Book of Abraham Apologetics Quotes

“Thus these statements in the text seem to be nineteenth-century additions approved by, if not made by, Joseph Smith.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique

“The references to the facsimiles within the text of the Book of Abraham seem to have been nineteenth-century editorial insertions.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique

“Smith’s interpretation was wrong.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique

“As historian David Hackett Fischer explains: “Valid empirical proof requires not merely the establishment of possibility, but an estimate of probability.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique

“It is both unprecedented and unreasonable to assume that an intrusive text about a completely different matter, a narrative history of Abraham and his descendants, would have been inserted into a document whose beginning, middle, and end is devoted specifically to the resurrection of an Egyptian priest.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique

“the long-scroll theory requires several improbable assumptions. The main assumption is that the text of the record of Abraham followed the text of the Book of Breathings on the same papyrus roll.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique

“While Smith tried to explain how the records of two Hebrew prophets came into the possession of an Egyptian royal family, he left unexplained why, after being handed down for several generations, they should be buried with mummies.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique

“Smith’s method of instilling confidence in his followers that his pseudepigraphic text was translated from Egyptian papyri, even though Smith’s speculations were factually erroneous.”
― Dan Vogel, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique