DiscussMormonism.com

. . . I am going to go out on a limb here.

Perhaps I'm missing something that's obvious to everyone else. If so, then I apologize in advance for my ignorance.

That said, is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking?

Specifically, William Schryver has made three repeated claims:

1. There is an upcoming publication that will prove, once and for all, that the Book of Abraham manuscripts--the ones with the Egyptian characters in the left margins--were actually produced by copying and not dictation.
2. There are several top-tier, top-ranked, yet unnamed LDS scholars/apologists working on this project.
3. Will Schryver is in close confidence with this group, and he has made at least one important contribution to the knowledge of this group vis-a-vis evidence for dictation.

I am now calling Will's bluff. I hereby submit the following three things:

1. Regarding the Book of Abraham and the refutation of critics, there is no publication or project in the works, to be revealed in in either the near future or at any other time. This is a fiction invented by Schryver himself and no one else.
2. There is no group of LDS scholars/apologists--whether top-tier, top-ranked or otherwise--that is working on any sort of project to prove that the manuscripts were produced by copying, not dictation. This, too, is a fiction invented by Schryver himself and no one else.
3. Will Schryver is not in close confidence with this group, nor has he made any sort of contribution to this group whatsoever, since this supposed group doesn't actually exist. This, too, is nothing more than a fiction invented by Schryver himself and no one else.

I am, of course, open to any objective evidence from any other source--outside of Will Schryver's mere say-so, of course--that I am wrong. And if I am indeed wrong, I will openly apologize for starting this thread.

Anyone?

I would be interested to hear what Will has to say. He seems to have disappeared from this board for a couple of weeks.

The other person who might know something about Will's claims is Daniel.

I, too, am very curious to hear what Will has to say for himself, and what type of documentation he is willing to provide to substantiate his claim. And, if for some reason, he pull his "the trailer park isn't worthy" crap, then, Will, please, by all means, at least provide us a link to MAD with the appropriate information. Surely, MAD is still worthy of your time.

liz3564 wrote:I would be interested to hear what Will has to say.

With all due respect, I have little to no interest in what Will has to say.

It's self-evident that he'll call me names and then just repeat everything he's already claimed over and over already. Therefore, I'm only interested in whether anyone else can provide backup for one or more of Will's claims.

Dr. Shades wrote:

liz3564 wrote:I would be interested to hear what Will has to say.

With all due respect, I have little to no interest in what Will has to say.

It's self-evident that he'll call me names and then just repeat everything he's already claimed over and over already. Therefore, I'm only interested in whether anyone else can provide backup for one or more of Will's claims.

I just thought that if Will provided some excerpts from the publication in question that he has been alluding to, that would contribute to supporting evidence.

It would be extreme for someone to fabricate the entire idea, although not impossible. I think it's far more likely he's exaggerated both the importance of the upcoming article as well as his own contribution. Grandiosity is the key to deciphering Willie.

Hi Shades,

Yes, I think you summarize the claims accurately.

Let me help you out here:

There is an upcoming publication that will prove, once and for all, that the Book of Abraham manuscripts--the ones with the Egyptian characters in the left margins--were actually produced by copying and not dictation.

Interpretation:

In the future there will be papers and publications discussing the Book of Abraham and its various theories of origin.

There are several top-tier, top-ranked, yet unnamed LDS scholars/apologists working on this project.

Interpretation:

A few LDS scholars and apologists continue to research and study the Book of Abraham, (perhaps the LDS church is allowing these scholars to actually study the papyri)?.

Will Schryver is in close confidence with this group, and he has made at least one important contribution to the knowledge of this group vis-a-vis evidence for dictation.

Interpretation:

Will is interested in discussions concerning the Book of Abraham and has interacted with a few apologists with similar interests.

Hope that helps!



~td~

Dr. Shades wrote:. . . I am going to go out on a limb here.

Perhaps I'm missing something that's obvious to everyone else. If so, then I apologize in advance for my ignorance.

That said, is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking?

Specifically, William Schryver has made three repeated claims:

1. There is an upcoming publication that will prove, once and for all, that the Book of Abraham manuscripts--the ones with the Egyptian characters in the left margins--were actually produced by copying and not dictation.
2. There are several top-tier, top-ranked, yet unnamed LDS scholars/apologists working on this project.
3. Will Schryver is in close confidence with this group, and he has made at least one important contribution to the knowledge of this group vis-a-vis evidence for dictation.

I am now calling Will's bluff. I hereby submit the following three things:

1. Regarding the Book of Abraham and the refutation of critics, there is no publication or project in the works, to be revealed in in either the near future or at any other time. This is a fiction invented by Schryver himself and no one else.
2. There is no group of LDS scholars/apologists--whether top-tier, top-ranked or otherwise--that is working on any sort of project to prove that the manuscripts were produced by copying, not dictation. This, too, is a fiction invented by Schryver himself and no one else.
3. Will Schryver is not in close confidence with this group, nor has he made any sort of contribution to this group whatsoever, since this supposed group doesn't actually exist. This, too, is nothing more than a fiction invented by Schryver himself and no one else.

I am, of course, open to any objective evidence from any other source--outside of Will Schryver's mere say-so, of course--that I am wrong. And if I am indeed wrong, I will openly apologize for starting this thread.

Anyone?

You've nailed it, Shades.



The whole thing is a figment of my imagination.

Or a pigment of my exaggeration.

Or something like that.

I know I'm eventually going to be exposed as a base fraud, but I'm such an out-of-control attention seeker that I just can't control my urges, and so here I am: I have dug myself so deeply into this pit of delusion and deception that it really doesn't matter anymore how far-fetched the claims might be--it's all gonna blow up in spectacular fashion before long, so why not ride it for all it's worth?

Besides, some chicks just dig a reckless loser on the fast track to self-destruction.

And who says "William Schryver" is a real person anyway? For all you know, I could be Joseph Smith reincarnated, living in a single-wide on the outskirts of nowhere, with a laptop and a dial-up connection, crafting elaborate self-aggrandizing fantasies to gratify my own twisted sense of irony and humor. In fact, I think you should explore that avenue a little further, it sounds like a much more compelling story than the one you're suggesting above.

OK, gotta go now. My seer stone is beeping ...

I know I'm eventually going to be exposed as a base fraud, but I'm such an out-of-control attention seeker that I just can't control my urges, and so here I am

I fear there is some truth to this. Please, feel free to express otherwise. You know that all I ever cared about was the truth or, at least getting closer to it.

Paul O

I think the best that Will (or anyone) can do is show that there is not enough information to judge the Book of Abraham a fraud. It is also the worst any Book of Abraham critic can do.