At this point we're going around in circles and will likely continue to. There was a time when I would continue this debate ad nauseum but, to be honest, I just don't have the time and energy now.
To answer quickly address your points above, to say there have been 4,000 changes in the Book of Mormon is highly misleading. I have my own copy of the 1830 version. The original transcript from the translation was written in long hand. Almost all of those "changes" were simply spelling corrections, punctuation, putting the book in chapter and verse form, etc. The Tanners (who run UTLM) know this but they don't tell you that because their whole purpose is misinformation about their former Church.
The Egyptologists
don't have access to the same papyrus Smith used. At least not all of it. That's the big misconception that the Tanners and other anti-Mormons won't tell you. What the Egyptologists have is the Book of Breathings and possibly some other parts that have survived. Church members who saw the papyrus described them, there was a lot of them, and what Joseph had access to was much more (and considerably different) than what remains. Feel free to read about that at the link below. Hopefully you will take as much time to do that as you did consulting anti-Mormon websites.
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Abraham.shtml#point1Finally, it's rather ironic when you say you came to a knowledge of the truth a long time ago through belief and evidence. Because many of the same arguments you are making against LDS beliefs are made by atheists and other non-believers against the beliefs of sectarian Christians like yourself. Many of the same critiques you make against the Book of Mormon can and are made by detractors of the Bible. Yet you believe in the Bible and Christianity (as you understand it). In the end, sectarian Christians are really no different than the Jews of old. Judaism rejected further light and knowledge in the form of the New Testament. Likewise, sectarian Christians reject further light and knowledge in the form of the Book of Mormon and other additional scripture. It's history repeating itself.
What's disappointing is you, who pretend to be so concerned about evidence and facts, haven't even bothered to
read the Book of Mormon, etc. You simply go straight to critical websites (almost always run by anti-Mormon groups, many of who are embittered former members) to justify your preconceived notions about it. But I suppose this shouldn't be surprising. From the beginning of this you have tried to portray yourself as an objective party with "no dog in the fight." But we've seen you're anything but that.
