It is currently Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:33 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 9:25 pm 
Quote:
1) Joseph Smith could not translate Egyptian. Either God failed in the translation, or Joseph Smith is a fraud.


Joseph Smith couldn't translate Egyptian although his ignorant followers believed he was able to. Joseph was able to fool them with his pretended acts of divination. They bought it, hook, line, and sinker.

Quote:
2) The funerary text inserted into the bowels of a mummy is from the pagan book of the dead. The contents were inserted into the mummy to guide it in the afterlife, and not as a mailbox for some future grave robber to steal, send to America and have some charlatan buy it for $2400 and then “translate” into doctrine to include polygamy


Joseph could have produced the BofA out of the formation of soggy tea leaves in the bottom of a cup. It was all supernatural and quite an act to say the least. Bravo!

Quote:
3) Joseph Smith claimed to know how to translate the pagan papyrus and started to write a book before he was killed. The EAG is still kept from critical examination as is the papyrus Joseph SMith used along with the "Book of Joseph" papyrus the Mormon church has in its possession. Why?


The President of the Mormon church is embarrased by the EAG and doesn't want to touch it. He knows that the moment he touches it that he will be consumed. The President of the Mormon church is a liar. He knows he is not a prophet. He knows he cannot translate Egyptian whether it be from a common papyrus in a museum or the documents in the church vault. It is over Monson's head and he knows it. Monson cannot translate a thing. He has no power. Do not fear him.

Paul O


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 9:55 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:48 pm
Posts: 18536
Quote:
As with all of your posts, you are simply in denial and like to say things that have no foundation in order to further the cause you champion. Here’ a few compelling reasons to know that the Book of Abraham is false


I think your #3 shows that all the rest is just assumption and speculation on your part.

_________________
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
A lesson on 'Faggotry' for Kevin Graham; a legitimately descriptive and even positive term used by homosexuals themselves.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 5:20 am 
abstract
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am
Posts: 3054
bcspace wrote:
I think your #3 shows that all the rest is just assumption and speculation on your part.


As is typical, you answer nothing. You have no answers, because your objective in maintaining your role as a teacher to itching ears is to simply enable them by pretending to actually believe what you claim to be true, which you know is a lie... your choice.

http://biblelight.net/false-prophets.htm
Quote:
2 Pet 2:1 [NIV] But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2 Pet 2:2 [NIV] Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
2 Pet 2:3 [NIV] In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

2 Tim 4:2 [NIV] Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage--with great patience and careful instruction.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

_________________
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:49 am 
abstract
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am
Posts: 3054
William Schryver wrote:
Rockslider:
Quote:
… the ground breaking evidence that will put all of this to rest.

I assume this statement was made in relation to something I have said in the past. What precisely did you have in mind? When have I ever made reference to “groundbreaking evidence”? Granted, I may very well believe that there is persuasive evidence that will serve to explain the meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, but I’ve been extremely judicious in my public discussion of these things. So, again, I ask you: upon what basis do you make reference to my having claimed possession of “groundbreaking evidence that will put all of this to rest”?
.
.
.
dlbagent007:
Quote:
Yeah, we all can't wait to see his ground breaking evidence.

Same question as above for you.

Quote:
I'll be shocked if he publishes anything much less something that puts the controversy to rest.

I’ve just been pretending—for almost four years now—to be involved in some kind of study of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, right? How can you possibly believe such a thing? What, in your judgment, would be the point of such a blatant deception?

In any event, when have I ever claimed to be able to “put the controversy to rest”? I assure you I have no such illusions. Quite to the contrary, while I believe what I have to say—assuming I can support my claims—will represent a watershed moment in Book of Abraham studies, I am certain that it will not change the minds of people like you.

Even so, I have frequently heard it claimed by you and others, that I have yet to produce anything in the way of specific findings, supported by evidence. That is so demonstrably untrue that I am left to marvel at how the notion continues to be believed by so many.

I have been very specific and have supported with extensive evidence every argument I have made to date. The Pundit’s Forum at the MADB contains the discussions of at least five very specific findings I have made concerning the “Abraham” manuscripts of the KEP. While those findings represent only a mere fraction of the larger body of findings that have been made, by both me and Brian Hauglid, they are very significant in their import.

In addition, I have recently made the claim, quite specific in its nature, that I believe I can demonstrate that at least the first three chapters of the published Book of Abraham were received/revealed/recorded in the first two weeks of July 1835—prior to the production of any of the documents now known as the Kirtland Egyptian Papers. I will also demonstrate that the entire published portion of the Book of Abraham, as well as parts never published, were received/revealed/recorded prior to the end of 1836. The evidence to support that claim will not be presented via online forums, but will be published as a volume in the Maxwell Institute’s Studies in the Book of Abraham series.

Quote:
I noticed that he recently admitted on MAD that he won't be able to publish his paper until 2011 at the earliest.

I conjectured, with good reason (since I have become familiar with how slowly the wheels of the publishing process grind), that my book concerning the KEP would probably not appear in print this year, but more likely in early 2011. I said nothing about a “paper” unless it was in reference to a summary paper that will most certainly appear during this calendar year. Indeed, I currently have three papers in process, on three separate and distinct aspects of the production of the Book of Abraham.

Quote:
You are seeing it begin with a little timeline slip. Pretty soon he won't be publishing anything at all.

Right. Again the notion (also expressed by Dr. Shades) that I’m just pretending. Shades even goes so far as to suggest that no one among the apologists is actually doing anything vis-à-vis the Book of Abraham or the KEP. It’s all a smokescreen of some sort—but to what end?

You have to remember that I have only possessed the full collection of high-resolution images of the papyri and KEP for less than two months! (My previous findings were based on either the Marquardt transcriptions of the KEP or my possession of only two of the many documents that comprise the KEP (Ab2 [KEPA-2] and Ab3 [KEPA-3]).

Hauglid and Gee have had them for about five years. Metcalfe has had his photographs for 25 years! Neither Gee, Hauglid, nor Metcalfe have published any studies, as of yet, concerning the Kirtland Egyptian Papers. Metcalfe has mentioned a “forthcoming” publication of his findings for many, many years.

Consistent with the logic of your argument, do you also conclude that Metcalfe will never publish anything at all?
.
.
.
liz:
Quote:
I think that Will Schryver's theory is along the lines of parts of the papyri missing.

I am entirely confident that no one has any idea at all concerning my theory of the production of the Book of Abraham.

It is true that only 10% – 20% of the original quantity of papyrus has survived to the present day. Cook’s and Smith’s confidence to the contrary notwithstanding, I am persuaded that my upcoming scroll-length study will put their’s “down for the count.” (I do think it’s fascinating that, completely independent of one another, Andrew and I formulated an almost identical plan to analyze the lacunae! [As indicated by Chris’s recent description of the methodology they employed.] However, after much thought and consultation with many very smart professors, we concluded that the methodology was hopelessly incapable of producing sufficiently accurate results.)

At any rate, even if the original scroll was 100 feet long, that does not necessarily mean that there was an Abraham text on the lost portion, nor that the papyri themselves could not have served as a catalyst for the receipt, via revelation, of the text of the Book of Abraham.

That said, contrary to my original expectations, I have now developed what amounts to a “unified theory” that explains the meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers. The meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers is a complex and multi-faceted question that necessarily requires a complex and multi-faceted answer.

OK, that is all I have to say at present on the topic. It would be in vain for anyone to expect me to engage in a protracted discussion of these things in this venue. It will not happen. If Rockslider desires to discuss the question at MADB, that is up to him.


William,

I have something I think you should think about in writing your book. If the critics are right and the facts regarding the Book of Abraham indicate it is in fact a fraud, nothing you can say is going to change that logical conclusion. If you were the one to write a book based on that truth, who could possibly ridicule you if you sided with the facts and made a logic conclusion instead of more whitewash that is running thin?

Consider where Mormonism is right now vs. your age. Kids live and breathe on the internet. All one has to do is type in “Joseph Smith” and look at what’s out there. The truth is, Joseph Smith was not a prophet of God. Mormons were duped in the early 1800’s by Joseph Smith and his occult seer stones, and they only way to continue this charade is to have bad spin doctors continuing to make arguments from silence to appease a mind so fraught with fear that its cognitive dissonance is fed by these blatant mistruths.

The Backyard Professor and Mike Ash recently made a video where they refer to the seer stones used to “translate” the Book of Abraham as the Urim and Thummim, when they both know the only use of the Urim and Thimmim were on the lost pages... not even in the Book of Mormon were they used, but only the seer stones. Mike then makes one reference to Seer stones at the end… it’s a lie and you know it. Here is the thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12324&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
An argument from silence as I understand it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_silence
Quote:
The argument from silence (also called argumentum ex silentio in Latin) is generally a conclusion based on silence or lack of contrary evidence.[1] In the field of classical studies, it often refers to the deduction from the lack of references to a subject in the available writings of an author to the conclusion that he was ignorant of it.[2] When used as a logical proof in pure reasoning, the argument is classed among the fallacies, but an argument from silence can be a convincing form of abductive reasoning.


So lets use an example of a snake and a hard boiled egg. The egg is left on the table and you leave the room. The snake now has a lump the size of an egg in its belly.

Logical conclusion:
The snake ate the egg.

The argument from silence:
You make an argument that specifies the odds that a snake that long couldn’t have climbed the chair to make it to the table, but you base that on calculations that are incorrect. The counter argument is that an egg is that snake’s favorite food, and there’s an actual trail that shows the snake did climb the table. The argument from silence is that because no one actually saw the snake eat the egg, you’ll still side with the most logic argument based on data you know is incorrect, but also ignoring data that is very relevant to finding the actual conclusion.

This scenario is the same for the LDS arguments regarding the papyrus and its so-called missing parts based on a theoretical mathematical conclusion that has a known faulty foundation… it’s wrong. The papyrus Joseph Smith used is in fact the one the Mormon church has in its possession and it matches the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. The other scroll that is also kept from the Mormon people along with the magical seer stones used by Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Abraham are in their possession and you know this. The moral of this analogy is that someone is going to tell the truth eventually, and conclude the Book of Abraham is false, because it’s a fact that it is false… and you know it.

Consider the ramifications for writing this book… telling the truth. You would be famous and probably sell a lot of books. For doing what? …telling the truth. How can anyone sleight you for telling the truth? In a perfect world, you declare that the Mormon church is in fact false and Joseph Smith was a necromancer that used Mormonism to satisfy his desires. What if a mass exodus occurred by LDS churches that decide to ditch the Mormon doctrine and the KJV with the Joseph Smith footnotes in it. What if those churches decided to call themselves the New Order Mormon that doesn’t believe in the doctrine of Joseph Smith and instead adopts basic form of Christianity. The tithing still comes in to fuel it, and slowly the Mormon church topples. Why is that bad? What if it kept the family unit and the tradition, but got rid of the magical thinking doctrine of a false prophet of God? Joseph Smith wasn’t a prophet of God if you look at the data, and you are part of the contingency that fuels its validity when you know you’re telling untruths to persuade people. Wiki Wonka does the same thing when he twists the data to conform to what he believes is in the best interest of the Mormon church, but it’s based on a pack of lies and bunch of very poorly constructed mathematical conclusions that are intended to fool people... it’s a lie if you don’t tell the truth …deception …False Witness.

Do the right thing Will… tell the truth. We don’t need another reverse engineered contorted bunch of spin doctoring …it’s been done and it’s wrong, and you know it’s wrong. Mike Ash and the Backyard professor will plant seeds of doubt by lying regarding the (Urim and Thummim) when they know that only occult seer stones were used, but you don’t have to follow this same pathetic pattern of bearing a false witness.

_________________
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:04 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:48 pm
Posts: 18536
Quote:
I think your #3 shows that all the rest is just assumption and speculation on your part.

Quote:
As is typical, you answer nothing. You have no answers, because your objective in maintaining your role as a teacher to itching ears is to simply enable them by pretending to actually believe what you claim to be true, which you know is a lie... your choice.


According to #3, the basis for claims 1 and 2 don't exist. Time to put up or shut up.

_________________
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
A lesson on 'Faggotry' for Kevin Graham; a legitimately descriptive and even positive term used by homosexuals themselves.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:27 am 
abstract
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am
Posts: 3054
bcspace wrote:

According to #3, the basis for claims 1 and 2 don't exist. Time to put up or shut up.


Why don't you make some logical argument that makes sense? What the hell are you talking about? Can you post some data to indicate you actually have an argument? I'm calling you a liar and running away from the questions and tap dancing around the truth just as you did when you claimed that Brigham Young was not a racist, based on your data. What data? When do you ever post data? Answer: You don't, because your purpose is to make false claims to satisfy your cognitive dissonance... misery loves company. Put up or shut up with something that makes sense and I'd be glad to answer it with data... or are you going to run away from the questions again?

_________________
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:30 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:48 pm
Posts: 18536
Quote:
According to #3, the basis for claims 1 and 2 don't exist. Time to put up or shut up.

Quote:
Why don't you make some logical argument that makes sense?


I have. If you cannot examine the evidence, how can you have a basis for claims 1 and 2? All you can do is speculate.

_________________
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
A lesson on 'Faggotry' for Kevin Graham; a legitimately descriptive and even positive term used by homosexuals themselves.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:42 am 
midnight rambler

Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:51 pm
Posts: 1923
Location: St. Eligius
thews wrote:
bcspace wrote:

According to #3, the basis for claims 1 and 2 don't exist. Time to put up or shut up.


Why don't you make some logical argument that makes sense?
How can anyone make sense (using logic) of the mythical and mystical? Note to Professor Dan and his disciples: LDS Inc takes great leaps of faith, as there are no logical answers. Let your fevered brains rest, assured that in the end God will reveal in the 4th and 5th and 6th dimensions how it all comes together.

_________________
--*--


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:43 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:48 pm
Posts: 18536
Quote:
Why don't you make some logical argument that makes sense?
Quote:
How can anyone make sense (using logic) of the mythical and mystical?


You'll have to ask thews why he posted what he did.

_________________
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
A lesson on 'Faggotry' for Kevin Graham; a legitimately descriptive and even positive term used by homosexuals themselves.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:59 am 
abstract
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am
Posts: 3054
bcspace wrote:

I have. If you cannot examine the evidence, how can you have a basis for claims 1 and 2? All you can do is speculate.


No you have not. And again you post nothing to back up your claim, and it's because you have nothing. Here's some data for you from Mormonthink.com regarding the Book of Abraham. If you can make a case for one thing on this website to indicate the data is wrong, please present it [ quote ] and link the source of your data.

http://mormonthink.com/boaweb.htm

There's my data I'm asking you to address. If you would like to link some data as a counterpoint, please do. If you can't, and we know you can't, reference your point with data and we can then conclude you have an actual point to make... you don't.

Also BC, for the fourth or fifth time, you stated Brigham Young was not a racist based on your data. Please present this data so we can see if you have point to make, or are just (again) making false claims based on nothing as a false witness yet again?

_________________
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 12:48 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:48 pm
Posts: 18536
Quote:
I have. If you cannot examine the evidence, how can you have a basis for claims 1 and 2? All you can do is speculate.

Quote:
No you have not. And again you post nothing to back up your claim, and it's because you have nothing.


You're joking right?

You haven't even passed the first test of making a coherent claim. Claims one and two can only be proven if we have the material and in claim three, you don't have the material. In addition, your claim two makes a sub claim that this was for the purpose of promulgating a plural marriage doctrine. CFR that such a doctrine is found in the Book of Abraham.

Quote:
Also BC, for the fourth or fifth time, you stated Brigham Young was not a racist based on your data. Please present this data so we can see if you have point to make, or are just (again) making false claims based on nothing as a false witness yet again?


I'm not the one claiming that BY was racist. When I look at the references given, all there is is presentism and an ignoring of other comments by BY such as:

If the Government of the United States, in Congress assembled, had the right to pass an anti-polygamy bill, they had also the right to pass a law that slaves should not be abused as they have been; they had also a right to make a law that negroes should be used like human beings, and not worse than dumb brutes. For their abuse of that race, the whites will be cursed, unless they repent.
JoD 10:111

So it really is incumbent on YOU who make the claim to come forward and show that such is not just mere presentism.

_________________
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
A lesson on 'Faggotry' for Kevin Graham; a legitimately descriptive and even positive term used by homosexuals themselves.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 2:08 pm 
abstract
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am
Posts: 3054
bcspace wrote:

You're joking right?

You haven't even passed the first test of making a coherent claim. Claims one and two can only be proven if we have the material and in claim three, you don't have the material. In addition, your claim two makes a sub claim that this was for the purpose of promulgating a plural marriage doctrine. CFR that such a doctrine is found in the Book of Abraham.


I presented you with a site link that explains my stance and one I agree with. Here is that link yet again: http://mormonthink.com/boaweb.htm .

You have again posted zero data and it's because you have nothing to reference other than the same exact "prove it" cry for help that I'm supposed to devote hours of data presentation that will only ignore as you run away yet again. If you have one single issue with the data at Mormonthink.com then present it. These idle retorts without any data is only defining your false witness.


Quote:
I'm not the one claiming that BY was racist.


I know... I am, and you stated, "Brigham Young was not a racist based on my research," to which I presented data that was used to form the opinion, and that data was never acknowledged by you, and that's because you are lying again. Where is your data? What "research" have you done to form your opinion?

Quote:
When I look at the references given, all there is is presentism and an ignoring of other comments by BY such as:

If the Government of the United States, in Congress assembled, had the right to pass an anti-polygamy bill, they had also the right to pass a law that slaves should not be abused as they have been; they had also a right to make a law that negroes should be used like human beings, and not worse than dumb brutes. For their abuse of that race, the whites will be cursed, unless they repent.
JoD 10:111

So it really is incumbent on YOU who make the claim to come forward and show that such is not just mere presentism.




You again make no sense and fail to answer any questions asked. I gave you an entire website of data to prove the Book of Abraham false and you again have failed to acknowledge it. You are in fact wrong, and your lack of any sort of coherent argument to base you claims proves this. Show me the data… what are you taking about? Reference your point as I have. YOU HAVE NOTHING. You are a sociopath and your willingness to present your false witness is evidence to your devotion to the Mormon church that condones lying. Mormon doctrine is the only place you’ll find God supporting the act of lying, and you are in fact a liar. If you disagree, please present a coherent argument with data to back up what I consider to be blatantly false statements backed up by absolutely nothing yet again.

http://mormonthink.com/lying.htm
More data...

Quote:
I was stunned after I learned these uncomfortable truths. I had naïvely believed that when church leaders transgressed, they followed the required steps of repentance, as taught to members and investigators. I believed they had the courage to face their mistakes and confess their shortcomings, no matter what the consequences; to live the same standards they set for the members. I believed they were completely honest.

D. Michael Quinn called the use of deception by LDS church leaders, "theocratic ethics." (The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power, page 112) Smith lied to protect himself or the church; which was an extension of himself. Dan Vogel in his excellent work, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, described Smith's viewpoint; he was a pious deceiver. Smith used deception if in his mind; it resulted in a good outcome. Smith had Moroni, an ancient American prophet and custodian of the gold plates declare, "And whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do good is of me; for good cometh of none save it be of me. ( Moroni 4:11-12). Translation: if deception was necessary to do good, or bring a soul to Christ, then it was worth it, as long as God approves. Smith believed he knew when God approved of lying.

Smith believed God also approved of murder if it was for a good cause. He wrote in the Book of Mormon that Nephi was inspired by God (1 Nephi 4:6) to deceive and capture a servant; and then murder another man in order to secure an ancient historical record on brass plates. And in Missouri, Smith and his counselor Sidney Rigdon threatened to kill Mormon's who disagreed with Smith's policies and initiatives (Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power, Chapter 3, "Theocratic Beginnings," 79-103).

Smith re-wrote scripture to demonstrate that God had ordered the prophet Abraham to lie to protect himself and his wife Sarah from harm (Abraham 2:23-25).

Hugh Nibley, famous dissembling LDS apologist also stated, ""...if this court record is authentic it is the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith." Dr. Nibley's book also states that if the authenticity of the court record could be established it would be "the most devastating blow to Smith ever delivered" (Hugh Nibley, The Mythmakers p. 142. See also The Changing World of Mormonism, Chapter 4, "Joseph Smith and Money Digging").

In the court record Joseph Smith confessed that "for three years" prior to 1826 he had used a magic stone placed in his hat to find treasures or lost property, placing his money-digging activities from 1823 to 1826. Mormon histories indicate that a heavenly messenger revealed the presence of gold plates on September 21, 1823. Joseph Smith was conning overly optimistic treasure seekers out of their money at the very time he claimed that an angel revealed to him that gold plates lay buried near his home. He continued these deceptive practices for at least three of the four years after God was supposedly preparing him to receive the gold plates. These facts undermine the credibility of Mormonism's first prophet and founder. (Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, Signature Books, 2004, pp. 80-86)



Object? Link me some data.

_________________
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 11:24 am 
Nursery

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:36 pm
Posts: 12
Quote:
And the KEP is troubling to this, the missing papyrus theory because the characters on the papyrus that LDS Inc has are copied in the left hand margins of the KEP which are the English manuscripts of the Book of Abraham in the handwriting of Joseph Smith and his scribes. The problems that the KEP pose are that the Egyptian characters, now translatable due to the Rosetta Stone, do not translate to anything near what the corresponding handwritten English text (i.e., the Book of Abraham) purports. So, for this reason, Gee has attacked the KEP, at least claiming that the Egyptian characters were added to the left-hand margin after the fact, not as part of the scribing process. To advance this, Gee has claimed that those characters are in a different, darker ink than the English text just to the right of it. However, there were some rather misleading photos used for that purpose--intentionally or not by Gee, the photos are misleading and on a closer inspection, it appears one and the same ink was used to write the English text and the Egyptian characters copied into the margins.

The KEP is damning evidence to Joseph Smith's claims re the BoAbr--except to the eye of one who already is a believer and is so steeped in that believe, could not be convinced of anything else. For them, the KEP is not a problem.

I have not been around here for quite some time, but Metcalfe was claiming several years ago to be putting together a book and analysis concerning these very issues. What is latest word on his book? What is the next best available source detailing these issues?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: KEP
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 2:34 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:47 am
Posts: 4247
Location: The Ivory Tower
enigm0 wrote:
I have not been around here for quite some time, but Metcalfe was claiming several years ago to be putting together a book and analysis concerning these very issues. What is latest word on his book? What is the next best available source detailing these issues?

If you want something more detailed than this, I recommend visiting utlm.org and purchasing H. Michael Marquardt's book, The Joseph Smith Egyptian Papers.

_________________
Worlds Without End


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Fence Sitter, toon and 46 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group