In another thread relating to the Book of Abraham (and more specifically Min's infamous erect penis in facsimile 2), ASteve made the following startling comment:

"Don't forget about the penis. Srsly. Around 1980 they realized that there was an erect penis in one of the facsimiles. So they took it out.

By taking it out they were implicitly acknowledging that Smith's translation was bullshit. Cause Smith thought the penis was not a penis.

Then a few years later, someone realized, WTF taking out the penis is an admission it's a fraud! So, they then . . .wait for it . . . . Re-inserted the penis. And it was exceedingly happy. ;-)




This is just extraordinary and in my mind has far reaching consequences that are worthy of additional discussion. Can anyone also provide any links to copies of the penis-less facsimile?

I've always been happier when the penis gets re-inserted.

But, you are 100% correct.

I took that as a tacit admission that they know it's a fraud.

This is precisely why we need to hold on to all old, out of print publications like the Pearl of Great Price with no cock pics in it.

Which years was it removed? I may have to keep my eyes open for an old triple next time I'm somewhere with a DI.

Is the man in #3 also supposed to be sitting with something other than his staff in hand?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/16/2014 06:24PM by cocoaberry.

In the other thread I related that my 1986 published PoGP does not have the erect penis in it. The edit they made appears to be a seated person doing part of the second token of the ironic priesthood. I wish I knew when it was put back in.

The following paragraph was copied from Mormonthink.com


Of particular note is Fig 7 (bottom right shown upside down). Joseph said it represents God sitting upon his throne. Egyptologists say that this is the god "Min." Min is an "ithyphallic god," that is, a sexually aroused male deity. His erect penis is clearly shown. It's interesting to note that in some earlier editions of the BOA the church erased the penis so it wouldn't look pornographic. It has since been restored in our current versions. But isn't it somewhat disturbing that Joseph would say that this pagan god with his exposed penis is our Heavenly Father?
Note, even LDS apologists admit that this figure, with the erect penis, is the god Min. (page 11, last paragraph of the above link). "7. A seated ithyphallic god with a hawk's tail, holding aloft a flail. This is a form of Min"