Hugh Nibley: The Father of Mormon Scholarly Apologetics ...
You may be interested to learn Dr. Nibley's credibility was seriously damaged when he authenticated Joseph Smith's translation of an Egyptian papyrus which was put forth as the Book of Abraham.
The award winning documentary, The Lost Book of Abraham, shown HERE, cites a number of prominent scholars who disagree with Smith and Nibley. Dr. Robert K. Ritner, Professor of Egyptology at the University of Chicago, is cited most frequently in the film and takes an unequivocal position denying the validity of Smith's purported translation. I invite you to review Ritner's vitae HERE.Dr. Nibley's credibility took another blow when, as explained HERE, he authenticated the Anthon Transcript, a sheet of paper believed to contain copies of the characters which appeared on the gold plates of the Book of Mormon. This document was later proven to be fabricated by Mark Hofmann.Interestingly, as noted HERE and HERE, Dr. Nibley would later recant much of his endorsement, but the damage to his reputation was done.
Dr. Nibley made other pronouncements which impaired his value as a Mormon apologist. For example, in 1947 he published the following demonstrably false statement:
Yet of all churches in the world only [the Mormon Church] has not found it necessary to readjust any part of its doctrine in the last hundred years. – Hugh Nibley, No, Ma'am, That's Not History, page 46.Still other examples of Dr. Nibley's lack of discernment can be found HERE.
In light of the above, you would probably be better served in future posts by not citing Dr. Nibley as an established expert.
Excuse me as far as I am concern it is the Tanner’s who lack discernment!
are you related to me like their son or something?
BTTT
Concerning that:
Charles Larson, By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri (Institute for Religious Research, 1992)
The Joseph Smith papyri, long thought to have been destroyed in a fire in Chicago in the late 19th century, had in reality found their way to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, where they came to public attention in 1967. Their rediscovery established for certain that Joseph Smith had authentic, ancient Egyptian documents in his possession when he produced the Book of Abraham.Unlike the gold plates of the Book of Mormon, which scholars were never able to examine [because "they were taken back up to heaven by angels," IIRC], these Egyptian texts give the actual documents from which Joseph Smith claimed to have produced one of the LDS church's scriptures. Therefore, they provide the first real opportunity to examine the prophet's claims in an objective and scientific manner.
In the first two chapters of By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus, former Mormon and Brigham Young University graduate Charles M. Larson, recounts the circumstances under which Joseph Smith acquired the two Egyptian scrolls, and his claim to have identified one of them as an account by the Biblical patriarch Abraham of his sojourn in Egypt (as described in Genesis 12:10-20). Then in chapters 3-10 Larson steps the reader through a detailed array of primary physical evidences which establish four major points: (1) the papyri which came to public attention in 1967 (color photographs of which are reproduced in the book) are indisputably those which Joseph had in his possession when he produced the Book of Abraham, (2) Joseph Smith did purport that the Book of Abraham was a translation from one of these papyrus scrolls, (3) the scrolls are now known to date from around the time of Christ, some 2,000 years after the time of Abraham, and (4) the scrolls have been identified by Egyptologists — including LDS scholars — as common, pagan Egyptian burial documents, that do not mention Abraham and have no connection to the contents of the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price.
8 scholars refute the Book of Abraham Translation by Joseph Smith, excerpts from a couple follow:
In his 1912 publication of "Joseph Smith, Jr., As a Translator,"I also think the following information is important to read as concerns the papyrus.
"The Egyptian papyrus which Smith declared to be the 'Book of Abraham,' and 'translated' or explained in his fantastical way, and of which are three specimens are published in the 'Pearl of Great Price' are parts of the well known 'Book of the Dead.' Although the reproductions are very bad, one can easily recognize familiar scenes from this book."Dr. Edward Meyer, University of Berlin
"A careful study has convinced me that Smith probably believed seriously to have deciphered the ancient hieroglyphics, but that he utterly failed. What he calls the 'Book of Abraham' is a funeral Egyptian text, probably not older than the Greek ages."
Dr. Friedrich Freiheer Von Bissing, Professor of Egyptology in the University of Munich
The Book of Abraham Papyri and Joseph SmithSo....from the above, among other claims, Joseph Smith wrote that the papyrus was, in fact: 1) written by Abraham; 2) the papyrus, itself, then, necessarily was made at the time that Abraham lived; 3) that he, Joseph Smith, TRANSLATED some ancient Records into English and called it the Book of Abraham; and 4) the Book of Abraham is the cornerstone of the Mormon Church.
(commentary on history and representations of images on papyrus)Better images in the LDS text are found here:
Facsimile 1
Facsimile 2
Facsimile 3Better image of the papyrus found at the Museum:
The papyrus find is authenticated: "The Facsimile Found: The Recovery of Joseph Smith's Papyrus Manuscripts", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought (Winter 1967), p. 64"
.
Joseph Smith claimed that the papyrus, itself, dates back to the time when Abraham lived (how else could it have been "penned by Abraham"?). However, "from paleographic and historical considerations, the papyrus can reliably be dated to around A.D. 60." However, that date not only post-dates Abraham's death, but Christ's as well. (Abraham lived during the Middle Bronze Age, which dates back to nearly 4,000 years ago.)
Confronted with the above inconsistencies, the Mormon church claims that there is text missing from the translations, thereby, outright dismissing all logical and scientific questions.
Regardless of their protestations, however, based upon examination of the papyrus by Egyptian scholars, there is no substantial text missing from the papyrus, other than the pieces obviously missing. Syntactically and contextually, it is a complete document: it has a beginning, a middle, and an end, is consistent with the funerary papyrus then commonly found (see the award winning documentary, The Lost Book of Abraham, previously linked by Zakeet). Additionally, and its length is typical for a funerary papyrus. There would be no need or normality for the papyrus to be LONGER than what currently exists to make it "whole." Anything added onto it would be deemed "out of place" an unnecessary. Liken this to the "Pledge of Allegiance." It is complete and freestanding as is. Adding page upon page to the pledge would be ridiculous and have no longer have anything to do with the purpose and intent of the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Mormon Church, for example, refer to Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. [see The Pearl of Great Price A Selection from the Revelations, Translations, and Narrations of Joseph Smith, First Prophet, Seer, and Revelator to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints].
Both the Old and New Testament Scriptures are replete with warnings concerning false prophets. For instance:
Deu 18:21-22:
21) And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? 22) When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.The Apostle Paul gave warnings about those who "preach another gospel" than Christ's:Deu 13:1-3:
1) If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, 2) and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," 3) you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul.
1 John 4:1:
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Galatians 1:8, 9The Mormons claims cannot stand. Their claimed prophet was shown by the evidence, to be in error concerning his claims regarding the contents of the papyrus, the dating of the papyrus, and contradict what was already written in both the Old and New Testaments. Therefore, anything and everything further that Joseph Smith states is automatically suspect and, imho, without credibility.
God is not the god of division. He would therefore not be contradicting Himself and His words. Either God is right or He is not. If He is right, then all things must be measured against what He says is true, not what fallible human beings claim is true. If what a fallible human being claims to be goes against God's word, then it is the fallible human being who must be given the doubt, not God. The New Testament, which the Mormons claim to use, shows above that if "another gospel is preached," it is not of God. The Old Testament states that if what a claimed prophet states is not true, then he is not a prophet of God, he is a false prophet.
Either one believes that all of God is right or they do not. Believing only that some of God and/or some of God's Word is right makes all of God wrong and the fallible human right, and, therefore, the false prophet's words become the standard upon which someone believes, not God.
