John Gee is a defender of lies

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _Droopy »

harmony wrote:
Enuma Elish wrote:I think it's probably more a reflection of our lay ministry, with Gospel Doctrine lessons proliferating non-sophisticated views as revealed truth.


So now you're blaming the local bishops and/or Gospel Doctrine teachers for the lack of substance and our unsophisticated views of revealed truth? Because we don't all have jobs that allow us to study our religion deeply enough to gain sophisticated views of revealed truth, like yourself?

Someone has to pay the tithing, so you can get paid, EE. Maybe you could try harder to not insult the hand that puts food on your table?


So that's why your general knowledge of even rudimentary gospel doctrine has traditionally been so weak. You're just too busy.

And here all along I've put it down to simply not being particularly interested or serious about it.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _Droopy »

You are correct, yet again, lord Shades. Joseph Smith was in fact a liar and when he published his revelation to the world in the Times & Seasons that the name Shulem was contained in the hieroglyphic writing of Facsimile No. 3, he was knowingly telling a lie. And yet we have Nibley and his stooge, coming here to MD to defend this. How pitiful.

Little wonder Joseph boy was tarred and feathered. He deserved it, and more.



I'd love to be your psychotherapist Paul. It would be a fascinating process uncovering the real issues gnawing and boring away at your soul.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Brackite
_Emeritus
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:12 am

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _Brackite »

in my opinion, LDS Apologist Dr. John Gee has been intellectually dishonest with his Book of Abraham Apologetics.

The Following is from what Egyptologist Professor Robert K. Ritner stated:


The original width of the papyrus was correctly estimated by Baer as being about 150–55 cm, allowing for textual restorations and the now lost Facsimile 3. 33

...

33 Baer, p. 127, n. 113. There is no justification for
Gee’s unsubstantiated attempt to more than double this
figure to “320 cm (about 10 feet)” in Gee, A Guide to
the Joseph Smith Papyri, pp. 10 and 12–13. Gee presumably
wishes to allow space for a supposedly “lost
hieratic text” of The Book of Abraham; his figure
derives from the average length of a manufactured
(blank) Ptolemaic papyrus roll—not comparable, individual
documents cut from such a roll.


Link: http://www.bookofabraham.com/ritner_article.pdf


Please Also Check Out and See:

Why Nibley And Gee Cannot Be Trusted:
Last edited by MSNbot Media on Tue Apr 20, 2010 1:45 am, edited 2 times in total.
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _harmony »

Enuma Elish wrote:You know, believe it nor, Institute instructors are not paid to research, study, and/or publish, only to teach. Case in point. This semester, I teach two graduate level courses at Harvard, two undergraduate courses at MIT, and one Wednesday and Tuesday night course in Cambridge. This in addition to coordinating the early morning seminary classes for the Cambridge, MA and Nashua, NH Stakes and serving as an LDS Chaplain at Harvard.

If I was a regular college professor, want to take a guess how many classes I would be teaching at one location? It would be an insult for any of the professors I studied with for my MA and PhD to be asked to teach more than two classes per semester.


You didn't address the point, EE. Most members don't have access to the resources you do. Yet you're blaming us for our lack of sophistication? Blaming our teachers for teaching us that which is the manual?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Paul Osborne

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _Paul Osborne »

Enuma Elish wrote: Not everyone is out to deceive you Paul. I honestly wish you nothing but peace and happiness. I simply refuse to subject scripture, the Prophet Joseph Smith, and revelation to the highly simplistic paradigm that has caused you so much distress. Based upon my experiences, neither scriptural texts, nor life itself accords with the strict fundamentalist views you endorse.


Joseph Smith was out to deceive all of us, David. He succeeded quite well in many respects but he couldn’t hold me to his aim. Indeed, Joseph Smith was a liar and a false prophet. I broke him through the veil! Come, join me, and deny the faith. There are other faiths for you to attach too, David. You can find peace outside of Mormonism. Trust me; there is peace for you outside of Mormonism! You will take that step when you are ready. We are here to support you and will love you just as you are.

Paul O
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _harmony »

Enuma Elish wrote:In contrast to Paul, in my mind, Joseph Smith’s use and interpretation of Facsimile 3 provides one of the greatest pieces of evidence for the Prophet’s inspiration.


By the time Joseph wrote the Book of Abraham, he had already lost his prophetic mantle. The papyri was purchased in 1835, after his affair with Fanny and prior to the restoration of the sealing power. He had already chosen his fate. Everything he did after Fanny is suspect.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _Droopy »

By the time Joseph wrote the Book of Abraham, he had already lost his prophetic mantle. The papyri was purchased in 1835, after his affair with Fanny and prior to the restoration of the sealing power. He had already chosen his fate. Everything he did after Fanny is suspect.



Of course, what Harmony means here is Joseph's marriage and sealing to Fanny, not his affair (for which no documentary evidence exists).

But why let fair, intellectually honest analysis get in the way of one's agenda?
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Paul Osborne

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _Paul Osborne »

Droopy wrote:I'll just use Paul's response to me here and to enuma above to answer Runtu's personal attack on me on the page previous, and to make the point that needs to be made. I have never, as of yet, seen anything of intellectual substance come from Paul's keyboard. Nothing.

I have never seen him engage a TBM with anything approaching an ounce of civility. The lack of four letter words and vulgar sexual references in these two above posts are quite unexpected.

I stand by what I said before, that Paul is, in essence, a vulgar anti-Mormon stand-up comic. His inability to even approach an intellectually serious or scholarly discourse with enuma is simply the usual performance he delivers here, and based upon most of what I have experienced of him since I've been around these parts, I do not believe for a second that it is anything approaching purly scholarly or intellectual problems with the Book of Abraham that drove him from the Church and which drives him to act out on this board like a rebellious teenager trying to get past his parents and out of the house to smoke a joint


Oh Droopy, boy. Have a drink or a blow for your nose.

Listen, Joseph Smith lied to you when he said the name Shulem was written in the characters of Facsimile No. 3. Did you hear what I just said, Droopy? He lied to YOU. SHULEM, SHULEM, SHULEM. Now Droopy, swear by your throat in the name of Satan that you believe Joseph Smith knew Egyptology by his pretended revelation!

I mock your prophet.

Paul O
_Joseph Antley
_Emeritus
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 6:26 pm

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _Joseph Antley »

Joseph Antley wrote:
Paul Osborne wrote:Joseph Smith was in fact a liar and when he published his revelation to the world in the Times & Seasons that the name Shulem was contained in the hieroglyphic writing of Facsimile No. 3, he was knowingly telling a lie.


Out of curiosity, how do you know that Joseph did not really believe that he was inspired to translate a record, and thus genuinely believed that his translation was correct?


Bump.
"I'd say Joseph, that your anger levels are off the charts. What you are, Joseph, is a bully." - Gadianton
"Antley's anger is approaching...levels of volcanic hatred." - Scratch

http://Twitter.com/jtantley
_RockSlider
_Emeritus
Posts: 6752
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:02 am

Re: John Gee is a defender of lies

Post by _RockSlider »

Joseph Antley wrote:Bump.


How about you Joseph, are you of the thinking of missing portions or catalyst theory?


David, your explanations here, in my mind did not clearly place you in either camp, how would you characterize yourself in this regard?
Post Reply