It is currently Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:50 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 208 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:19 am 
High Goddess of Atlantis
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 5:40 am
Posts: 4792
Going back to an earlier post on this thread:

I discovered a few answers, they are in red!

truth dancer wrote:
OK, this is why I am so confused, (tell me it is not just me)...

Will writes...

Quote:
No one commenced any serious formal study of the KEP until 2005.

No one except Metcalfe could have! (And whoever else had copies of his photos.)

No one had access to the originals, nor to quality images of them. That's why, contrary to the often-repeated suggestions that the final judgment has already been made, the fact is that the trial has barely begun.

My only problem with that argument is that Gee is the one who has access to the original papyri, and claims to have made precise measurements to the 1/10th of a millimeter.


Let me ask as plainly as I can cause I may have not been clear (I apologize is this is silly):

1. Does the LDS church still have the original papyri (not the missing scrolls) from which Brent's copies were made?

Answer: Yes, on another thread Chap quotes Gee saying he has access to the original papyri.
2. If so, does Gee, or any other LDS scholars have access to them? If not, why not?

Answer: Yes Gee has access to the original scrolls. Anyone else have this privilege?

3. Why is Brent blamed for not sharing his copies with others to study when the LDS church has the originals from which his copies were made? (I really don't understand this... what am I missing)?

Big question... I do not understand this at all.

4. Are there not other copies similar to Brent's? (IIR there were two other sets). Who has them?

5. Has the LDS church made any copies of the original, if so, who has seen them, if not why not? Has anyone like Gee for instance asked for copies?

6. Has the LDS church ever (since 1965) allowed non-LDS scholars and experts to examine and study the originals they have in their possession (assuming they still have them)? If so, who, if not why not?

Thanks for any clarification from anyone!

:smile:


Anyone know the answers to the above questions?

Above bold mine.

_________________
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj


Last edited by truth dancer on Wed Apr 22, 2009 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:26 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 3:23 am
Posts: 7137
Location: On the imaginary axis
Hmm. And when the papyri were handed over to the CoJCoLDS by the Chicago Museum (?) was it made a condition of the gift that the papyri should be made accessible to bona fide scholars for study?

If I was a museum director, I can't imagine making such a gift without imposing such a condition. How could one find out what the facts of the case are?

_________________
Christopher Ralph: The discovery that the creators of South Park place a higher value on historical authenticity than do the Brethren creates spiritual shock-waves from which some members never recover.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:27 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 6056
Proof that John Gee cannot be Trusted

Proof that William Schryver cannot be Trusted

Proof that William Schryver is Intellectually Dishonest

_________________
"Faggotry of all sorts isn't going to change LDS doctrine" - bcspace


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:48 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Kevin Graham wrote:

Proof that Kevin should have gotten his head hit harder. :wink:

But seriously, it's good to know you weren't called to the bar of judgment yet, before you've gotten a decent chance to repent.

BTW, if I am so intellectually dishonest, etc., etc., then why is that my findings vis-à-vis the KEP keep getting confirmed by the experts? Are they all intellectually dishonest, too? :lol:

What about the forensics lab? Are you going to call their results intellectually dishonest?

Or are you just going to continue your three-year-long slide into utter irrelevance when it comes to the Book of Abraham controversy?

_________________
... 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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:50 am 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 13719
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
William Schryver wrote:
BTW, if I am so intellectually dishonest, etc., etc., then why is that my findings vis-à-vis the KEP keep getting confirmed by the experts? Are they all intellectually dishonest, too? :lol:

What about the forensics lab? Are you going to call their results intellectually dishonest?


Pardon us for not simply taking your word for all of this.

_________________
The Electronic Journal of Jaredite Studies
The Definitive Electronic Jaredite Bibliography

"I don't profess to be such a Prophet as were Joseph Smith and Daniel; but I am a Yankee guesser." ~Brigham Young


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:00 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 6056
Will we all know you're blowing smoke again. You've admitted being wrong so many times on this subject, and have misrepresented even Hauglid so many times it is hard for anyone to take you seriously anymore, especially when you start referring to these mysterious "experts" who have verified YOUR (Someone who doesn't even reach the status of amateur. Someone who didn't even know what the KEP were until I told you a few years ago, and then became an instant "expert" after a few Nibley readings) conclusions! The fact that Hauglid is willing to consider your crazy ideas only tells us how desperate the Book of Abraham apologetic has become.

But it is pointless to even respond without something solid as a reference for your so-called "experts". Experts in what exactly, b***s***? We're just supposed to take your word for it right? The same way we were supposed to in the link above when you were proved to be flat out incorrect on virtually every point you thought you had made? It isn't even worth dealing with you any more. Your conclusions are testimony-driven, pure and simple. You and Hauglid and Gee approach the matter with an agenda, as Hauglid was good enough to admit. He came to the matter with a conclusion already in mind and his "job" was to defend it because that would be "defending the kingdom of God."

This is all a joke when you pretend to have any sense of scholarship on your side.

_________________
"Faggotry of all sorts isn't going to change LDS doctrine" - bcspace


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:11 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Kevin Graham wrote:
Will we all know you're blowing smoke again. You've admitted being wrong so many times on this subject, and have misrepresented even Hauglid so many times it is hard for anyone to take you seriously anymore, especially when you start referring to these mysterious "experts" who have verified YOUR (Someone who doesn't even reach the status of amateur. Someone who didn't even know what the KEP were until I told you a few years ago, and then became an instant "expert" after a few Nibley readings) conclusions! The fact that Hauglid is willing to consider your crazy ideas only tells us how desperate the Book of Abraham apologetic has become.

But it is pointless to even respond without something solid as a reference for your so-called "experts". Experts in what exactly, bull-s***? We're just supposed to take your word for it right? The same way we were supposed to in the link above when you were proved to be flat out incorrect on virtually every point you thought you had made? It isn't even worth dealing with you any more. Your conclusions are testimony-driven, pure and simple. You and Hauglid and Gee approach the matter with an agenda, as Hauglid was good enough to admit. He came to the matter with a conclusion already in mind and his "job" was to defend it because that would be "defending the kingdom of God."

This is all a joke when you pretend to have any sense of scholarship on your side.

I'd consider responding to you, but you are so far out in the "doesn't know what he's talking about field" that it would be impossible to make you understand.

Kevin, you have fallen so far behind in the discussion that it's sad.

Yes, my observations concerning the interlinear insertion at Abr. 1:12 and the dittograph on page 4 of the same document have been confirmed by multiple "experts" in textual criticism and forensic document analysis. Skousen is the only I will name at present, but all will be named.

All of this, plus the stuff Hauglid and his team have been working on, will shortly appear in print.

You can rant and rave all you want about ... whatever it is you're ranting and raving about.

But you can't change the facts.

And on at least these two significant points (which I have been arguing for almost three years now) my conclusions are going to be vindicated and the critics' arguments to the contrary will be proven false. And the bigger picture: the theory of KEPA #2 and #3 being simultaneous transcripts of an oral dictation will be shown to be entirely untenable.

You might as well deal with it now. Because a year from now, if you keep ranting like this, you're only going to convince rational people that you've lost it completely.

_________________
... 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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:13 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Kishkumen wrote:
William Schryver wrote:
BTW, if I am so intellectually dishonest, etc., etc., then why is that my findings vis-à-vis the KEP keep getting confirmed by the experts? Are they all intellectually dishonest, too? :lol:

What about the forensics lab? Are you going to call their results intellectually dishonest?


Pardon us for not simply taking your word for all of this.

You can do whatever you damn well please, Kissassman. Doesn't matter to me.

I have the luxury of actually knowing what's going on. You don't.

_________________
... 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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:28 am 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 13719
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
William Schryver wrote:
I have the luxury of actually knowing what's going on. You don't.


And when we see the goods, we'll acknowledge them. Your propensity to trade on accomplishments that remain to be verified is suggestive of the weakness of your position and your low status among apologists.

_________________
The Electronic Journal of Jaredite Studies
The Definitive Electronic Jaredite Bibliography

"I don't profess to be such a Prophet as were Joseph Smith and Daniel; but I am a Yankee guesser." ~Brigham Young


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:38 pm 
High Priest
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:55 am
Posts: 379
I think the anonymous Jewish redactor theory is still alive.

The nice part about The Missing Scroll theory is that theoretically the missing scrolls can never be found. If they actually existed how could anyone know. As we can see from the facsimiles printed in the PoGP that Joseph clearly didn't know how to translate Egyptian.

By the same measure I don't know why critics and apologists need to keep going back and forth on theories. The 3 facsimiles and their translations are pretty good evidence that Joseph didn't know Jack Squat about translating Egyptian.


Phaedrus


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:01 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 10:06 pm
Posts: 15049
Location: Sterling, Virginia
Phaedrus Ut wrote:
I think the anonymous Jewish redactor theory is still alive.

The nice part about The Missing Scroll theory is that theoretically the missing scrolls can never be found. If they actually existed how could anyone know. As we can see from the facsimiles printed in the PoGP that Joseph clearly didn't know how to translate Egyptian.

By the same measure I don't know why critics and apologists need to keep going back and forth on theories. The 3 facsimiles and their translations are pretty good evidence that Joseph didn't know Jack Squat about translating Egyptian.
Phaedrus


Yup. The facsimiles suggest that Joseph was trying (and failing) to do exactly what most people think a translator should do: translating. The facsimiles tie the translation to the papyri, so they tend to rule out the catalyst or "revelation" theory, leaving only the direct translation (the critics' choice) and the closely related reinterpretation theory (David B's preference).

As you say, if there were missing scrolls, there's no guarantee that Joseph's attempts at translation would have been any more successful than his efforts at the facsimiles.

There really isn't much left to defend of the Book of Abraham, sadly.

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:04 pm 
Stake President
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:27 am
Posts: 566
Location: Kansas City
Phaedrus Ut wrote:
I think the anonymous Jewish redactor theory is still alive.

The nice part about The Missing Scroll theory is that theoretically the missing scrolls can never be found. If they actually existed how could anyone know. As we can see from the facsimiles printed in the PoGP that Joseph clearly didn't know how to translate Egyptian.

By the same measure I don't know why critics and apologists need to keep going back and forth on theories. The 3 facsimiles and their translations are pretty good evidence that Joseph didn't know Jack Squat about translating Egyptian.


Phaedrus


It seems like some of the theories employed do not require him to be able to. Some even seem to allow him not having the slightest clue what was going on (with regard to the production of the Book of Abraham), and that his statements concerning the the whole process are not found to be accurate.

_________________
"Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis" - Laplace


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:07 pm 
God

Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 18144
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR
Just because something is published doesn't mean it's reliable or valid... or even right. Everything in FROB is "published". That doesn't mean diddly about the veracity.

_________________
(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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:01 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
harmony wrote:
Just because something is published doesn't mean it's reliable or valid... or even right. Everything in FROB is "published". That doesn't mean diddly about the veracity.

Similarly, just because something is posted on a message board doesn't mean it's reliable or valid.

I know that's hard for you to accept, but this latest episode with the alleged overturning of the scroll length calculations should be a lesson to you.

I know it has been to me.

_________________
... 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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 3:13 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 11:29 am
Posts: 2852
that one part that was missing the head that Joseph drew in - I would have put a big :wink: there.

_________________
I want to fly!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 5:57 pm 
Valiant B
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 8:37 pm
Posts: 186
Hi Will,

You aver:



My conclusion is not based on anything Gee has said.

...

It is, rather, based on "documentary evidence." I have identified several pieces of historical evidence that suggest that at least all of the third chapter was produced in Kirtland, almost certainly with Warren Parrish as scribe.



Since you have "several pieces of historical evidence that suggest that at least all of the third chapter was produced in Kirtland, almost certainly with Warren Parrish as scribe," can you provide just three such pieces of historical evidence?

My best,

</brent>

http://mormonscripturestudies.com
(© 2009 Brent Lee Metcalfe. All rights reserved.)
——————————
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:00 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Brent Metcalfe wrote:
Hi Will,

You aver:



My conclusion is not based on anything Gee has said.

...

It is, rather, based on "documentary evidence." I have identified several pieces of historical evidence that suggest that at least all of the third chapter was produced in Kirtland, almost certainly with Warren Parrish as scribe.



Since you have "several pieces of historical evidence that suggest that at least all of the third chapter was produced in Kirtland, almost certainly with Warren Parrish as scribe," can you provide just three such pieces of historical evidence?

My best,

</brent>

http://mormonscripturestudies.com
(© 2009 Brent Lee Metcalfe. All rights reserved.)
——————————
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown

I promise to do it no later than when you refute my arguments on the interlinear insertion at Abr. 1:12 in KEPA #2, and the long dittograph on page 4 of the same document.

Or you actually publish your long awaited tome on the textual origins of the Book of Abraham.

Which ever comes first. :wink:

((c) William Schryver, 2009, All Rights Reserved.)

_________________
... 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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:08 pm 
Valiant B
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 8:37 pm
Posts: 186
Hi Will,

Unless you can provide substantive evidence for your claims, I can only conclude you have no such evidence.

Best wishes,

</brent>

http://mormonscripturestudies.com
(© 2009 Brent Lee Metcalfe. All rights reserved.)
——————————
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:11 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:44 am
Posts: 6510
Location: Cassius University
What's worse, Brent, is that even Will's "counter" is lame. It's obvious that he's trying to "stick it" to you in the way that he feels you have "stuck it" to TBMs all these years. So: not only does he not have any real evidence, he also cannot come up with an original counter. He must be literally seething with frustration and anger.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:16 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Brent Metcalfe wrote:
Hi Will,

Unless you can provide substantive evidence for your claims, I can only conclude you have no such evidence.

Best wishes,

</brent>

http://mormonscripturestudies.com
(© 2009 Brent Lee Metcalfe. All rights reserved.)
——————————
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown

I guess we'll see, won't we? Unless, of course, you continue to lurk in the background, seemingly so risk averse that you have become all but paralyzed.

_________________
... 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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Book of Abraham and the Latest Apologetics
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:17 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:58 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Elsewhere
Doctor Scratch wrote:
What's worse, Brent, is that even Will's "counter" is lame. It's obvious that he's trying to "stick it" to you in the way that he feels you have "stuck it" to TBMs all these years. So: not only does he not have any real evidence, he also cannot come up with an original counter. He must be literally seething with frustration and anger.

Hey Scrotch,

Pull up your fly. Your idiot is showing again.

_________________
... 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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 208 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Brad Hudson, canpakes, Fence Sitter, Google [Bot], Zim and 31 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