RFM Annihilates Egyptologist Kerry Muhlestein, TOTAL Wipe Out!!!

[_thechair]

Here are my few thoughts after listening to RFM's Muhlstein podcast.

1. Muhlstein's dissing of the podcast medium is absurd. I could understand this posture if RFM had called him out to a soundbite duel over social media or Twitter, but not to a long-form debate over podcasting. Some very complex and critical debates were once had over existential issues in a form of similar length to podcasts: Lincoln vs. Douglas in the 1858 Illinois Senate race. The two titans squared off seven times in seven Illinois towns over issues that wouldn't be settled until April of 1865. They argued over whether it was lawful for Congress to restrict slavery in the territories, over who created the Union, the People or the states, and many other related issues. Whoever went first, Lincoln or Douglas, would make his case for an hour. The other would then rebut for 90 minutes, and the first would then do a 30-minute rejoinder. It occurs to me that if Lincoln and Douglas can spar over the meaning of personhood, freedom, and the nature of the Union in a 60-90-30 debate format, surely Muhlstein should see the adaptability of podcasting to a Book of Abraham debate series. He and RFM could jockey over conditions and parameters. There is no reason to reject out of hand podcasting as a format.

2. Muhlstein's elevation of academic process and language for discussion of Book of Abraham issues indicates consciousness of a weak case. The Book of Abraham was published to the members of the church and to the world at large. Its legitimacy therefore ought to be discussed in an accessible format. Professor Ritner and RFM showed they can break down complex and nuanced issues and discuss them in plain English. If highly-educated skeptics can question Book of Abraham origins in plain English, then there's no reason Muhlstein and Gee can't defend the Book of Abraham in plain English. This sort of wagon-circling reminds me of John Gross's quip, "Complexity is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Orwell also comes to mind; here's a nugget from his Politics and the English Language:

"A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink."

3. Ritner and Vogel and others make a VERY strong case against the Book of Abraham's origin story. If this were a criminal case to be tried in front of a jury, I'd call the case against Book of Abraham authenticity so far "beyond a reasonable doubt." Without contrary evidence, this is enough to convict in a criminal case and is the highest level of proof in litigation. Meanwhile, unless its orthodox defenders engage at a similar, plain-language level, those with questions will continue to turn for answers about Book of Abraham to the Dehlin/RFM/Ritner episodes, to Dan Vogel, to CES Letter, Mormonthink, and to those here for information. What will they find there? The case against the Book of Abraham orgins beyond a reasonable doubt. The clock's-a-tickin'. What they almost certainly will not do is WAIT a long time only to be presented with a large text or with academic articles written in academese. Expert opinions are of little value to juries unless they are unpacked and explained--DURING the trial and in plain English.

4. RFM's bumper/outro music is sans pareil.

thechair

[_Philo Sofee]

The chair
The Book of Abraham was published to the members of the church and to the world at large. Its legitimacy therefore ought to be discussed in an accessible format. Professor Ritner and RFM showed they can break down complex and nuanced issues and discuss them in plain English. If highly-educated skeptics can question Book of Abraham origins in plain English, then there's no reason Muhlstein and Gee can't defend the Book of Abraham in plain English.

This is the magnaminous take away that floors anything the LDS scholars will come up with. It is simply by no stretch of the imagination so complex Mormons won't be able to sort it out without apologetic spin. Ritner simplified it perfectly, while demonstrating there IS complexity, but of course, that is not in question. But to say nothing can be concluded is totally false, and we know LDS scholars know this.

[_Shulem]

Philo,

If Muhlestein agreed to come on Mormon Discussions to discuss and debate Book of Abraham apologetics, do you think you'd be able to handle that slimy little worm? Could you take him and Gee on at the same time, a worm in both hands?

:biggrin:

You wound't run with ur tail tucked would ya?

[_Temp. Admin.]

If John Gee had never been a Mormon, and someone handed him the Book of Abraham papyri, then handed him the Book of Abraham and claimed that the latter is a translation of the former, would Gee believe that person?

[_Shulem]

If John Gee had never been a Mormon, and someone handed him the Book of Abraham papyri, then handed him the Book of Abraham and claimed that the latter is a translation of the former, would Gee believe that person?

Of course he would not any more than Robert Ritner and every other nonMormon Egyptologists. It's safe to say that ALL of them know about the Joseph Smith incident which is quite documented; this from Cracking Codes The Rosetta Stone and Decipherment:

. . . . it was not the first influential attempt to 'translate' Egyptian texts, since the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith Jr had in 1835-44 worked on three Roman period funerary papyri, one of which he translated by direct inspiration as now canonical scripture, The Book of Abraham.

Egyptologists around the world (and they are relatively few in number) are not flocking to the church to get baptized in order to testify how they know Smith translated the Book of Abraham.

Do you think John Gee's faith is faltering right about now? With his new book being pulled and all the seeming persecution against him he must feel somewhat dejected. Surely he can't really believe in the Missing Roll? It's just more of the same stuff in which Smith had cut up and put behind the glass frames for display. Gee can read the writing of the Facsimiles so you'd think he would think the same for the lost portions as well. More of the same stuff.

[_Philo Sofee]

Shulem
Do you think John Gee's faith is faltering right about now? With his new book being pulled and all the seeming persecution against him he must feel somewhat dejected.

Nope.He gets paid big money from the church affiliated College, BYU. His testimony is IRRELEVANT and is compartmentalized into a place where reality and truth cannot reach... at least until he retires and secures his pension. He will remain LDS no matter what truth refutes him. Russell Nelson can personally tell Gee that nothing he writes is correct, and it wouldn't even phase him... lets quit pretending he or any other apologist who is paid by LDS Inc is ever going to apostatize. It ain't happenin.

[_Shulem]

Well, thanks for your opinion on that. It's quite disturbing to say the least that Gee is so locked into it all.

I really loath the Church and what it does to people. Very sad, indeed.

[_Philo Sofee]

Well, thanks for your opinion on that. It's quite disturbing to say the least that Gee is so locked into it all.

I really loath the Church and what it does to people. Very sad, indeed.

But it's not disturbing.........it's obviously predictable. They are PAID by the church. You simply don't throw away a 6 digit salary that you would literally get nowhere else because of the ridiculous silliness you would, as an employee, proclaim to be actual history. They are stuck, and they are paid more than enough to be more than happy enough to drink the Kool Aid, and try to get all others around them to partake as well.

[_Shulem]

it's not disturbing.........it's obviously predictable. They are PAID by the church. You simply don't throw away a 6 digit salary that you would literally get nowhere else because of the ridiculous silliness you would, as an employee, proclaim to be actual history. They are stuck, and they are paid more than enough to be more than happy enough to drink the Kool Aid, and try to get all others around them to partake as well.

I disagree. I would throw away a 6 digit salary paid by the Church in order to come clean and cleanup the mess created out of lies and deception sponsored by the church. I wouldn't sell my soul for a mess a pottage which is what Gee and his little lapdog Muhlestein are doing. Muhlestein is nothing more than a strip tease dancer performing for his pasty faced boss, Gee.