It is currently Sat Jan 18, 2020 10:10 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 771 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 37  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:14 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:02 pm
Posts: 6707
I really have tried to follow along with the online Book of Abraham stuff for two years now. I think I'm more confused now than ever before about the issues. Who the heck is Greg Taggart http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... n-the-kep/?

Based on his comments, as well as knowing Brent has been the only one with color photos for years and a acknowledged expert in the field, I do also feel a sense of, come on Brent do something with it after all these years.

As far as Schryver and the peanut comment, I still have this pet peeve that the church is apparently allowing him and Hauglid to publish a book with the high resolution images (which no one else can get access to). Stalling any debate that could take the wind out of upcoming sales (pun intended) might also be a motivating factor.

William might be faced with a real dilemma, his need for attention (i.e. take the debate) and potential income loss.

Oh the joys of money for Jesus and paid apologetics. Welcome to the big league William.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:17 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 7213
harmony wrote:
This is one rebuttal short for Brent.

I understand the kind of panic that produced this outline, though. To actually have to stand up in public and talk about this nonsense as... well... truth is pretty frightening. And even worse, to be recorded in a podcast, when all your fluttering and sputtering is captured forever. And debate isn't a team sport.


They do get equal rebuttal time, but clearly Schryver wants the last word. I also note that he would essentially dominate the last half of the proposed proceedings, since he would have 1) his cross-examination of Metcalfe, followed by 2) a rebuttal of Metcalfe, and then 3) he would be able to offer a rebuttal of Metcalfe again at the end. Obviously this is his way of trying to control the debate and leave people with an impression that he has orchestrated.

_________________
“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: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:19 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 7213
RockSlider wrote:
Based on his comments, as well as knowing Brent has been the only one with color photos for years and a acknowledged expert in the field, I do also feel a sense of, come on Brent do something with it after all these years.


I think most everyone feels that way about now.

_________________
“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: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:28 am 
God

Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:35 pm
Posts: 18195
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
I took Debate as a class in high school and participated in several debates. Part of the fun (and the stress) was not knowing what the other side was going to present. We prepped for weeks ahead of a debate, and hoped our opponents didn't have anything we didn't have, but we certainly didn't show our cards beforehand. That would be dumb. Part of the idea was to see how well we could think on our feet, how well we knew the subject and could formulate rebuttal, and see how poised we were.

Will's on the internet strutting like he's all that, and now he's wussing out, trying to get Brent to show his cards. Showing one's cards before the debate isn't part of the process. What a chicken.

_________________
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:32 am 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 13029
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Hello,

It is clear Mr. Schryver isn't as confident in his knowledge of the KEP and BofA as he would belie. People who are truly well-versed in their perspective discipline don't have a problem debating it. They're confident in their knowledge and grasp of the subject.

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me


Pretty much. Will doesn't know the material well enough to debate it. This is why he doesn't show up in the post-presentation video's filmed by Shirts. He left it up to morons like wade to defend his presentation because he couldn't.

Will is only good at delivering a script, and so a debate with Metcalfe disarms him of his most valuable weapon: his ability to woo like-minded Mormons into thinking his arguments via assertion are actually evidence-based. Metcalfe would take him apart for the same reasons Will has already been taken apart in his online exchanges.

Online, Will has to resort to personal attacks, which is something he knows isn't going to fly in a live debate. In a live debate he won't be able to go off on a rant about how his opponent is biased, an anti-Mormon, has an agenda to destroy the Lord's Church, etc etc. He can do this online because this is the standard methodology at MADB and their members love this stuff, but on the public stage this will be looked down upon and be interpreted as evidence that he doesn't know the material well enough to defend his own positions. And this is really what it all boils down to. Will is an intellectual fraud.

What exactly has Will offered that is new? His amazing piece of evidence was a Phelps letter that had already been published in Chris Smith's paper. Will snagged that and pretended he came up with it on his own the way he has snagged information from others in the past, and then he adds a J. R. R. Tolkien twist to it, which only TBMs would interpret as genius.

Last year I illustrated how doing proper research seems to be something beyond Will Schryver's capacity:

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... f=1&t=9323

He relied on a half dozen apologists for helping him with his silly little missing papyrus argument. It took me an hour to find his source - which he didn't provide - and refute his claim. He then responded by saying I must have had help from Metcalfe, because I came up with it so quickly. He didn't understand how someone could actually do their own homework successfully without relying on others.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:38 am 
God

Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 12:00 pm
Posts: 1068
None of you are shocked by Will chickening out, right? I mean I knew the second after reading Brent's post that Will would never agree to the debate. It was a foregone conclusion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:38 am 
Has More Degrees Than Droopy
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Posts: 2690
Location: Cassius University: Ho Chi Minh Professor of American Military History
This debate will never happen. The whole thing will play out for a few years with numerous skirmishes on the message boards, but will amount to nothing more than another tease for the Book of Abraham enthusiasts.

_________________
Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded.-charity 3/7/07

MASH quotes
I peeked in the back [of the Bible] Frank, the Devil did it.
I avoid church religiously.
This isn't one of my sermons, I expect you to listen.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:46 am 
God

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm
Posts: 13029
The best thing that Brent could do is go ahead and accept the terms, just to see how much further Will decides to move the goal posts.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:53 am 
Star B

Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 116
This is truly hilarious. Will was grandstanding while holding a 2-7 offsuit, and Brent called him on it. Woopsie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:54 am 
Has More Degrees Than Droopy
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 4:21 pm
Posts: 2690
Location: Cassius University: Ho Chi Minh Professor of American Military History
Kevin Graham wrote:
The best thing that Brent could do is go ahead and accept the terms, just to see how much further Will decides to move the goal posts.


About to this point:

Billiam Schryver wrote:
I won't be involved in Mormon studies for much longer.


viewtopic.php?p=348723#p348723

_________________
Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded.-charity 3/7/07

MASH quotes
I peeked in the back [of the Bible] Frank, the Devil did it.
I avoid church religiously.
This isn't one of my sermons, I expect you to listen.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:22 am 
God

Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:43 pm
Posts: 13122
dblagent007 wrote:
None of you are shocked by Will chickening out, right? I mean I knew the second after reading Brent's post that Will would never agree to the debate. It was a foregone conclusion.


I saw Brent post last night and knew that Will would chicken out. Not by saying he won't debate, but by putting unreasonable demands on Brent. I noticed he also wants Brent to publish in a journal before any debate. I think Will is using this as his main way of hopefully avoiding a debate with someone who understands the material much better then himself.

_________________
42


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:46 am 
abstract
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am
Posts: 3054
truth dancer wrote:
As amazing as Will thinks he is, I'm pretty sure Will knows that in a live debate, in a public forum, even on stage, Brent has the clear advantage!

;-)

~td~

I would say that anyone who takes the position that defends a translation of Egyptian “by the hand of Abraham” from the “catacombs of Egypt” into the “Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar”, using magic rocks out of a hat that were also used to see dead treasure guardians, from a papyrus found in a mummy from the pagan book of the dead, into some “restored” doctrine that outlines Jesus Christ’s plan to have him marry little 14 and 15 year old girls and other men’s wives (using the threat of a flaming sword), has a distinct disadvantage. Like Chris Rock said, it’s like playing basketball with a r____ kid and calling him for double-dribbles.

Will’s objective was to give the Mormon who wants to believe, something to hold on to. It doesn’t have to make sense, nor does it have to be the focal point of the issues with the Book of Abraham… all it has to do is appease their cognitive dissonance with the notion that someone they consider more intelligent and “scholarly” understands it. They don’t understand the issues, which Greg Smith and Nomad both admit, so the target is hit by merely making the claim it’s been hit. Will won’t ever actually agree to this debate no matter what conditions are met… it doesn’t serve the objective.

This will be taken out of context, but Will’s soul is on the line here. When one has a daughter that goes through cancer, there is only one authority to ask for help, and it’s God (whoever you believe God is). Having had this conversation with God as an adult, I assure you there is no amount of money worth the betrayal of God after being granted a wish. My wish was granted more than once, and while it ultimately was denied, the extra time I was given with my daughter was a gift many parents are denied. Will owes God the truth, and if I’m labeled a prick for calling him on it, I’m ok with that. If you are intentionally lying to distort the truth William Schryver, the blood money you receive from it will corrupt your soul, as the souls you send down a path of deception will define you as a teacher to itching ears. Come clean and stop the charade, the lies, the tap dance around the truth using selective methodical distortion; the BofA is not truth and you know it's not true. [/soapbox]

_________________
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: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:53 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am
Posts: 19715
Hello,

This reminds me of the disastrous attempt by Mr. Peterson to debate Robert Spencer on the topic of Islam. Mr. Peterson was clumsy, stuttered almost incoherently, and fumbled through a rushed presentation while Robert Spencer was calm, cool, and collected as he destroyed Mr. Peterson's position as an Islamic apologist. Unfortunately, Mr. Peterson was revealed to be a complete and utter fraud in the realm of Islamic studies.

I fear Mr. Schryver would fare no better...

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

_________________
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:54 am 
God

Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:35 pm
Posts: 18195
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
thews wrote:
Like Chris Rock said, it’s like playing basketball with a r____ kid and calling him for double-dribbles.


Careful, thews. Your sensitivity is showing.

Quote:
all it has to do is appease their cognitive dissonance with the notion that someone they consider more intelligent and “scholarly” understands it.


In order for one to be considered intelligent and scholarly, I think even LDS church members like to see letters behind one's name... like BA, MA, and Ph.D.. William has none of those. We're not all as dumb as you'd like to think we are.

_________________
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:03 am 
abstract
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am
Posts: 3054
harmony wrote:
thews wrote:
Like Chris Rock said, it’s like playing basketball with a r____ kid and calling him for double-dribbles.


Careful, thews. Your sensitivity is showing.

It may be insensitive, but relevant, as Will’s target audience is brainwashed by a cult.

harmony wrote:
thews wrote:
all it has to do is appease their cognitive dissonance with the notion that someone they consider more intelligent and “scholarly” understands it.


In order for one to be considered intelligent and scholarly, I think even LDS church members like to see letters behind one's name... like BA, MA, and Ph.D.. William has none of those. We're not all as dumb as you'd like to think we are.


I didn’t say anyone was dumb, but what I am saying is they are brainwashed. They repeat “I know the church is true” to reinforce their commitment to Joseph Smith's doctrine, no matter how flawed the logic. What they need to continue this dedication to a false prophet of God, is teachers to itching ears… the teachers know they’re lying. If your logical conclusion is that doctrine from magic rocks and the pagan book of the dead makes sense, you may want to reconsider your foundation for how you came to this conclusion. Was it logic, or was it brainwashed into you?

_________________
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: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:05 am 
God

Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 3519
After his debate can we see Mr. Schryver on the mat agains the Real Brent Metcalf? http://www.hawkeyesports.com/sports/m-w ... ent00.html

That would be worth it. Mr. Schryver twisted by words and then in reality.

_________________
"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: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:23 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:54 pm
Posts: 4166
Location: Goddess Suite
Will's latest post:

Quote:
Yes, folks, as strange as it may seem, my having significantly raised the stakes from Metcalfe's initial proposition has been met with ... charges of cowardice?

That's right.

Only in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park© are such twistings of reality possible, thus proving again that there is no delusion the exmormon cannot embrace, given sufficient motivation.

At any rate, in light of a few ignorant comments read there concerning the format I have proposed, it might be profitable for some people to enlighten themselves as to the long-standing tradition of Lincoln/Douglas style debate in this country; a style of debate designed for two interlocutors, according to the pattern established by as its namesakes in the famous 1858 Illinois senatorial debates.

Read here: Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858

The format of these debates is by tradition, and many high school forensics students are quite familiar with it: Lincoln Douglas Debate Format

The Affirmative Interlocutor (AI) always begins and ends the debate. The first speech is called the "Affirmative Constructive" and consists of the participant making his case, after which the Negative Interlocutor (NI) cross-examines the AI for a set period of time. The second speech is the "Negative Constructive" and typically consists of the participant addressing/contesting the Affirmative case, following which the AI cross-examines the NI for a set period of time. This is then followed by three rebuttal speeches, two shorter affirmative speeches preceding and following a longer negative one.

It is a traditional and extremely elegant form of public debate still practiced today on account of its enduring popularity.

Though certainly my knees will be shaking the entire time; my hands trembling; sweat dripping from my befuddled brow, and my heart pounding a fevered beat throughout, yet I look forward to the inestimable opportunity to stand in the presence of the master of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, notwithstanding my admitted unworthiness.


Guess he done showed us, huh!

_________________
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:25 am 
Bishop
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:07 pm
Posts: 504
I am certain Metcalfe will never agree to debate Schryver if it means he (Metcalfe) has to actually publish something beforehand. Metcalfe is clearly afraid to take any public position on the matter for fear of being shown in error down the road. As Schryver has noted, Metcalfe has never published a single word about the KEP. No one has any idea what his interpretations are, other than the fact that he seems to support the old Ashment ideas. What other explanation can there be for his years of silence on the matter if not fear of committing himself to a position?

No, Metcalfe is all blow and no show. Always has been. That's not going to change now, especially now that Schryver has scorned his penny ante bet and put some real stakes on the table.

You people forget, I know William Schryver. He would hand Metcalfe his hat in a public debate like the one he has proposed. I don't know anyone better able to think on his feet than he is. No one.

_________________
... she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront ... Church leaders ... while well armed. The idea was ... dropped ... [because] she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.
-DrW about his friends (Link)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:38 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:16 pm
Posts: 2975
Location: Unassigned Lands
Trevor wrote:
The Dude wrote:
Will is a thespian, I would think he would have an advantage in a dynamic public exchange -- much like a charismatic EV preacher stomping an evolutionary biologist even though the preacher's creationist arguments suck.

But Will wants to pass up his tactical advantage and play "pretend" academic instead -- I think that is foolish of him.


You may be off here. It could be that this is the reason why Will wants a live venue instead of a podcast. He wants to be in a place where he has better "presence" and a crowd packed with his boosters. That would give him more leverage than John's podcast.


Thanks for the correction, Trevor. This is exactly what is going on.

As Will's bed-buddy Nomad informs us, Will is more than capable of putting on a show and for this he wants to be seen, not only heard.

The worst thing that could happen to Will is for him to proceed in the academic arena where his "theory" can be picked apart. The best thing would be for him to get on stage and put on a good show. It will minimize his weaknesses and maximize his strengths.

_________________
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:39 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 7213
Nomad wrote:
I am certain Metcalfe will never agree to debate Schryver if it means he (Metcalfe) has to actually publish something beforehand.


Will just pulled this stupid "requirement" out of his butt to buy himself some time. The crux of the matter is that he is intimidated by the idea of having to debate Brent anytime soon. I certainly understand why, and I don't think less of Will for balking at this particular debate offer. He is just unfortunate enough to have a clueless friend like you to put him up to such nonsense.

Nomad wrote:
You people forget, I know William Schryver. He would hand Metcalfe his hat in a public debate like the one he has proposed. I don't know anyone better able to think on his feet than he is. No one.


Yeah, and you kinda forget that we know him pretty well too. And your version of the story is something that few of us are buying.

_________________
“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: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go
PostPosted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:40 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:54 pm
Posts: 4166
Location: Goddess Suite
I predict that if this debate happens, after the blood is cleaned off the floor, each side will boast of how much of the blood came from the opponent and how little of it is their own.

In the end, the believers will still cheer Will and the critics will cheer Brent. Nothing will change.

_________________
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 771 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 37  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bret Ripley, Google [Bot], It occurs to me . . ., Meadowchik, Stem and 12 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