Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
hauslern
1st Counselor
Posts: 474
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2020 2:36 am

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by hauslern »

29 guests ? Who could that be?
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by MG 2.0 »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 6:49 pm
sock puppet wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 6:27 pm
I suspect that as soon as the Big 15 might de-canonize the Book of Abraham, as was done with the Lectures on Faith in 1921--without a vote of the general membership--all these Mopologists would immediately stop talking about the Book of Abraham, or claim that they knew all along it was not properly part of the canon. Scripture non grata, as it would then be.
They would also say that they always suspected it wasn't actually scripture, but more in line with midrash, and so no harm, no foul. MG tried to pull something along the lines that Smith hisself never actually tried to canonize it, so he didn't think it was scripture. Shulem, true to form, simply man handled the weak argument. It's up in the Celestial forums....
Umm…that wasn’t my take away, but yeah, it’s a fun thread to go back and read. We agreed on a bunch of things but disagreed on matters that do matter.

By the way, are you up to the possibility that midrashic literature contains elements of scripture? That is, the word of God?

Regards,
MG
hauslern
1st Counselor
Posts: 474
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2020 2:36 am

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by hauslern »

Does anyone know the present status of Gee's ;ong scroll theory
Rasmussens assertioin "Kyler Ray Rasmussen 7 minutes ago
"Chris Smith and Andrew Cooke dealt with Gee's long Book of Abraham."

See, now I know you didn't read the essay. Or paid any attention to Interpreter in the last year or so.

In short, in one of Smoot's recent articles he cites secular scholars that essentially agree with Gee that Smith and Cooke's method is "no better than eyeballing". Long roll is alive and well."
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by Philo Sofee »

We gotta see analysis if they think Cook and Smith didn't refute Gee. It was hands down a solid... solid win.
Fence Sitter
High Priest
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:02 am

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by Fence Sitter »

hauslern wrote:
Fri Dec 03, 2021 2:14 am
Does anyone know the present status of Gee's ;ong scroll theory
Rasmussens assertioin "Kyler Ray Rasmussen 7 minutes ago
"Chris Smith and Andrew Cooke dealt with Gee's long Book of Abraham."

See, now I know you didn't read the essay. Or paid any attention to Interpreter in the last year or so.

In short, in one of Smoot's recent articles he cites secular scholars that essentially agree with Gee that Smith and Cooke's method is "no better than eyeballing". Long roll is alive and well."
In Gee's latest offering An Introduction to the Book of Abraham 2017 he is still promoting his long scroll theory. He stopped defending it after Smith and Cook took him to the woodshed for his horrible math skills here but he still promotes it. I don't know what references Smoot is using to support his claim about Smith and Cook's methods but they used a standard formula (the Hoffman formula) for measuring this type of scroll, basically the same one the Gee used and butchered and the same one used by others. So what ever criticism might be offered against that method would apply equally to what ever results Gee came up with. In Gee case it is clear he didn't even understand some pretty basic math necessary to estimate the scroll length. It is kind of ironic. Gee has been known to claim that only qualified Egyptologist are capable of offering opinions on the scrolls, but the second he ventures into other fields (mathematics or textual criticism) to support his theories he has shown himself quite incapable too.

The BYU Egyptologist have to continue to assert the missing scroll because otherwise there really isn't much new an Egyptologist can say offer about the Book of Abraham if it was not a translation in the traditional sense.

By the way, the estimated length of the Hor scroll is not just derived from applying the Hoffman formula to successive lacuna gaps in the scroll. Hor scrolls are fairly rare, I think there are about 30 of them in existence and they are all consistent in content. Knowing what content is missing also tells us how long the scroll the Church possesses would have been. That length (about 5'-0") matches up nicely with what every non BYU Egyptologist have stated as the original length.
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by Philo Sofee »

malkie wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:04 pm
Marcus wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 4:33 pm

You'll notice it appears only in the Interpreter Blog, also. Not even Peterson and the editorial board of the Journal dare to put those laughable pieces into the Journal itself.
I think I may have found a suitable journal for Kyler to submit his work to:
Journal of Universal Rejection (JofUR) wrote: About the Journal
The founding principle of the Journal of Universal Rejection (JofUR) is rejection. Universal rejection. That is to say, all submissions, regardless of quality, will be rejected. Despite that apparent drawback, here are a number of reasons you may choose to submit to the JofUR:

You can send your manuscript here without suffering waves of anxiety regarding the eventual fate of your submission. You know with 100% certainty that it will not be accepted for publication.
  • There are no page-fees.
  • You may claim to have submitted to the most prestigious journal (judged by acceptance rate).
  • The JofUR is one-of-a-kind. Merely submitting work to it may be considered a badge of honor.
  • You retain complete rights to your work, and are free to resubmit to other journals even before our review process is complete.
  • Decisions are often (though not always) rendered within hours of submission.
Instructions for Authors
The JofUR solicits any and all types of manuscript: poetry, prose, visual art, and research articles. You name it, we take it, and reject it. Your manuscript may be formatted however you wish. Frankly, we don't care.

After submitting your work, the decision process varies. Often the Editor-in-Chief will reject your work out-of-hand, without even reading it! However, he might read it. Probably he'll skim. At other times your manuscript may be sent to anonymous referees. Unless they are the Editor-in-Chief's wife or graduate school buddies, it is unlikely that the referees will even understand what is going on. Rejection will follow as swiftly as a bird dropping from a great height after being struck by a stone. At other times, rejection may languish like your email buried in the Editor-in-Chief's inbox. But it will come, swift or slow, as surely as death. Rejection.
https://www.universalrejection.org/
:lol: :lol: :lol: HOWLING LAUGHTER!!!!! TEARS!!!!!!
Marcus
God
Posts: 5037
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by Marcus »

Midgley inadvertently explains why publishing in the peer-review-less Interpreter doesn’t really count as valid “publication”:
Midgley wrote:…So we get a whole raft of folks who discount the opinions of Tony Fauci without knowing that his publication record in the area in which he is trained leads the profession.

And they will swallow rubbish from someone who has no publishing record on anything at all.
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 639403023z
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Kyler Rasmussen and the Book of Abraham

Post by Philo Sofee »

Marcus wrote:
Thu Dec 09, 2021 10:55 pm
Midgley inadvertently explains why publishing in the peer-review-less Interpreter doesn’t really count as valid “publication”:
Midgley wrote:…So we get a whole raft of folks who discount the opinions of Tony Fauci without knowing that his publication record in the area in which he is trained leads the profession.

And they will swallow rubbish from someone who has no publishing record on anything at all.
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 639403023z
:lol: ' and to make him even more mad or embarrassed, this is a good Freudian slip on his part.
Post Reply