John Gee is a defender of lies

[_truth dancer]

The thing is, one (even a five year old), can take any picture, let's go with an Egyptian painting, and even without the least bit of knowledge or understanding of anything Egyptian, come up with a story that one could "make work." The way some apologists (read Nibley...smile), come up with "hits" makes one wonder what would be a miss.

I'm pretty sure that one could take ANY picture and make it fit ANY story... this phenomenon has become an art form.

:-)

In terms of the Book of Abraham, I'm guessing that within my lifetime it will go the way of D&C 101:4 and the Lectures of Faith. ;-) Or at least, it will be in the category of the Songs of Solomon.

~td~

[_Droopy]

You didn't address Dr Gee's comment, EE.

Is the church moving away from the canon?

Of course it isn't. What on earth would give you this idea?

The only people I can think of who would seriously consider the Church moving away from its own scriptures, is someone who has thoroughly moved away from the Church.

[_zeezrom]

Of course, the only way to know that the Book of Abraham is divinely inspired scripture is through the principle of revelation. Scholarship is only an adjunct to this, but its power to support a positive view of Joseph as having far more knowledge of the materials he had than he possibly could have had, is startling.

I have received revelation (personal to me) that Book of Abraham is unnecessary for human existence and simply a lie. Yeah, we might be able to find a couple of interesting sentences in there that could be interpreted in a way to encourage us to be better people, but that is it for me.

[_Droopy]

The thing is, one (even a five year old), can take any picture, let's go with an Egyptian painting, and even without the least bit of knowledge or understanding of anything Egyptian, come up with a story that one could "make work." The way some apologists (read Nibley...smile), come up with "hits" makes one wonder what would be a miss.

I'm pretty sure that one could take ANY picture and make it fit ANY story... this phenomenon has become an art form.

Why don't you take some time to become familiar with what the Book of Abraham actually says, and then with the relevant competent LDS scholarship on the matter. Then you could familiarize yourself with the corpus of ancient Abraham literature, celestial ascent literature and ancient near eastern religious ritual texts involving similar themes and motifs that were not available to Joseph Smith, or even known at all, in many cases, in Joseph's day, that closely parallels the Book of Abraham?

Once you had done this, you could avoid embarrassingly facile attacks on the Book of Abraham as you've indulged in above.

[_Droopy]

I have received revelation (personal to me) that Book of Abraham is unnecessary for human existence and simply a lie. Yeah, we might be able to find a couple of interesting sentences in there that could be interpreted in a way to encourage us to be better people, but that is it for me.

If you wish to be taken seriously in your criticisms, than be serious. Otherwise, you're just another Paul Osborne: a fuming anti-Mormon stand-up comic.

[_Joseph Antley]

You didn't address Dr Gee's comment, EE.

Is the church moving away from the canon?

Dr. Gee didn't make that comment.

[_zeezrom]

Droopy,

Please list the great truths of the Book of Abraham that help mankind, starting with the most important:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Thank you.

[_truth dancer]

Once you had done this, you could avoid embarrassingly facile attacks on the Book of Abraham as you've indulged in above.

No offense Droopy, but I think the only embarrassing thing here is that there are people who think the Book of Abraham is actually the writings of Abraham.

;-)

I do not know where I engaged in facile attacks on the Book of Abraham. My point was about the ability of some folk to make hits where others see none. (smile) Again, when it comes to the Book of Abraham, one has to wonder what is a miss.

~td~

[_RockSlider]

Enuma Elish,

First off, for what it's worth, I've somewhat followed your posting here and on MAD and respect you for it.

I would like to follow some good information on this topic, and it appears you are up on the details fairly well.

It had seemed to me that over the past, that the main apologetic players were dropping like flies. I am just very surprised that it is not Gee presenting the material you have given here; instead it appears he is backing away from it.

Where can/will we expect to see scholarly defense of the Book of Abraham in the future?

Kudos for jumping into the fray, as usual you handle it well.

[_Dwight Frye]

These type of ritual gestures appear in biblical tradition connected with temple worship described in the Psalms: “Until I went into the sanctuary of God; then understood I their end… I am continually with thee: thou hast holden me by my right hand. Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel, and afterward receive me to glory” (Psalm 73:17-24).

Thanks for your thoughtful, interesting post, Enuma. I have a question about this bit in Psalms. In reading through the part represented by ellipsis, it seems to me David (or whoever) is tying his visit to "the sanctuary of God" with his realization of the ultimate fate of the wicked. While his mention of the hand thing follows this, I'm not sure I can see that it is as directly related to his visit to the "sanctuary" as you seem to suggest. But, given your training, you're obviously in a better place than I am to know.

So I suppose my question is: Have any non-LDS scholars picked up on the significance of the handholding mentioned in v. 23 in relation to "the sanctuary of God" mentioned in v. 17?

Thanks for your post, and I hope it receives more interesting interaction than it has so far generated.