It is currently Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:14 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:07 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
CaliforniaKid wrote:
William Schryver wrote:
There is no "exact sequence of characters in order."

b***s***.

For one who pretends to know so much, there sure is a lot that you don't know.

So, that you may understand that I mean what I say, I repeat: There is no "exact sequence of characters in order."

If you disagree, I invite you to map each character from the Abraham manuscripts to its corresponding position on JSP XI.

I know where they are found. It is quite apparent that you do not.









~

_________________
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:26 pm 
Dark Lord of the Sith
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:16 pm
Posts: 13392
Location: In a van down by the river
Will, has your work on the KEP been peer-reviewed by anyone who is not an LDS apologist?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:28 pm 
God

Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 3519
"If I remember, Joseph Smith also believed in little green men on the moon."

It is stated that he said they were about six feet tall and dressed like quakers. Some had patriarchal blessings stating they would serve missions to the inhabitants of the moon.

Brigham Young thought the Sun was inhabited also. He didn't describe their clothes though. Or maybe he wrote it down as a revelation but a big dog ate the papers it was written on?

_________________
"This is how INGORNAT these fools are!" - darricktevenson

Bow your head and mutter, what in hell am I doing here?

infaymos wrote: "Peterson is the defacto king ping of the Mormon Apologetic world."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:39 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 12827
It seems Will is much further behind that we originally imagined. He demands evidence left and right from we lowly people who know nothing, but when evidence is asked of his expert self, he says he is not into explaining his positions. This means he is only interested in truth via assertion with the four year empty promise that an explication is forthcoming - just keep having faith you fence-straddlers out there. The apologetic whore is here to save you with rhetoric.

But no sequence of characters huh? What the hell is this guy smoking? Maybe he needs to take a break from the apologetics lab where reality is twisted left and right to suit their fantasies. I can't wait to see how these ass-clowns try explaining why a bunch of scribes would 1) take it upon themselves to try their own "abilities" at translations and 2) invent characters from "revelation" to fill in the missing pieces of the commencement. There is only one person with the keys and authority to do any of this, and that is the prophet of the Church. But in this situation Will has to divorce Smith from the project at all costs, even that of his credibility. These wild scenarios of renegade scrfibes trying to become prophets behind closed doors, are fabricated without evidence for the sole purpose of trying to distance Joseph Smith from the KEP project. That's it. That is the only reason anyone would entertain the stupid notion that transcripts written by people who were all hired as scribes must represent the workings and ideas of the scribes, and not the person who hired them! This is like responding to a court transcript by saying that all this proves is that the stenographer was working on her own. How idiotic!

Sequence anyone?

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:42 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 12827
We've figured out Will's master plan. He just plans to do what he's always done, and that is lie. He misrepresents the evidence and hopes people just believe him. He's used to this at MADB. People believe him because they need to.

No sequence of characters! What a friggin idiot. And the invented characters appear exactly where we would expect them to appear. How do they explain this? Oh yeah, maybe Joseph Smith was on vacation with some other man's wife while the scribes huddled together in an effort to overthrow the prophet by proving they can come up with translations via revelation just the same!

Genius!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:55 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Kevin Graham wrote:
We've figured out Will's master plan. He just plans to do what he's always done, and that is lie. He misrepresents the evidence and hopes people just believe him. He's used to this at MADB. People believe him because they need to.

No sequence of characters! What a friggin idiot. And the invented characters appear exactly where we would expect them to appear. How do they explain this? Oh yeah, maybe Joseph Smith was on vacation with some other man's wife while the scribes huddled together in an effort to overthrow the prophet by proving they can come up with translations via revelation just the same!

Genius!

Are you sure all those characters that you claim are "invented," are, in fact, invented?

In any case, I know an Egyptologist who will have a little to say on this topic in the near future. When that happens, you can take it up with him.

_________________
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:08 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 12827
Gee, let me guess who it could be. The same Egyptologist who was lying for the Lord in his "Guide to the Papyri" that pretended to have a clue about the KEP. The same guy who lied when he said the characters overran the the text. The same guy who presented distorted photos of the KEP in order to mask the coloring so he could argue that the English and Egyptian texts were written in two different inks, therefore some mysterious person came along later and erroneously added the Egyptian characters after the translation was already written. That guy?

Just one of many failed attempts to distance Joseph Smith from the project, but typical for the tragedy that has become Book of Abraham apologetics. Its entire history is riddled with inconsistencies and backtracking. Of course leave it up to the MADites to say this proves it is just typical "scholarship." No, to those familiaar with scholarship, this looks more like desperate apologetics.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:17 pm 
Dark Lord of the Sith
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:16 pm
Posts: 13392
Location: In a van down by the river
I know an Egyptologist who can tell us what the symbols mean:

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:23 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 12827
The white slave or the transvestite in the chair?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:27 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:47 am
Posts: 4247
Location: The Ivory Tower
William Schryver wrote:
For one who pretends to know so much, there sure is a lot that you don't know.

So, that you may understand that I mean what I say, I repeat: There is no "exact sequence of characters in order."

If you disagree, I invite you to map each character from the Abraham manuscripts to its corresponding position on JSP XI.

I know where they are found. It is quite apparent that you do not.

Oh, I'm quite certain that when the lacunae are filled with other characters from elsewhere on the papyrus, you and Gee think that gives you license to make the misleading claim that "there is no exact sequence of characters." But to make that claim without qualification or explanation is a ____ misrepresentation of the evidence, and you know it.

_________________
Worlds Without End


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:32 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 12827
Yeah, no kidding. Will got quiet all. He lost his mojo suddenly.

In the immortal words of Bullet-tooth Tony,

Quote:
You are shrinking, and your two little balls are shrinking with ya.
The fact that you've got "Replica" written down the side of your gun.
And the fact that I've got "Desert Eagle point
five O" written on the side of mine,
Should precipitate your balls into shrinking,
Along with your presence.
Now... ____ off.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 8:14 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
CaliforniaKid wrote:
William Schryver wrote:
For one who pretends to know so much, there sure is a lot that you don't know.

So, that you may understand that I mean what I say, I repeat: There is no "exact sequence of characters in order."

If you disagree, I invite you to map each character from the Abraham manuscripts to its corresponding position on JSP XI.

I know where they are found. It is quite apparent that you do not.

Oh, I'm quite certain that when the lacunae are filled with other characters from elsewhere on the papyrus, you and Gee think that gives you license to make the misleading claim that "there is no exact sequence of characters." But to make that claim without qualification or explanation is a b***s*** misrepresentation of the evidence, and you know it.

It appears to me that you may not have a full appreciation of the situation. That's fine. All I know myself is what I have been shown. I don't claim any expertise when it comes to hieratic Egyptian. I'm compelled to yield to formal training when it comes to such things, so I'll let John speak for himself on this particular matter. All I can say is that I think you might be a bit premature in labeling as "____" findings you have yet to actually consider. Alas, that seems to be par for the course in these environs. No one has any idea what I'm going to talk about, and yet everyone here is absolutely certain that it will be nothing but lies and ____. Strange ...

_________________
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 9:35 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 7213
William Schryver wrote:
No one has any idea what I'm going to talk about, and yet everyone here is absolutely certain that it will be nothing but lies and b***s***. Strange ...


Is it really? People tend to judge based on your past record. When you actually present something at a conference, and your article really appears, which I am confident will happen, then you can at least say that your studies are no longer simply "forthcoming."

Cheers!

_________________
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:21 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Trevor wrote:
William Schryver wrote:
No one has any idea what I'm going to talk about, and yet everyone here is absolutely certain that it will be nothing but lies and b***s***. Strange ...


Is it really? People tend to judge based on your past record. When you actually present something at a conference, and your article really appears, which I am confident will happen, then you can at least say that your studies are no longer simply "forthcoming."

Cheers!

Interesting.

So, if I understand you correctly, on the basis of my not having yet published, in a formal venue, any of my findings, they are to be regarded as "lies and ____" until that time?

Is this same criteria applied equally to Brent Metcalfe?

I have, at least, "e-published," as it were, several arguments in the Pundit's forum of the MAD board that pertain to the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, as well as my first draft of the scroll-length article that will soon be published in the JBMORS.

_________________
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:22 am 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 12827
Brian Hauglid, August 2006 Fair Conference:

Quote:
Now, myth #2. This one I've seen a lot on the board (laughing) OK. And by the way this is not Mr. Metcalfe. Mr. Metcalfe agrees this is absolutely a myth here, OK. Ink analysis will give complete and accurate information. Ok well that caan't be true. Why? Because how can you do ink analysis on a photo? (Hauglid does his best Glenn Beck impression) It is kinda hard to do that isn't it? And I haven't tried it, and I don't want to.


Hauglid lied here. He didn't see this "a lot" on the board because "ink analysis" was only mentioned once, by me. And he lied again by misrepresenting what I said just so he had a convenient straw man to fill in more time during his presentation.

Quote:
Kevin Graham - May 10, 2006

John Gee had access to the color photos and then developed an apologetic that worked off of our ignorance. He argued that the Egyptian characters off to the left couldn`t possibly be part of a working translation since they were written in a different ink, meaning, after the english text to the right was written. Following this lead in, one suddenly imagines a scenario of a few guys goofing around with the text, therefore the KEP represent nothing but a "failed attempt" at something. However, once the color photos were released by Brent Metcalfe (he purchased them from Christenson many years ago) [edited by moderator] Even worse, it raised questions as to how anyone could get it wrong as he did, implying disingenuousness at best. There is simply no way one could deduce from the color photos that two different inks were used.

... if [John Gee] reproduced [the KEP] in his book, it seems obvious he had access to them, though I suppose it is possible that the Church air-mailed him preselected snippets. Why they were not in color is the mystery. In any event, I would have a hard time believing the Church didn't allow its lone Egyptologist to peruse the KEP.

PS: I should also point out that it would be absurd for anyone to develop an "ink analysis" argument if he hasn`t actually seen the ink!


Who the hell ever said anything about ink analysis of photos??


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:30 am 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 12827
Quote:
So, if I understand you correctly, on the basis of my not having yet published, in a formal venue, any of my findings, they are to be regarded as "lies and b***s***" until that time?


No. It is because you have a documented history of presenting both lies and ____. You haven't earned the benefit of the doubt.

Perfect example above. You said there was no sequence of characters. I presented the evidence that proves there is a sequence of characters that appear exaactly as the critical model would expect. So you lied. Period.

You said there were as many as four witnesses testifying to "long rolls." I showed where there was only one. So you lied. Period.

Now you tell us that even though you've pumped out thousands and thousands of words on this subject since the 2006 conference, that you don't present evidence because you're not interested in explaining things on the internet. But hey, we're supposed to just keep trusting you that you know what you're talking about.

Why not just present them now? Brian Hauglid didn't present anything new in his presentation speech. What's wrong with sharing your "evidence" beforehand?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:06 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
"Cracker" Graham:
Quote:
.. you have a documented history of presenting both lies and b***s***.

Uh, huh.

Like, for example, my arguments and evidence concerning the copying error (dittograph) on page 4 of Ab2 (BA1a) which proves that the document is a copy of a predecessor document. Or my arguments and evidence concerning the interlinear insertion at Abr. 1:12, suggesting that the phrase in question was a later addition/redaction of the original text. Or my arguments and evidence concerning the secondary nature of the emendations in both Ab2 and Ab3 (BA1a and BA1b), which argues against the notion that these corrections were made in the process of a dictation.

And it goes on and on. No counter-arguments have ever been presented to rebut the arguments I list above. All that ever happens is that you and others dismiss the arguments as being "stupid" or that they attest a lack of understanding concerning the rudiments of textual criticism, etc., etc. It's all quite comedic, actually. I present arguments and evidence, you guys say, "No, it's not. You're an idiot. Anyone can see that you don't know what you're talking about ..." Blah, blah, blah.

Quote:
You said there were as many as four witnesses testifying to "long rolls."

I don't believe I have ever given a number of the witnesses, but there are definitely multiple eyewitnesses to at least one long roll of papyrus after the mounted fragments were removed. That is a given. I refer people to my forthcoming paper in the JBMORS for the details.

Anyway, the bottom line is that you continuously resort to this same ploy. People here lap it up, because they're either ignorant or hopelessly biased. That's a given, of course. But then I'm not trying to open the eyes of those who are willfully blind.

It is sufficient for me to know that I am providing a knowledge of the truth of these things to those still willing to see.

In fact, just this morning I have uncovered additional evidence of the fact that the Willard Richards manuscript of the text of the Book of Abraham (specifically the pages containing the text of chapter 3) is copied from a predecessor document. Metcalfe and Smith believe that chapter 3 was not translated until March 1842. They are wrong in concluding this, and I can prove it several times over. Chapter 3 was translated in early July of 1835, and the original translation manuscripts are now lost.

And so, the evidence keeps mounting with each passing month of my continued study of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, and there is no end in sight yet. But you go ahead and keep up your "Schryver is a liar and an idiot" gambit. I have no doubt it will continue to play well here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park. It always does. You're dealing with a very indiscriminate crowd. When it comes to your particular skill set and body of knowledge, that's the best kind of audience.

_________________
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:54 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 9:49 am
Posts: 2420
William Schryver wrote:
"Cracker" Graham:
Quote:
.. you have a documented history of presenting both lies and b***s***.

Uh, huh.

Like, for example, my arguments and evidence concerning the copying error (dittograph) on page 4 of Ab2 (BA1a) which proves that the document is a copy of a predecessor document. Or my arguments and evidence concerning the interlinear insertion at Abr. 1:12, suggesting that the phrase in question was a later addition/redaction of the original text. Or my arguments and evidence concerning the secondary nature of the emendations in both Ab2 and Ab3 (BA1a and BA1b), which argues against the notion that these corrections were made in the process of a dictation.

And it goes on and on. No counter-arguments have ever been presented to rebut the arguments I list above. All that ever happens is that you and others dismiss the arguments as being "stupid" or that they attest a lack of understanding concerning the rudiments of textual criticism, etc., etc. It's all quite comedic, actually. I present arguments and evidence, you guys say, "No, it's not. You're an idiot. Anyone can see that you don't know what you're talking about ..." Blah, blah, blah.

Quote:
You said there were as many as four witnesses testifying to "long rolls."

I don't believe I have ever given a number of the witnesses, but there are definitely multiple eyewitnesses to at least one long roll of papyrus after the mounted fragments were removed. That is a given. I refer people to my forthcoming paper in the JBMORS for the details.

Anyway, the bottom line is that you continuously resort to this same ploy. People here lap it up, because they're either ignorant or hopelessly biased. That's a given, of course. But then I'm not trying to open the eyes of those who are willfully blind.

It is sufficient for me to know that I am providing a knowledge of the truth of these things to those still willing to see.

In fact, just this morning I have uncovered additional evidence of the fact that the Willard Richards manuscript of the text of the Book of Abraham (specifically the pages containing the text of chapter 3) is copied from a predecessor document. Metcalfe and Smith believe that chapter 3 was not translated until March 1842. They are wrong in concluding this, and I can prove it several times over. Chapter 3 was translated in early July of 1835, and the original translation manuscripts are now lost.

And so, the evidence keeps mounting with each passing month of my continued study of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, and there is no end in sight yet. But you go ahead and keep up your "Schryver is a liar and an idiot" gambit. I have no doubt it will continue to play well here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park. It always does. You're dealing with a very indiscriminate crowd. When it comes to your particular skill set and body of knowledge, that's the best kind of audience.


So...what you are saying is there is a sequence of characters...

_________________
"your reasoning that children should be experimented upon to justify a political agenda..is tantamount to the Nazi justification for experimenting on human beings."-SUBgenius on gay parents
"I've stated over and over again on this forum and fully accept that I'm a bigot..." - ldsfaqs


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 1:05 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am
Posts: 18463
Hello Mr. Schryver,

Please demonstrate the non-sequence postulation. I am interested in your assertion.

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

_________________
https://youtu.be/IdTMDpizis8


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 1:11 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
schreech wrote:
So...what you are saying is there is a sequence of characters...

I will attempt to be as clear as possible: In Ab1/Ab4 (Metcalfe's BA2) there is a total of 27 Egyptian morphemes written in the left hand column, containing many individual hieratic characters. It has been assumed that those characters occur "in order" within the Egyptian text of The Document of Fellowship Written by Isis (the so-called "Book of Breathings"). According to John Gee, that assumption is incorrect, and I have viewed the evidence he has assembled to demonstrate the fact. While I make no pretense to a knowledge of hieratic Egyptian, his evidence seemed pretty straight forward to me, and the characters are not taken "in order" from the papyrus. John will present his evidence at the upcoming FAIR conference, immediately preceding my address.

_________________
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kirtland Egyptian Paper Questions
PostPosted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 1:31 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:47 am
Posts: 4247
Location: The Ivory Tower
Kevin,

Did you see where Gee made this same claim? The way he phrased it was even more egregious:

Quote:
The characters in the manuscripts are an enigma. No theory for their presence satisfactorily explains their presence. They are not found in all the Book of Abraham manuscripts but only a few. They are placed in the manuscripts at the beginning of every paragraph, but their is no pattern to the order in which they are taken from one of the papyri. They seem to be taken at random which completely undermines the theory that the English text (which in many cases is clearly written before the characters) represents a translation of them.


Can you believe that? "The characters in the manuscripts... seem to be taken at random" from the papyri?? This is the kind of apologetic tactic that really rubs me the wrong way.

Peace,

-Chris

_________________
Worlds Without End


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Analytics, Arc, Majestic-12 [Bot], slskipper and 23 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