LDS: Does this disprove Joseph Smith was being deceptive?

Joseph Smith purchased some Egyptian papyrus in which he claimed was about Abraham. Smith translated this papyrus into The Book of Abraham by what he claimed was the gift and power of God.

.In 1966 the papyrus thought to be lost was located in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. However, many Mormons today deny it is the same because it has been found by modern Egyptologists to NE nothing but ordinary funeral text from the Egyptian book of the dead. The name Abraham does not appear in it at all.

So if Smith had translated this by the power of God but it turned out to be not even close to his translation. Smith claimed it was one thing but it turned out to be something completely different. Does this not 100% prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that Smith was being deceptive? How is it possible that smith can claim it to be scripture when in fact it is a pagan religious text complete with images of pagan deities?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0u6clxJmI8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCd7v0ttBhk&feature=related

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

I pointed this out to my sister who is VERY LDS.

Net result?

Nothing...

"That is an anti-Mormon study, they are biased."

Of course she didn't explain HOW they were bias, or what she was basing her opinion on. But I've tried everything to wake up my Mormon family.

Nothing seems to work. They are lost.

Others claim that he was just 'inspired', however he outlines in journals in great detail that he is in fact doing a word for word translation. His own journals basically prove he thought he was translating the text. However any rationalization can be made. Was God LYING to Joe, so that he would write the correct text!?!?! /boggle


--atheist

By way of background, I am not a Mormon. It certainly shows that he is incapable of translating these papyri. He showed his abilities with the Kinderhook plates as well.

does it prove that you are being deceptive not to mention that the papyrus that JS had (5 long scrolls and a fa cs) was not recovered - but that only 11 small fragments of the whole were? the LDS do not deny that the fragments are from the same - but they do point out that a piece is not the whole.

that's right. after JS died the scrolls were sold and split-up. evidence demonstrating that at least 87% of the original collection is still missing was presented by Egyptology's Dr. john gee. (using a standard calculation for estimating the amount of missing papyrus on a scroll relying on how tightly papyrus can be rolled, then measuring the crease marks.)
and if you were to research this @all you would see that the LDS also discovered another fragment within their own records. that they made all available for study and studied them themselves. and published several articles and a mini-series of articles on the fact that the recovered facsimile was the 'Hor Book of Breathings' very shortly after the fragments were recovered.

as to the facsimile - there are enough differences within the drawing itself to cast doubt on the idea that it is 'a simple funerary rite'. it does not match up with other known funerary rites in many ways. if you are interested here's a link.
http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri

regroup sweetie - and try again.

There are so many problems with the Book of Abraham that one hardly knows were to start.

There are Egyptian characters and concepts on the existing scrolls that didn't exist in Abraham's time for one thing. How could that be?

Every non LDS Egyptologist who has ever looked at it has said, even with scrolls missing, that it could not be a translation. The LDS experts who disagree have never had the courage to submit their theories to professional journals. They'd be laughed out of their profession.

It boggles the mind to think that Abraham could write this stuff in his language, time and place, and somehow get it to Egypt - where it's translated into Egyptian - and stuffed in a sarcophagus. Then it magically travels to the US and gets sold to some Mormons. Quite a journey over hundreds of years.

God told Smith to hide the gold plates. Apparently he told Smith to display the sacred scrolls and charge a fee to view them. Rather inconsistent.

Like so much LDS history, you can ask every Mormon and get one answer, or you can ask every professional scholar and scientist and get an opposite answer.

Who do you think we should trust?