For Paul Osborne and Dan Vogel and Radio Free Mormon from the Backyard Professor

[Res Ipsa]

Interesting idea, Philo. Are you envisioning a thread in Celestial in which participation is limited to the two teams?

Oh. A good question. I hadn't really thought about it to tell the truth. Is that possible to have it set up that way? That would insure no derails and interruptions, for sure.

My understanding is that any users can be placed into a group, with access privileges tailored to that group. Dean Robbers handles that end of things. I don’t know whether it’s logistically easier to create a restricted thread within Celestial or set up a temporary restricted kingdom or something else, but I think the odds of your invitation being accepted would be better if you could assure the participants that they wouldn’t be harassed or hacked during the debate.

I’d also PM shades to get his blessing. The only change in his status here involves his oversight of moderation. Otherwise, he’s still the head honcho.

[Fence Sitter]

Honestly I doubt you would get any of the main apologist to participate here in any discussion. Even if one were to consider it, I think others would heavily criticize him just for showing up here. They have done their best to delegitimize this forum over the years and label it in the worst possible terms. Participation by an apologist of any level would be a problem.

I like the idea. Maybe you guys could set up a new neutral forum just for that purpose?

[Shulem]

My understanding is that any users can be placed into a group, with access privileges tailored to that group. Dean Robbers handles that end of things. I don’t know whether it’s logistically easier to create a restricted thread within Celestial or set up a temporary restricted kingdom or something else, but I think the odds of your invitation being accepted would be better if you could assure the participants that they wouldn’t be harassed or hacked during the debate.

I’d also PM shades to get his blessing. The only change in his status here involves his oversight of moderation. Otherwise, he’s still the head honcho.

It would be best if the discussion had limited participants.

[drumdude]

Honestly I doubt you would get any of the main apologist to participate here in any discussion. Even if one were to consider it, I think others would heavily criticize him just for showing up here. They have done their best to delegitimize this forum over the years and label it in the worst possible terms. Participation by an apologist of any level would be a problem.

I like the idea. Maybe you guys could set up a new neutral forum just for that purpose?

I think it’s still worth making the invitation. I was surprised that Rod Meldrum agreed to be on Mormon Stories. It was a very difficult show to watch at times but I appreciated the dialogue between the two very far apart sides.

[Shulem]

That's what's on my mind after having read well over 700 pages of Paul's materials this week

That's an incredible amount of material to cover and my hat is off to you for that. You know very well that I've got my ducks in line and understand the material and what Joseph Smith was up to. I made it my business to understand those things and have spent decades carefully studying the issues. Although the Facsimiles and the Kirtland Egyptian Papers provide an interesting look into what Smith was up to and the Explanations of the Facsimiles demonstrate that Smith was clueless, it pales in demonstrating Smith's total lack of knowledge on how Egypt came into existence. I've indicated in my work that the real monster under the bed is not the Facsimiles or the translations. THE REAL MONSTER IS BOOK OF ABRAHAM CHAPTER ONE! Joseph Smith was utterly clueless and wrong about how Egypt came to be and WHEN. Egypt's making is not correctly expressed or explained in chapter one of the Book of Abraham. Joseph Smith took a crap shot and lost. Every Egyptologists can easily explain away chapter one and Smith's biblical chronology, moreover, his 6,000 year chronology of the earth's temporal existence. The Jews knew very little about how ancient Egypt was established and how its antiquity greatly outdated the kingdom of the Jews. Ancient Egypt is very, very, ancient. The Jews came much later and their understanding of how Egypt came to be was very limited.

Here are my signature posts that are the real gems of my work and absolutely devastate and destroy Smith's false description of how Egypt came to be. Egyptian history, religion, language, and civilization, predate anything Joseph Smith ever imagined by a great period of time. Joseph Smith was completely out of the loop when it came to understanding WHEN Egypt came to be and HOW.

John Gee knows this.

(I will not posts those links here)

[Philo Sofee]

That's what's on my mind after having read well over 700 pages of Paul's materials this week

That's an incredible amount of material to cover and my hat is off to you for that. You know very well that I've got my ducks in line and understand the material and what Joseph Smith was up to. I made it my business to understand those things and have spent decades carefully studying the issues. Although the Facsimiles and the Kirtland Egyptian Papers provide an interesting look into what Smith was up to and the Explanations of the Facsimiles demonstrate that Smith was clueless, it pales in demonstrating Smith's total lack of knowledge on how Egypt came into existence. I've indicated in my work that the real monster under the bed is not the Facsimiles or the translations. THE REAL MONSTER IS BOOK OF ABRAHAM CHAPTER ONE! Joseph Smith was utterly clueless and wrong about how Egypt came to be and WHEN. Egypt's making is not correctly expressed or explained in chapter one of the Book of Abraham. Joseph Smith took a crap shot and lost. Every Egyptologists can easily explain away chapter one and Smith's biblical chronology, moreover, his 6,000 year chronology of the earth's temporal existence. The Jews knew very little about how ancient Egypt was established and how it's antiquity greatly outdated the kingdom of the Jews. Ancient Egypt is very, very, ancient. The Jews came much later and their understanding of how Egypt came to be was very limited.

Here are my signature posts that are the real gems of my work and absolutely devastate and destroy Smith's false description of how Egypt came to be. Egyptian history, religion, language, and civilization, predate anything Joseph Smith ever imagined by a great period of time. Joseph Smith was completely out of the loop when it came to understanding WHEN Egypt came to be and HOW.

John Gee knows this.

I will honor and share your magnificent contributions tomorrow night on my Live Sunday Night Fireside session, without doubt!

[Shulem]

I will honor and share your magnificent contributions tomorrow night on my Live Sunday Night Fireside session, without doubt!

Indeed. Bear in mind, it's chapter ONE of the Book of Abraham that utterly discounts Smith's understanding of ancient Egypt. Yes, the Facsimiles are a disaster too and easy to demonstrate but chapter ONE of the Book of Abraham is the bomb. John Gee knows this. I can only imagine he is scared to death to discuss that with people in the know. It absolutely destroys the Book of Abraham.

[Shulem]

What if I were to have a discussion with John Gee?

Sure, I'll ask him "what's the king's name" and what happened to Anubis's nose? But all that is child's play and would get old real quick.

I'll take John Gee on a RIDE into predynastic Egypt and chronology! John Gee would have no choice but to forfeit. He knows that.

[Philo Sofee]

What if I were to have a discussion with John Gee?

Sure, I'll ask him "what's the king's name" and what happened to Anubis's nose? But all that is child's play and would get old real quick.

I'll take John Gee on a RIDE into predynastic Egypt and chronology! John Gee would have no choice but to forfeit. He knows that.

But if you are a faithful Mormon you have to begin with Adam, 4004 B.C. so Gee has an out...

[Philo Sofee]

Honestly I doubt you would get any of the main apologist to participate here in any discussion. Even if one were to consider it, I think others would heavily criticize him just for showing up here. They have done their best to delegitimize this forum over the years and label it in the worst possible terms. Participation by an apologist of any level would be a problem.

I like the idea. Maybe you guys could set up a new neutral forum just for that purpose?

I think you are correct. They have to vilify what they cannot refute, it gives them an excuse to continue believing falsehoods.