John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by dastardly stem »

There is zero chance Gee would accept any sort of debate with Shulem. He'd never even respond to Shulems arguments. He has no reason to other than for the sake of truth, and that seems far from his priorities. He and the church are much better off pretending shulem doesn't exist. If BYP and/or Rfm doesn't do a show with Shulem, nicely describing and responding to Gee's points in some detail, we are all missing out. These types of things need wide-ranging conversation, as I see it. Mormons have no clue what's going on with this stuff and if they did they'll for the most part be satisfied to know a Dr Gee or Muhlestein are defending it. As we've seen once a Mormons starts catching on on these issues with the Book of Abraham, it gets very difficult for them.

Dr. Muhlestein might be a better option to have a conversation with. I'm guessing he'd be more open to it, but even that seems extremely unlikely.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

In Theory, Shulem Vs. John Gee

Post by Shulem »

Fence Sitter wrote:
Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:02 pm
So if he were to embrace the catalyst theory he would no longer be qualified to hold that chair. The BYU Egyptologist are stuck between a rock and a missing scroll.

And with that point let me introduce the brutality I would exploit when ensuing a hot debate with John while exposing the weakness in his position. It boils down to TESTIMONY and pouring salt into the wounds of that testimony. I know just how to do it.

Listen and learn:

John, you claim to have a personal testimony that the Book of Abraham is true and that Joseph Smith is a prophet. That is the foundation upon which you base your claims. You believe that the Holy Ghost has born witness to you and that the Spirit of God has revealed to your mind and heart that both are true. Fine. But with that, your admission given to Scott Gordon screams one very important confession that delights me, and I want to tell you what that is:

I, JOHN GEE, DO NOT HAVE A TESTIMONY OF THE MISSING ROLL THEORY WHICH IS NOTHING MORE THAN A THEORY. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S TRUE.

That's right, John, you don't know. You're hanging in the breeze having a testimony of a book that you don't know how was translated or from what source. It's a mystery for you and all you can say is you know the book is true but you don't know the source from which it was translated due to the controversies of its origins.

How does that make you feel, John? Do you feel confused and maybe a little lost in confessing that you don't know and that you are depending on a THEORY that you can't prove and one that you are willing to abandon?

John, you said by your own admission that you are willing to accept an alternative THEORY to explain the source and method of the Book of Abraham translation -- the CATALYST THEORY. You do realize that this is just another theory that cannot be proven true and you will not have a testimony of it anymore than you do NOT have a testimony of the one you currently endorse. Do you see what I'm saying, John? In sum, you will not have had a testimony of either theory! The theories serve to offer an excuse to support your testimony that the Book of Abraham is somehow true. Belief in either or both theories gives you the following results:

1) I do NOT have a testimony of the Missing Roll Theory
2) I do NOT have a testimony of the Catalyst Theory

Therefore, all you can ever say is that you know the Book of Abraham is true but how it was translated and from what source you can't say for sure.

STOP!

I point out that in the above circumstances of falling back to the Catalyst Theory you are now forced to get a testimony of it and believe it absolutely as you do the Book of Abraham is somehow true as told you by the Spirit -- because, if you fail to do that then your only other alternative is to embrace the last theory which is supported by the critics, the one you fear!

So, in conclusion, if you fall back on the Catalyst Theory, then you have no other place to go should that theory be proven false. I can assure you, John, I can disprove the Catalyst Theory and destroy it completely by using logic, math, and reason. What will you do then?

Listen up...
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by Shulem »

I would pour salt into the scabby wounds of John Gee's Book of Abraham which are horrible open sores oozing with puss and blood! How cruel of me, I suppose. :(

Shall I tell you John Gee's worst nightmare?

:twisted:

Come here, John. I know what you fear most.

We only need discuss conventional chronology understood by modern Egyptology and scientific calculation based on king's lists, Sothic cycling, and the historic records.

What did Joseph Smith say about the origins of Egypt, how many years ago in which that took place, and how it came to be? Search church history and statements made by the brethren including the prophet himself. Search the D&C. Compare what the Book of Abraham says about Egypt's making. *That* is John Gee's nightmare in epic proportion!

Isn't that right, John? Care to discuss the time span between Abraham and Egyptus? Let's break down the years exactly and see how the dynasties fit therein according to Joseph Smith's time reckoning. You know by what I am speaking. You know the nightmare of Smith's chronology Vs. Egyptology! You crumb-bum! You coward! Hiding behind your Gay Chair! Bah!!

John Gee wouldn't last 5 minutes with me in a discussion about Egyptian chronology Vs. Joseph Smith's RETARDED revelations and teachings of earth's chronology.

:evil:

Gee, you are a disgrace. You did it to yourself. You have nobody to blame but yourself.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by Moksha »

dastardly stem wrote:
Sat Dec 04, 2021 3:31 pm
There is zero chance Gee would accept any sort of debate with Shulem.
What if he writes a hit piece on either Shulem or Anubis for the Interpreter?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by Shulem »

John Gee has left Anubis for dead. Until he makes amends and stands up for Anubis in both Facsimile 1 & 3, he will ever remain the liar he is. It IS Anubis in both Facsimiles. He knows it and yet he continues with the charade and false pretentions in his writings and teachings in defending Joseph Smith’s false interpretations.

It should be Gee on Joseph Smith’s so-called “iron” sacrificial bedstead given to the gods under the altar. Retribution requires his name be stricken from every record. What Gee has done to the memory of Anubis and leaving him for dead is despicable and is a classic example of a pious fraud. There is no excuse for his traitorous behavior in hiding truth from his students and those who look up to him.

Come clean and confess!

Repent!
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by Philo Sofee »

Shulem wrote:
Sun Dec 05, 2021 6:33 pm
John Gee has left Anubis for dead. Until he makes amends and stands up for Anubis in both Facsimile 1 & 3, he will ever remain the liar he is. It IS Anubis in both Facsimiles. He knows it and yet he continues with the charade and false pretentions in his writings and teachings in defending Joseph Smith’s false interpretations.

It should be Gee on Joseph Smith’s so-called “iron” sacrificial bedstead given to the gods under the altar. Retribution requires his name be stricken from every record. What Gee has done to the memory of Anubis and leaving him for dead is despicable and is a classic example of a pious fraud. There is no excuse for his traitorous behavior in hiding truth from his students and those who look up to him.

Come clean and confess!

Repent!
What would you say Shulem to doing a threesome with RFM and I?! We together interview you in fantastic and total details of why the Book of Abraham is true and John Gee is a valid Egyptologist... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I am actually serious about this. Between the 3 of us we can surely find a way to keep John Gee afloat til he retires can't we? I would LOVE to do this with you guys. It would be EPIC. I mean totally ***EPIC***

Ladies and Gentlemen! RFM & BYP Interviews Shulem on the Book of Abraham and John Gee's Mormon Apologetic Defense. That would be TOTALLY EPIC
simon southerton
Sunbeam
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2020 11:15 pm

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by simon southerton »

Shulem wrote:
Fri Dec 03, 2021 3:09 pm
:evil:

PS. Gee said he is open to the Catalyst Theory as a fallback, second choice.
Is this admission as momentous as it looks?

Hasn't Gee devoted his career to defending the missing scroll theory and Joseph Smith's skill's as a translator? Now he is admitting the catalyst theory isn't a bad option. He is conceding that it is possible Joseph Smith didn't need to be able to translate. He just needed to be inspired by the papyrus to write the Book of Abraham.

To me this is tantamount to admitting that it's possible his entire career has been a complete waste of time.
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1812
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by Dr Moore »

simon southerton wrote:
Mon Dec 06, 2021 1:31 am
To me this is tantamount to admitting that it's possible his entire career has been a complete waste of time.
I bet he'd disagree on the grounds that his entire career has been in service of one goal: to defend the Church at all hazards. So this latest admission, such as it is, is likely just his way of "doing whatever it takes."
simon southerton
Sunbeam
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2020 11:15 pm

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by simon southerton »

Dr Moore wrote:
Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:19 am
simon southerton wrote:
Mon Dec 06, 2021 1:31 am
To me this is tantamount to admitting that it's possible his entire career has been a complete waste of time.
I bet he'd disagree on the grounds that his entire career has been in service of one goal: to defend the Church at all hazards. So this latest admission, such as it is, is likely just his way of "doing whatever it takes."
Of course. I was assuming that an academic career should be focussed on discovering truth, not blindly defending fixed ideas. Silly me.
Alphus and Omegus
Area Authority
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:41 pm

Re: John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon

Post by Alphus and Omegus »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Sat Dec 04, 2021 1:17 am
Nothing about this assures anyone that the truth is on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints side... If one actually knew they had the reality, and the truth of the reality, why on earth would they have any reason for any possibility of being refuted, and therefore for want of a better description, hide behind a safety wall?!? I mean, isn't that what this is? What else can we possibly see this as?
I can't speak for FAIR, but podcasts often are not released to the public for various reasons, usually they are intended to be inducements to become a paid subscriber.

Oftentimes, it is the more arcane, nerdy, or specialized content that's chosen for these paywalled episodes since the people most likely to find it of interest, are also most likely to pay.

I think also that Gee doesn't seem to see any value at all in the idea of debate. He seems to have constructed a false equivalency between Smith and his critics and will do zero reading of material that debunks his beliefs.

That's because, like most fundamentalists, Gee has a broken epistemology, one based on fuzzy feelings and childhood indoctrination.

His mind is so limited that he actually thinks it's expanded.

If I had to guess, I would say that Gee probably hasn't read or listened to anything from Ritner since he fell out with him. He's peevishly decided to write him off as "an anti-Mormon" not worth engaging with.
Post Reply