depictions from the vignette as much as it us he DID. Thaf's a conundrum. Because there can't be two realities. I can't pretend to know what process was applied but it seems reasonable from HIS perspective it WAS a record of Abraham. He couldn't have yielded a true record from the papayus unless he had translational gift.