DiscussMormonism.com

June 19 from 7–8:30 p.m. in Provo, UT

Olivewood Books, Art and Media
3330 N. University Ave., Suite C
Provo, UT 84604

Go to learn how John Gee is the only Egyptologist on the planet who thinks that Joseph Smith somehow pulled the Book Of Abraham out of the Egyptian papyri, or his ass.

Somebody should bring facsimile #3 and engage this idiot about the mis-labeled figures.

And no, I'm not going to waste my time with his drivel.

Love this response drummed up over on RFM to ask Gee:

1) Sir, in my Book of Abraham, on facsimile 3, I read that Fig. 2. is King Pharaoh, "whose name is given in the characters above his head." How do the characters above Fig. 2 read? Can you interpret these characters?

2) Could you also please help me with Fig. 4? The Book of Abraham indicates that Fig. 4. is Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, "as written above the hand." What is actually written above the hand of Fig. 4?

3) Finally, can I ask you about Fig. 5? The Book of Abraham text and Joseph Smith tell us that this Shulem, one of the king’s principal waiters, "as represented by the characters above his hand." What do the characters above his hand actually mean?

Thank you, Mr. Gee

Anyone know if this is being filmed for FAIR's YouTube channel? I'd love to see it.

If the characters in Fac. 3 actually did translate to what Joseph Smith claimed they did, then we would be forced to believe, and would lose the chance to take the Book of Abraham on faith alone - which is superior to using logic, and it's what god wants, right? God is testing you, and you have failed.

Who Knows wrote:If the characters in Fac. 3 actually did translate to what Joseph Smith claimed they did, then we would be forced to believe, and would lose the chance to take the Book of Abraham on faith alone - which is superior to using logic, and it's what god wants, right? God is testing you, and you have failed.

Seems watertight to me.

Similarly, the Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses were tested and failed too. They should have refused to go anywhere near the plates, so that they could have had the glory of belief through faith alone.

I suppose the same thing would go for anyone who believed in the reality of the Book of Mormon on the basis or partial basis of the witnesses' testimony, rather than through the witness of the Holy Ghost (it is all right to ask Him, isn't it?).

Why DID the prophet put all that stuff into the Book of Mormon prefatory matter when he must have know it would lead to the spiritual shipwreck of all involved?

Chap wrote:

Who Knows wrote:If the characters in Fac. 3 actually did translate to what Joseph Smith claimed they did, then we would be forced to believe, and would lose the chance to take the Book of Abraham on faith alone - which is superior to using logic, and it's what god wants, right? God is testing you, and you have failed.

Seems watertight to me.

Similarly, the Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses were tested and failed too. They should have refused to go anywhere near the plates, so that they could have had the glory of belief through faith alone.

I suppose the same thing would go for anyone who believed in the reality of the Book of Mormon on the basis or partial basis of the witnesses' testimony, rather than through the witness of the Holy Ghost (it is all right to ask Him, isn't it?).

Why DID the prophet put all that stuff into the Book of Mormon prefatory matter when he must have know it would lead to the spiritual shipwreck of all involved?

To separate the sheeples from the goatles?

malkie wrote:

Chap wrote:

Who Knows wrote:If the characters in Fac. 3 actually did translate to what Joseph Smith claimed they did, then we would be forced to believe, and would lose the chance to take the Book of Abraham on faith alone - which is superior to using logic, and it's what god wants, right? God is testing you, and you have failed.

Seems watertight to me.

Similarly, the Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses were tested and failed too. They should have refused to go anywhere near the plates, so that they could have had the glory of belief through faith alone.

I suppose the same thing would go for anyone who believed in the reality of the Book of Mormon on the basis or partial basis of the witnesses' testimony, rather than through the witness of the Holy Ghost (it is all right to ask Him, isn't it?).

Why DID the prophet put all that stuff into the Book of Mormon prefatory matter when he must have know it would lead to the spiritual shipwreck of all involved?

To separate the sheeples from the goatles?

LMAO!

Pardon my candor, but I think it rather cowardly of you to attack the man without being willing to attend a short lecture and ask him some questions in person.

Who Knows wrote:If the characters in Fac. 3 actually did translate to what Joseph Smith claimed they did, then we would be forced to believe, and would lose the chance to take the Book of Abraham on faith alone - which is superior to using logic, and it's what god wants, right? God is testing you, and you have failed.

Whenever a person decides to use an argument that goes something like "You shouldn't have to use logic to believe so that's why God didn't use any." it translates into "I don't have any facts to back up my claim so therefor you're a sinner"

LifeOnaPlate wrote:Pardon my candor, but I think it rather cowardly of you to attack the man without being willing to attend a short lecture and ask him some questions in person.

I so agree with LoaF.
If you needed some gas money to go there I certainly would wire it to you.
It is disingenuous for you strike low blows about Kolob, Enish GoOndosh, Zelph, Nephilim.......
Give me a ring before you lack funds to confront idiots like him...

Pardon my candor, but I think it rather cowardly of you to attack the man without being willing to attend a short lecture and ask him some questions in person.

Are you serious?

John Gee is the coward. I know this from first hand experience. Back in 2002 he was too chicken crap to confront Metcalfe on the KEP, but that didn't stop him from emailing me and telling me what to say in his place.

Gee has already destroyed his credibility with this deceptive two ink theory. Even amateurs like Chris Smith have been able to show the guy is completely lacking in the critical thinkng dept.

Gee doesn't even face up to his critics. He prefers to push his new drug onto an ignorant crowd who knows nothing about his history in Book of Abraham apologetics.

WHat I find so funny, and so telling, is how the Book of Abraham issue is obviously their achilles heel. They want to keep everything on the down-low; secret whenever possible. Hauglid gives a presentation of photos but refuses to let the photos be filmed during the DVD production. Gee, what's he afraid of?

Why is it that every time I go to MADB posting the million dollar questions, I get banned immediately and all of the posts removed?

What are they so afraid of?

And why is Hauglid and Will lying to their audience when they say that they are not even aware of what the critical evidence is with regards to dictation. It was handed to Hauglid on a silver platter just weeks before his presentation. He ignored every opportunity to explain them within his copyist model. And then during his presentation he has the audacity to say he hasn't heard any evidemce.

Just so his audience will think this is because teh critics" don't have any!

Will is over at MADB doing the same damn thing too. I pointed out that he had been called out here several times and he fled. He was also schooled on this subject back in may of 2006 by Metcalfe, and he abandoned the discussion. This was when Will wasn't even aware of basic issues, such as who the scribes were!

So their exposure and awareness of these evidences have been documented all over these forums for years, but when they are locked safe away in their precious "pundits" forum, they know they can get away with anything they want. So they lie. They say they haven't even seen any evidence! Of course this lie is used to bolster their ridiculous copyist theory.

The end justifies the means. Keep the flock ignorant and believing.