This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice (conflictofjustice.com). Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.
“The Church conceded in its July 2014 Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham essay that Joseph’s translations of the papyri and the facsimiles do not match what’s in the Book of Abraham.”
(CES Letter)
No
Source Perished In Chicago Fire – The church’s essay admits that the fragments of papyri do that have been recovered do not match the Book of Abraham. Yes, the church has always admitted this. But these fragments were not the source for the Book of Abraham. Skepticism hinges on the narrative that the recovered fragments of papyrus were the source for Joseph Smith’s translation, and this is false. The fact is, the source perished in a fire in Chicago. The church never conceded that the recovered fragment was the source.
Almost a century of vast research by LDS scholars have uncovered evidence for the Book of Abraham and the Facsimiles. Joseph Smith made clear that the Egyptian and Abrahamic contexts of the Facsimiles were different. Yet Anti-mormons insist that he meant to give a straight word-for-word translation of the Egyptian words. The Egyptian meaning is closely related, but Mormons never claimed that he gave text translation. Joseph Smith only explained how the symbolism related to Abraham.
Joseph Smith’s Modus Operandi?
“It is the issue that I’ve spent the most time researching on because it offers a real insight into Joseph’s modus operandi as well as Joseph’s claim of being a translator.”
(CES Letter)
CES Letter uses this term Joseph Smith’s “modus operandi” three times in their PDF. What do they mean by that?
According to Hugh Nibley, the term was started by Richard P. Howard, historian of the RLDS Mormon splinter-sect, the same splinter-sect that created the rock-in-a-hat myth. Richard Howard said the rediscovered papyrus fragment “discloses the modus operandi of Joseph Smith in determining its context.”
Well it doesn’t. Neither Richard Howard nor CES Letter can ever tell us what that process was. How did he do it? Why would he go to so much trouble dealing with hieroglyphics when he could just make something up out of nothing? Why make claims of what Egyptian hieroglyphics say or how the cosmos work if he thought scientists would soon figure out Egyptian and expose his fraud? Joseph Smith himself said hieroglyphics would one day be deciphered. Why carelessly give away the papyri to friends instead of destroying the evidence?
Anti-Mormons point to Joseph Smith’s notes of the Egyptian papers. Well, why did he go to all that work? How did he produce the magnificent Book of Abraham from those notes? How did his Book of Abraham just happen to match non-biblical details in a vast library of ancient Abraham books that were discovered after Joseph Smith died? How did he do all that? What was his modus operandi?
Anti-Mormon Modus Operandi? – Well, they can’t tell us what Joseph Smith’s modus operandi was, but it is clear what CES Letter‘s is. Look at the general pattern of how they attack the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham:
- Contradictions with the bible
- Contradictions with other LDS scripture
- Contradictions with science
- Anachronisms
- Explanation for how Joseph Smith produced it
- Mormons post-rationalize evidence of a fraud
For both books of scripture, CES Letter starts with a big first lie that trickles down to further lies. With the Book of Abraham, the lie was that Joseph Smith based his translation on papyri fragments that have since been recovered and were found to have nothing to do with Abraham. This branched to further lies: that the facsimiles have nothing to do with Joseph Smith’s interpretations for them, that the Book of Abraham perpetuates anachronisms in the bible, that it adopts an “out of vogue” model of science, etc.
Book Of Abraham Is The Smoking Gun – CES Letter says the Book of Abraham “is the smoking gun that has completely obliterated my testimony.” I agree it is a smoking gun, but not of a fraud. It is physical proof that Joseph Smith was a prophet. The list of archaeological evidences is long, and CES Letter ignores all of this. Besides this clear physical evidence, there are the uplifting messages of mankind’s divine origins and potential. The doctrine of the priesthood is personally empowering. I find the intersection of Mormonism and ancient Egyptian theology to be another witness of the truth of this ancient book and Joseph Smith as a prophet. The spiritual edification found inside is positive proof that it comes from God.
Why are there so many parallels with other ancient Abraham books, books that were discovered after Joseph Smith and which he could not have had access to?. How did Joseph Smith know that Abraham’s father created idols, that the king tried to sacrifice Abraham on an altar for opposing idolatry, that a heavenly messenger appeared to deliver Abraham, that the people died in an earthquake instead of Abraham, that Abraham attained the records of his forefathers, that Abraham wrote records of his own and passed them down to Joseph? None of those details are in the bible or any literature that Joseph Smith could have had access to.
Why do skeptics just ignore all of this?
CES Letter Logical Fallacies
| Strawman Fallacy | Joseph Smith did not translate the recovered papyri into the Book of Abraham and the church never claimed he did. CES Letter misrepresents what the church says in their essay. |
Big Lie Tactic – How does the Book of Abraham turn into the smoking-gun evidence that Joseph Smith is a fraud? It starts with the big lie that the recovered fragment is what Joseph Smith claimed to use for his translation. From there, everything falls apart. It is a big lie that compounds with further investigation of the Book of Abraham and leads to other lies. This lie is easier for the CES Letter reader to believe after all those earlier arguments that attached the same narrative about the Book of Mormon.
Shifting Context – It is like a magician making a rabbit disappear. First, they show the empty box, and then they take a rabbit and put it in a new context, the magic disappearing box. CES Letter takes a fragment of parchment that was not the Book of Abraham source material, and they say that was the source. Then they open the door of the box, but the rabbit is behind a mirror so that it looks as if the box is empty. They say the names in the Book of Abraham are modern and the papyrus is modern. So now it looks like the papyrus fragment was definitely Joseph Smith’s source but had nothing to do with Abraham. Then they sneak the rabbit out of the back in a secret door. They point out some Egyptian names that Joseph Smith “misidentified” in the Facsimiles and call the whole thing gibberish. Before we know it, we went from a book of scripture that was translated from a scroll that was burned in the Chicago fire to some Egyptian names in funerary documents. Presto! The box is empty!
Lazy Logic – People fall for this illusion because it is the easier path. All you have to do is make this assumption that the recovered fragments are the Book of Abraham source, and then you are led to further logical assumptions that bolster your decision. The other path is the lengthy task of answering every single nit-picked question that Anti-Mormons throw at you. In reality, the answer often cannot be known because it is lost history. So, either make the easy assumption or be forced to back up every detail of your beliefs from attack. That is your choice.
The author of CES Letter apparently made the easy decision, and that is why they expect members of the church to answer every single little challenge instead of discovering the truth for themselves. They want easy beliefs. Of course, they do not say what it is they belief in so we can’t challenge in kind to their faith. They never say “this is what we believe.” Anti-Mormons typically don’t bring up the real reasons why they left the church when they ask their “questions.” No mention of gay marriage, feminism, or the other social issues that would reveal their beliefs. They want to snipe from a safe position where they don’t have to talk about their own beliefs.
Justification For Apostasy – What actually obliterates a person’s testimony of the gospel? Is it the groundbreaking discovery that the Egyptian-looking facsimiles are actually Egyptian? No, I think a lot leads up to a lost testimony. Perhaps a priesthood blessing went unfulfilled or it was the divorce of parents. Of course it is difficult to open up and discuss these painful experiences, but I wish Anti-Mormons would talk about it instead of making up these justifications for what they have already decided about the gospel. I don’t think it is coincidence that CES Letter appeals to fake science so often. I don’t think it is coincidence that they attack patriarchy in the church. Anti-Mormon arguments develop from personal experiences which I certainly am not qualified to judge, but which I would be happy to empathetically listen to.
The first step of spiritual development is humility, and that begins with gratitude. Maybe with a change of attitude we can see miracles where before we saw deception. Maybe the answers that never came were answered before you asked.
If You Are Explaining You Are Losing – Now we see why Anti-Mormons relentlessly ask for “official answers” to their questions. It’s because they want to push Mormons on the defensive and yell “see, you even admit it!” every time we answer their question. They don’t want to have to answer for their pride, behavior, and apostasy, but relentlessly push Mormons more into a defensive position. They act like a child who won’t stop asking “why” every time you answer their questions.
It is important to never let ourselves get like this. Do not stomp on someone’s face with your boot because they humbly apologized for something or took the time to answer your questions. It is really the sign of a rotten character. Rather, we show virtue by taking people’s apologies to heart and appreciating a person’s listening ear and their willingness to give dialogue. This is a sign of their virtue, not weakness. If Anti-Mormons and skeptics would learn this simple moral lesson, they would discover a new ability to learn and progress in their lives. The church is under no obligation to publish these gospel topic essays, and in fact, these are questions that we ought to be researching and figuring out for ourselves. But the church provides this resource because they truly want to help out–not in a condescending or negative way, but so that we can empower our individual selves and build ourselves up. We likewise should engender this positive attitude and build up those around us.Complete answers to CES Letter questions about Mormons: