Graham began a thread at MDD called "Kep: Sequence Of Characters" which can be analyzed for its wealth of personal polemical content. One will not be disappointed, no matter how much may have been deleted by the mods thus far. Starting on the first page, we can see the bombastic, self absorbed narcissism of this individual in full flower.
I will retain the mods (who have at this point apparently matured to the point of full fledged "neo-orthodoxy" along several dimensions) original interpolations where deletions were made of flames no longer remaining - page after page of them - long after all were warned that they would be banned from the thread in insults continued, in red. That warning, however, was not aimed primarily at Graham, who was held to a different standard (as per Bokovoy in the past) and allowed to continue, while Will was banned and I was banned for making no particularly egregious insults (and in my case, none) whatsoever. Any emphasis (bold or italics) will be mine.
Believe it or not, this isn't the most egregious goof John Gee has produced on this subject. It is just his latest.
That's because the only people willing to engage on this subject are those who clearly do not understand. I don't just assert this, I demonstrate it.
You make it sound like John Gee has repented of his ways, but in fact he has a decade long history of making one ludicrous evidence-free claim after another.
Order the presentation and stop making a fool of yourself. The image I provided came straight from the presentation. You simply don't know what you're talking about as usual.
Gee's argument has been fully grasped. His argument insults the intelligence of his audience and is just one of the many examples of John Gee's bad apologetic arguments. I can't believe anyone here is actually trying to justify his argument somehow
Evidently, wade refuses to watch the actual presentation. Anyone who watches it will see I made no mistake at all.
Gee simply doesn't know what he's talking about. <---tired insult
In summary, both Gee and Schryver have presented baseless arguments that appear to have no justification aside from apologetic necessity. They present their theories with bombastic certitude, gloating
<---- tired insult that theirs is "reality" vs. the anti-Mormon "fantasy."
And there is a difference between "parties" here. I don't just tell people they misunderstand things, I demonstrate the fact. Case in point, Will's constant claim that I've misrepresented his thesis might have a chance of selling if he'd reconcile the evidence to the contrary; the numerous citations from his presentation that he absolutely refuses to address. You don't want to address them either. But you'll keep telling your audience that I'm not only misrepresenting, but that I'm doing so intentionally.
:::sigh:::: 3 paragraphs bursting with insults
(Note: Kevin has not been banned yet, after a clear waring a page earlier. I had already been banned, not for making any "personal shots," as the mod prevaricator-in-chief Minos claimed in later explanation, but for a measured, critical appraisal of Kevin's posting style. For a contrast to Kevin's stuff in this post, here is why I was banned:
As Will has just pointed out above, the problem actually seems to be, based on what you wrote, that you do not seem to understand William's core thesis at its very root. If one researcher has to tell another (and, over the years, I've seen Will tell you this again and again, on various points of KEP studies and his own work in relation to them) that they have thoroughly misunderstood and misperceived a theory, and hence, are riding through a field setting fire to strawmen, then this would tend to call into question much, if not the entirety of that critic's responses to it, not the least of which would be his ability to critically represent the claims of his opponent properly
As he pointed out and as we've been discussing for sometime here, the "explained" characters in the EA/GAEL.
This is getting nowhere. All you still have, as the critics had 40 years ago, is a correlation and connection of some kind between the Book of Abraham and the KEP. There is no known causal relationship, at least running in the direction you wish, and stating with airs of certitude what is, at best, guesswork and naked conjecture in the face of substantial counter-evidence and problematic elements in the KEP itself, is nothing more or less than that: statements of certitude grounded, apparently, in your assumed authority as an "expert" on this subject.
Argument by assertion, bluster, and personal invective masked as argument demonstrates nothing. All the padding of your lengthy posts with graphics and associated analysis do not alter the Kabuki dance-like nature of your project here, which is really nothing much more than restating, over and over, the old arguments of Ashment, Marquardt et al that have long been plausibly answered by competent LDS scholarship.
I understand that you seem to have a good working knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the KEP as to its structure. But knowing this doesn't give you its purpose and meaning in any clear manner. Your penchant for confuting hypothesis, theory, and fact with naked conjecture and speculation are salient features of all your work, and are, I think, a part of the irritation you encounter here in your opponents. A truly scholarly temperament and approach to a text-critical forensic reconstruction of such a complex and ambiguous set of texts such as the KEP would involve the kind of tentativeness, judicious inference, and balanced give and take of evidential plausibility that you simply are not willing to engage in.
Insinuating or clearly impugning intellectual inferiority and/or base motives to other professional scholars with whom you disagree, such as John Gee and Bill Hamblin, has gone far enough, has it not?
You will notice that in all of this I think quite temperate take on Kevin's "approach" to debate, I even praised his knowledge at one point. For this I was banned and threatened by the trendy neo-orthodox at MDD with expulsion from the board, while Kevin was allowed to plow on through six solid pages of personal put-downs and self glorification )
You just made that last part up. He said no such thing. He obviously believed it was extant to at least some extent, which is how the scribes copied it into the form they did on the Book of Abraham manuscripts. All of this just goes right over your head because you keep wanting him to argue something else.
You are most definitely wrong because you don't grasp the fundamental basics of this presentation.
Post deleted AGAIN
No content no post
So faithful to that agenda, later that same day wade assures his imagined audience that he has caught me in a snare:
Pretending a contradiction exists, Wade reponds by saying, "here is what Gee actually said":
Did you see how that works? Wade avoids every critical point in my refutation of Gee and instead tries to focus on a minor point, using his limited understanding of a citation to conjure up an "ironic misunderstanding" on my part. Wade then tried to drag everyone away from the thread topic and onto his preferred topic, requesting others to comment on my supposed "error."
(It is impossible to tell if the above is relevant argument or hostile psychologizing)
Wade's response gratuitous personal insult removed:
So now that irrefutable evidence has been provided, gratuitous personal insult removed his only response to the graphic images is dismissive:
No, that isn't the question. gratuitous personal insult removed He made an allegation and he needs to support it or retract it if he expects credibility as a "reasonable" debater.
(This is now at page five, two pages after the clear warning of bannings for personal insults and long after I, Mola, and Will had been removed for, at best, ambiguous violations of that warning, while Kevin was given free reign of the board)
Again you refuse to watch presentation provided by Gee so you're really in no position to speak on this subject. That you keep making these ludicrous remarks about the two different characters proves you have no intention of properly educating yourself on this matter.
(Apparently, the mods don't think stuff like this is "gratuitous.")
But since you can never be expected to answer for your false accusations or admit being wrong, especially in light of your arrogant and condescending charges, you're given freedom by the mods to completely derail this thread as you see fit.
(Mean, snarky, rude, crude, insulting Wade is the real problem here, not civil, temperate Kevin)
Poor abused, put upon, victimized Kevin Graham, after the thread had been evacuated of all defenders of the Book of Abraham save for Wade, and after having been allowed numerous violations of the insult warning (the mods kindly deleting his many cut-downs instead of enforcing the warning), launches into a full scale personal assault on Wade:
This is just a classic example of where an apologist is permitted to completely take over a discussion and derail it as he sees fit. He polluted this thread with his false accusations, and he pressed the point up until the time he realized he screwed up. Conveniently, he then decides to "hold his tongue" so he won't have to address the fact that he falsely accused me of doing precisely what he has been doing from the beginning. Why is he allowed to get away with this? In what corner of the universe does this resemble an attempt to foster civil discourse when one side can make wild allegations without a shred of evidence or understanding, and then completely forego all obligation to explain oneself when the evidence proves you were just making stuff up? Wade demanded a verdict about my credibility when he launched his baseless accusations, and the mods went along with it. However, when I prove beyond all doubt that it was wade, not I, who didn't properly understand Gee's argument, suddenly I'm not permitted to demand a verdict concerning wade's true agenda. Suddenly this all becomes "gratuitous insult."
If wade refuses to address the topic of this thread and he refuses to address my remarks or answer for his baseless attacks, then why is he permitted to continue in this thread at all? He has offered nothing of value pertaining to the topic and he has refused to finish the debate topic which he started; questioning my integrity and ability to properly represent Gee. He understands nothing of these documents or arguments and all he ever does is ask questions from those in the know, to get a quick education and then he uses that limited information to formulate knee-jerk "analysis" that of course accuses us of misrepresenting someone or something.
And there were three remarks that were completely edited out from my posts by the moderators, claiming I had provided "gratuitous insults." In each example I merely responded by pointing out that wade is guilty of the things he had attributed to me, but strangely enough all of his verbal assaults remain on the thread in all their glory. I also said he was just poisoning the well, but that was deleted too! By contrast, wade told me I was "self-deluded," which is something that got me thread-banned months ago. He said I was "incapable of rational input." He was allowed to preach to his imagined audience about my so-called history of misunderstanding and "remarkable penchant for misrepresentation," despite the fact that not a single example has been provided. These remarks stand untouched by the mods. However, if I prove it is wade who has misunderstood and misrepresented, then my remark, "the evidence shows that it is wade, not I, who has misrepresented..." is edited out and replaced with a flaming red accusation of "gratuitous insult." Amazing.
And wade is also allowed to argue with the mods, in which case they respond with an apology and then tell me that the guy who keeps falsely accusing me of misrepresentation while referring to me in third person, has been "nothing but nice" to me!
Then, finally, at the 11th hour (more like near the very proverbial witching hour), the mods intervene:
You are in the no insult zone. Nice try but every poster has complied since the last warning except you. So of course no one else has had insults removed. Earlier insults remain untouched along with yours so going back in time to paint a picture that you are still being insulted isn't going to work. As of now all gratuitious insults will be removed but no one but you has made them. You continue to be given more leeway than any other poster because a post like this would get any other off-topic and noncompliant poster thread banned.
Or, did I misspeak? Graham was
still not banned. Indeed, here the mods clearly admit, unwittingly perhaps, that certain posters will be allowed exemptions from board rules, while others will be punished. Its no wonder everyone complied but Graham as nobody who could be conceived as a strong or articulate defender of the Book of Abraham had been allowed to remain in the conversation, and it is precisely those who would be the most tempted to retaliate at Graham's constant personal low blows.
Apparently sensing the futility of it all, Bill Hamblin leaps into the shark tank:
Xander:
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone.
Hamblin:
You've been there a long time
No waring to William.
Graham then launched into another lengthy pity party post detailing his ill treatment by the mods.
The surreality is endless.
