"I have decided that my best interests are not served by continuing to participate on internet message boards, therefore I have resolved to refrain from that activity in the future—at least as much as is humanly possible for a weak person like me who has a really hard time biting his tongue.
Plus, I'm still mad at Nemesis for being unjustifiably rude to me, so I told him I'm going to take my ball, go home, and not play on his stupid message board anymore.
<snip>
There is really very little that could be characterized as “new” data. Rather, I have assembled the long-available data in such a way that it will finally make sense.
Incidentally, none of my fundamental findings are based on having exclusive access to the high-resolution scans of the papyri and the KEP. Refinements and additional confirmations were greatly facilitated by having the images, but probably 90% of the findings derive from my analysis of the Tanner/Marquardt transcriptions that have been available to the general public for decades."
Mr. Schryver will be lurking. He may not post. He will not start threads. He will be watching. He must see the response on MADB and more importantly here. He cannot resist. It will be like a bug in his brain eating at his core until he clicks on.
I suspect that once Mr. Schryver is done presenting his slide show, the faithful in attendance will rise, lock arms and sing Cumbaya! The FAIR conference will end. The faithful will begin pounding their keyboards. Gleeful posts will appear on MA&D, sneering posts will appear here.
About the 4th page into the celebratory MA&D thread, Mr. Brent Metcalfe will post a couple of tidbits that at first seem odd. The faithful will scratch their heads, then continue their gleeful high-fiving posts.
Mr. Chris Smith, Mr. Kevin Graham and you, sir, will begin explaining to us what assumptions Mr. Schryver made, what gloss overs are critical to his giving a single, salutary explanation to the KEP.
Professor Peterson will then enter the fray. Only on the MA&D board, mind you. He will exclaim, "Why on earth would... ." That 'would' being doubt an explanation as facile as Mr. Schryver has put together. Professor Peterson will proclaim it beautiful in its simplicity. "I can't imagine why on earth the KEP would detract from one's faith that JSJr was God's tool here on earth," he will post. Then another post at MA&D by Mr. Metcalfe. Now, the faithful minions will understand what Mr. Metcalfe's first post meant. Oh, no. Professor Peterson will be too buy to deal with Mr. Metcalfe, promising to do so later.
As Scott Lloyd and LoaP flounder, Mr. Schryver will at last surface. No longer able to contain himself. He will ask whether anyone watched his presentation. Yes will be the answer. Mr. Schryver will then wax erudite in trying to reestablish his credibility. (I.e., baffle 'em with BS.) Mr. Bokovoy will then enter the fray, asking "Why on earth would Joseph produce the KEP knowing it had nothing to do with the papyrii? It did not. His scribes were just trying to figure out what Joseph was doing." Mr. mfbukowski will then appear and explain that in his infinite understanding of logic, Mr. Schryer's presentation allows for a gestalt of the Book of Abraham situation.
Weeks will pass. Messrs. Metcalfe, Smith, and Graham, as well as you, will poke hole after hole after hole in presentation and "logic" behind it. The remaining cloth of Mr. Schryver's presentation will soon be dust. At MADB, USU78 will decry as absurd what the critics are finding as an inability of them to understand without 'the Spirit' guiding them. The Holy Ghost after all will have told him that Mr. Schryver is right.
As I walk out of Mr. Schryver's presentation, on the other hand, I will simply pound my forehead with the palm of my hand and immediately exclaim, "gee, I could've had a V8." So if I have a dumb look on my face as I exit the presentation, please do not mistake it as my having witnessed a vision of Mother Mary, much less that I have been overcome by Mr. Schryver.
Regards,
Spider.
Speaking of Rodin's sculpture, BYU official Alan Wilkins observed: "'The Thinker' does not represent the sort of activity that we believe is appropriate for the BYU setting."
I have really got to get into the Book of Abraham. Seems that is where all the action is. Most threads about Book of Abraham on this board are way over my head. Have there been any Book of Abraham for dummy threads?
It is my province to teach to the Church what the doctrine is. It is your province to echo what I say or to remain silent. Bruce R. McConkie
Willy Law wrote:I have really got to get into the Book of Abraham. Seems that is where all the action is. Most threads about Book of Abraham on this board are way over my head. Have there been any Book of Abraham for dummy threads?
Mr. Willy Law,
Book of Abraham for dummies? Actually, that is the great Mormon hope that Will is to deliver. If you cannot be there on August 6 in person, then please sign up for the webcast. It is "Must see TV."
In the meantime, Mr. Schryver can assure you that you do not even know enough to ask the right questions.
Regards,
Spider.
Speaking of Rodin's sculpture, BYU official Alan Wilkins observed: "'The Thinker' does not represent the sort of activity that we believe is appropriate for the BYU setting."
Willy Law wrote:I have really got to get into the Book of Abraham. Seems that is where all the action is. Most threads about Book of Abraham on this board are way over my head. Have there been any Book of Abraham for dummy threads?
If I'm not mistaken, Kevin Graham once toyed with the idea of making some YouTube videos laying the groundwork of the Book of Abraham controversy. I hope he will consider it again.
"Christian anti-Mormons are no different than that wonderful old man down the street who turns out to be a child molester." - Obiwan, nutjob Mormon apologist - Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:25 pm
Interesting. I know it isn't a new thing, but don't you wonder why Will Schryver uses a different font than the default? He didn't do this from the start, back when I knew him in the early days.
It's like he's been preparing us for this ascendance to a higher plane, beyond message boards. Once in a while he may appear in our kingdom, gracing us with posts in a different font, maybe even a different color.
Brent Metcalf does the same thing.
Isn't that weird?
William Schryver wrote:So come and watch me walk that fine line between pretentiousness and audacity.
Oh, I wish I could be there to see you, Will. I hope you aren't going to try and memorize it like David Stewart. That would be really weird.
Good luck.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
"I have decided that my best interests are not served by continuing to participate on internet message boards, therefore I have resolved to refrain from that activity in the future—at least as much as is humanly possible for a weak person like me who has a really hard time biting his tongue.
Plus, I'm still mad at Nemesis for being unjustifiably rude to me, so I told him I'm going to take my ball, go home, and not play on his stupid message board anymore.
Hmmm.. I wonder if the MAD folk, and Juliann in particular, are laying the groundwork for distancing themselves from Will?
(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.
Spider-to-the-Fly wrote:I suspect that once Mr. Schryver is done presenting his slide show, the faithful in attendance will rise, lock arms and sing Cumbaya! The FAIR conference will end. The faithful will begin pounding their keyboards. Gleeful posts will appear on MA&D, sneering posts will appear here.
About the 4th page into the celebratory MA&D thread, Mr. Brent Metcalfe will post a couple of tidbits that at first seem odd. The faithful will scratch their heads, then continue their gleeful high-fiving posts.
Mr. Chris Smith, Mr. Kevin Graham and you, sir, will begin explaining to us what assumptions Mr. Schryver made, what gloss overs are critical to his giving a single, salutary explanation to the KEP.
Professor Peterson will then enter the fray. Only on the MA&D board, mind you. He will exclaim, "Why on earth would... ." That 'would' being doubt an explanation as facile as Mr. Schryver has put together. Professor Peterson will proclaim it beautiful in its simplicity. "I can't imagine why on earth the KEP would detract from one's faith that JSJr was God's tool here on earth," he will post. Then another post at MA&D by Mr. Metcalfe. Now, the faithful minions will understand what Mr. Metcalfe's first post meant. Oh, no. Professor Peterson will be too buy to deal with Mr. Metcalfe, promising to do so later.
As Scott Lloyd and LoaP flounder, Mr. Schryver will at last surface. No longer able to contain himself. He will ask whether anyone watched his presentation. Yes will be the answer. Mr. Schryver will then wax erudite in trying to reestablish his credibility. (I.e., baffle 'em with BS.) Mr. Bokovoy will then enter the fray, asking "Why on earth would Joseph produce the KEP knowing it had nothing to do with the papyrii? It did not. His scribes were just trying to figure out what Joseph was doing." Mr. mfbukowski will then appear and explain that in his infinite understanding of logic, Mr. Schryer's presentation allows for a gestalt of the Book of Abraham situation.
Weeks will pass. Messrs. Metcalfe, Smith, and Graham, as well as you, will poke hole after hole after hole in presentation and "logic" behind it. The remaining cloth of Mr. Schryver's presentation will soon be dust. At MADB, USU78 will decry as absurd what the critics are finding as an inability of them to understand without 'the Spirit' guiding them. The Holy Ghost after all will have told him that Mr. Schryver is right.
Yea, the prophet doth speak.
(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.
Spider-to-the-Fly wrote:I suspect that once Mr. Schryver is done presenting his slide show, the faithful in attendance will rise, lock arms and sing Cumbaya! The FAIR conference will end. The faithful will begin pounding their keyboards. Gleeful posts will appear on MA&D, sneering posts will appear here.
About the 4th page into the celebratory MA&D thread, Mr. Brent Metcalfe will post a couple of tidbits that at first seem odd. The faithful will scratch their heads, then continue their gleeful high-fiving posts.
Mr. Chris Smith, Mr. Kevin Graham and you, sir, will begin explaining to us what assumptions Mr. Schryver made, what gloss overs are critical to his giving a single, salutary explanation to the KEP.
Professor Peterson will then enter the fray. Only on the MA&D board, mind you. He will exclaim, "Why on earth would... ." That 'would' being doubt an explanation as facile as Mr. Schryver has put together. Professor Peterson will proclaim it beautiful in its simplicity. "I can't imagine why on earth the KEP would detract from one's faith that JSJr was God's tool here on earth," he will post. Then another post at MA&D by Mr. Metcalfe. Now, the faithful minions will understand what Mr. Metcalfe's first post meant. Oh, no. Professor Peterson will be too buy to deal with Mr. Metcalfe, promising to do so later.
As Scott Lloyd and LoaP flounder, Mr. Schryver will at last surface. No longer able to contain himself. He will ask whether anyone watched his presentation. Yes will be the answer. Mr. Schryver will then wax erudite in trying to reestablish his credibility. (I.e., baffle 'em with BS.) Mr. Bokovoy will then enter the fray, asking "Why on earth would Joseph produce the KEP knowing it had nothing to do with the papyrii? It did not. His scribes were just trying to figure out what Joseph was doing." Mr. mfbukowski will then appear and explain that in his infinite understanding of logic, Mr. Schryer's presentation allows for a gestalt of the Book of Abraham situation.
Weeks will pass. Messrs. Metcalfe, Smith, and Graham, as well as you, will poke hole after hole after hole in presentation and "logic" behind it. The remaining cloth of Mr. Schryver's presentation will soon be dust. At MADB, USU78 will decry as absurd what the critics are finding as an inability of them to understand without 'the Spirit' guiding them. The Holy Ghost after all will have told him that Mr. Schryver is right.
Yea, the prophet doth speak.
Ms. harmony,
Just one thing to say, 'oh, darn'. I was shooting for a Dr. Seuss style in this post. I guess when you aim for the stars, sometimes you nevertheless land in a puddle of mud.
Regards,
Spider, cleaning the mud out of my eyes.
Speaking of Rodin's sculpture, BYU official Alan Wilkins observed: "'The Thinker' does not represent the sort of activity that we believe is appropriate for the BYU setting."
"There is really very little that could be characterized as “new” data. Rather, I have assembled the long-available data in such a way that it will finally make sense."
This will be great, your making clear what the Prophets have mucked up.
"This is how INGORNAT these fools are!" - darricktevenson
Bow your head and mutter, what in hell am I doing here?
infaymos wrote: "Peterson is the defacto king ping of the Mormon Apologetic world."
