Turning a new leaf

I am going to resurrect this blog and let the reader know that I am now atheist.

Comments

Hüffenhardt said…
The nice thing about the Book of Abraham is that we do not have to rely on anyone's opinion or statement about anything. The only statement I use is what Joseph said the Book of Abraham is, which statement is right in our scriptures, then I can use no futher statements from the 1800's to disprove it. I simply use the facsimilies as they appear in the scriptures, "The Philosophy of a Future Stae" by Thomas Dick, the writings of Josephus, the known English translation of the hieroglyphics in the facsimilies, and Joseph's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammer.

We don't have to know anything about Joseph Smith or what his friends or enemies said about him or what they said about the translation process or the documents themselves, or anything.

And the thing that convinces me Joseph was a knowing fraud and not just following the false impressions that came to his mind is his "restoration" of facsimilie #2. (His restoration of facsimilie #1 is incorrect according to Egyptologists and I agree, but he may have felt that what he drew was supposed to be there). However, with facsimilie #2, his restoration is more telling. An honest man might leave the damaged and missing portions of the facsimilie blank as is drawn in the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammer. A fool might notice a pattern, that there were supposed to be hieroglyphics there, and imagine some characters there and draw them in. Perhaps they would be true characters from his memory of looking at the other true characters. Perhaps they would be made up characters, for he had made up some characters in damaged portions of the sensen text as evidenced in the Egyptian Papers. But, Joseph was neither an honest man (for he did not leave the area blank), a fool (for he did not put some random characters in the missing place), nor was he a prophet (for what he "restored" there was not only incorrect judging by the text that is on every other hypocephalus facsimilie that has the surrounding characters, the characters he "restored" were from a different time period, a different developmental stage of the Egyptian written language). No, Joseph was none of those things, he was a knowing fraud because he copied character by character in order from a random section of the sensen text and gave it a different translation in the facsimilie than he gave those same characters in the the Book of Abraham text.

The case is even more clear when you look at what I am talking about. I don't believe a fool following his heart would do that, neither would an honest man, neither would a prophet. IMO, Joseph knowingly, actively defrauded us in that. And for a man that could do that, I have no problem entertaining the idea that he defrauded the Kirtland Safety Society investors with sand filled boxes, that he defrauded Josiah Stowell of his pay by pretending he could see treasure in his stone, or that he defrauded all of us with the Book of Mormon, especially when the Book of Mormon has so much evidence against it.

For a discussion of the reuse of Egyptian symbols, look [L=here]http://p080.ezboard.com/fpacumenispagesfrm47.showMessage?topicID=526.topic[/L]

To see photos of how the symbols line up look [L=here]http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/BOA/BOA_5.html[/L] and [L=here]http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/BOA/BOA_7.html[/L]

OK, I am out of this thread. To me, Joseph never was a prophet, fallen or any other kind. I apologize if I have overstepped the bounds of NOM.
Sat Aug 19, 08:06:00 AM PDT
Anonymous said…
It was good to read your post and also all the comments you received at hatrack.com. I was a very faithful Mormon until 2001 (my senior year at BYU). During that year I did a lot of soul-searching and came to many of the same conclusions you have detailed in your posts. I am married with two children and my wife is still an active member. We lived in Topeka, KS (Sherwood and Lake Shawnee wards) for several years and just moved back West. Wish I had known you while I was out there! It's been difficult finding people in my community who share my beliefs. You are so lucky that your spouse has also seriously considered these issues.... I look forward to any further posts that you might come up with.
Mon Aug 28, 10:35:00 PM PDT
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I left the LDS Church

[Last edited 1/28/10] I was a very deeply spiritual person and easily moved to tears when thinking of the Savior and the sacrifices I believed he made for me and the rich blessings he bestowed upon me. I was born in the covenant to convert parents who were very active in the Church and true believers. I had a strong testimony of Joseph Smith and the restoration even before turning eight for I had recognized the joy of the Spirit and the love for mankind I felt when reading the Book of Mormon. And after turning eight, I had an experience which I considered to be a visitation of an angel. When I was 14, my mother passed away. I felt very much alone and learned through that experience to lean on the Lord even more. I decided that I would do what was right because it was the path to happiness, not to please my dad or because of fear of punishment. I felt particularly close to Heavenly Father over the next few years, having had countless experiences of answered prayers, premonitions that w...
Read more

My Patriarchal Blessing

First an intro: Sister Mary Lisa recently posted parts of her patriarchal blessing on her blog. I have decided to do the same. I used to believe in this document so much. I believed that God was personally telling me how much he loved me and how highly he thought of me and what he had in store for me and the mission he sent me to earth to accomplish. I even made my PB into Section 139 of my Doctrine and Covenants and divided it into verses and inserted cross references to other scriptures. It really is beautiful and inspiring and I think patriarchal blessings in general are good for raising people's self-esteem. But, that good does not make up for what I believe to be the misdirection it gives believers. Believers make very important life decisions based on this blessing, which would be great if it actually came from God, but since in all likelihood it is nothing more than the words of an old man inspired by nothing more than his own thoughts and experiences, it can be quite danger...
Read more

Spalding's "Manuscript Found" vs "Manuscript Story"

I don't claim to know who or how the BoM was written. But, there is one point of confusion about the Spalding-Rigdon theory that has been exacerbated by most who have written on the subject, both anti and apologist alike. It is very important that anyone looking into this topic understand what I am about to tell you as most everything that has been written on the Spalding-Rigdon theory focuses on the wrong book. I am borrowing generously from websites for which I will provide links to below. The following is from: http://www.mormoninformation.com/srtheory.htm The "Spalding-Rigdon theory" was first given wide publicity in 1834 with the publication of the book Mormonism Unvailed. In it, the author followed up on indications previously published in Ohio-based newspapers that a man named Solomon Spalding was the real (and unwitting) originator of the Book of Mormon. To make an extremely long story very, very short, the theory goes that Solomon Spalding authored a work called...
Read more