Calling Shulem! Gee is on the Loose Again on Translation

[_Philo Sofee]

Hey Shulem, Grindael, Kevin Graham and others! Gee has just released the newest most up to datest bestest and mostest accuratested theory of Joseph Smith translating the papyri into the correctest Book of Abrahamest in all of the history of the churchest! Shall we all pool our resources and wipe this all totally out? I haven't read it yet, but predict he is fudging and cheating on which papyri is which and what was used for translation and what wasn't.......http://www.conflictofjustice.com/

Let us partake in this sacrament of refutation of translation!

[_Themis]

LOL I have only read the first paragraph so far and he is already being dishonest with the overwhelming evidence that the BOB scroll is the source. The remnants contain fac 1 and we know from Egyptology that fac 3 belongs with it as well. Not to mention hieroglyphs found next to sections of the Book of Abraham are found on the remnants of the BOB scroll. Opps

[_Philo Sofee]

LOL I have only read the first paragraph so far and he is already being dishonest with the overwhelming evidence that the BOB scroll is the source. The remnants contain fac 1 and we know from Egyptology that fac 3 belongs with it as well. Not to mention hieroglyphs found next to sections of the Book of Abraham are found on the remnants of the BOB scroll. Opps

I will read it tomorrow. I can bet right here, right now, he misuses the eyewitnesses to the papyri (by careful eliding some witnesses or their descriptions of the papyri) and makes it appear that they are saying something they are not. I also predict he most certainly WILL either misuse (by incomplete use or ellipses) what Joseph Smith himself said, and I also predict that if he tries to take on Ritner, he will misunderstand or deliberately distort what Ritner either says or means.

[_I have a question]

In light of Nelsons’ latest announcement, Gee has got a lot of work to correct his website terminology as it relates to the Church etc...

[_Shulem]

I'll try and take a look at it later today. It seems rather lengthy and scattered with all kinds of litter. It won't be any problem taking Gee down. All you have to do is quote Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and those who were there.

Gee is a disgrace to Egyptology. He has apostatized from the sacred calling of guarding the history and memory of the Egyptians. He is a traitor to Egyptology and has shamed ancient Egypt.

[_Shulem]

FACSIMILE NO. 3 is the key

Everything else hangs on Facsimile No. 3.

What is the king's name? Where is the name Shulem? etc!

[_Fence Sitter]

He lost me at the 1st paragraph.

Out of the four scrolls in Joseph Smith’s Egyptian collection, we know that Joseph Smith used the missing Amenhotep scroll as his basis for the Book of Abraham text, based on witness descriptions.1 Joseph Smith identified the mummy containing the Book of Abraham source as “Onitah” and Joseph Smith’s notebooks associate “Onitah” with the missing Amenhotep scroll. In Joseph Smith’s notebooks, we find a chronology of attempts to explore the other scrolls based on this translation.

There is so much evidence against this assertion that it boggles the mind to think otherwise. The text of the Book of Abraham itself tells us it came from the Hor scroll.

That you may have an understanding of these gods, I have given you the fashion of them in the figures at the beginning, which manner of figures is called by the Chaldeans Rahleenos, which signifies hieroglyphics.

[Guest]

The hieroglyphs overlap the page’s columns, while the English text does not. This suggests that the English was written first, and that it therefore came from a previous source.

Wrong.

If the English were there before the hieroglyphs then we would have instances where the hieroglyphs overlapped the English text itself. We don't. What happened is margins were drawn in first before anything was placed on the text. Some of the glyphs happen to be wider than the margins. In every case where a glyph overlapped the margins, the English text is indented far enough to allow for the wider glyph.

This is basically just trying to provide evidence for a missing previous translation of the Book of Abraham before the manuscript translation documents were created. Once again Mormonism depends on some written document that no one can verify ever existed.

Convenient that.

Missing plates (prop)
Missing 116 pages
Missing scroll(s)
Missing translation manuscript.

Worst case scenario for the faithful is that any of these items were to show up.

Edited to delete references to Gee which now look incorrect.

[_spotlight]

Nazis considered their methodology for truth superior to the Jews. Goebbels said the German was “a specialist in every area, but the wonderful thing is that while most specialists never go beyond their knowledge, his knowledge is the raw material for understanding and action.” They likewise appealed to science as the higher truth.

There it is. The subject of science brings Hitler into the discussion.
Didn't we already have a time in history when religion took a front seat to science?

[_Shulem]

He lost me at the 1st paragraph.

I'm actually dreading the thought of having to read Gee's adulterated garbage. I suspect it's going to contain a lot of fluffy stuff that has little to do with actually addressing the issues that prove Joseph Smith couldn't translate.

What's this about the missing Amenhotep scroll as the basis in which Smith got his Book of Abraham? It appears this is Gee's feeble attempt to keep the missing roll theory alive in the face of all the actual evidence that proves the Hor scroll was the source.

Hey, Gee, you idiot! You can't use the missing scroll/hieroglyphs theory to defend the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 which is a PART of the Book of Abraham translation. All the characters are in the registers and those are the very characters Smith used to interpret and translate.

Hey stupid!

What's the name of the king? Where is the name Shulem?

Gee might as well postulate that the names are on the Amenhotep scroll and Smith's eyes were bouncing back and forth! That's the ticket. The Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are actually describing things on the missing Amenhotep scroll and Facsimile No. 3 is something else.