John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Alphus and Omegus
Area Authority
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:41 pm

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Alphus and Omegus »

Rivendale wrote:
Sun Feb 05, 2023 7:13 pm
Alphus and Omegus wrote:
Sun Feb 05, 2023 6:38 pm
I listened to the whole interview. It was nothing new whatsoever. Just Gee repeating his typical talking points, including one outright lie which has been discussed here a few times.

Gee goes on to make numerous ludicrous claims about the astronomy of the Book of Abraham and completely ignores the totally made-up Egyptian history in the book. He knows this is the weak point of his argument and so rather than even try to address it, he hopes that his gullible listeners don't even see.
I can just picture Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson or Stephen Hawking expressions when informed about Hah-ko-kau-beam.
Of course they would laugh at such absurdities. And Gee would not present them as being true astronomical knowledge because he knows it's not.

There are two interesting behaviors in Gee's engagement with the Book of Abraham astronomical ideas:

1) He utterly ignores how the Book of Abraham represents thinking that was current in the mid 19th-century.

2) Gee tries to put the Book of Abraham's astronomy is Egyptian terms. This fails as a historical matter, but it also is an act of apostasy. The book is supposed to be perceived as the literally true description of how planets and stars function. Instead, Gee tries to just dismiss it as reflective of ancient Egyptians' false perceptions about astronomy.
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5015
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Philo Sofee »

Shulem wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 5:04 pm
malkie wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 4:56 pm
He can't even claim that he meant bananas instead of feet:
http://bananaforscale.information/#!/convert/l ... rs/bananas

As yet, I can't get myself to listen to the second half of the podcast. Gee is such a dope.

I guess I need to continue to roll the tape at some point and see what else he said.

Ugh

WHERE THE HELL IS THE BACKYARD PROFESSOR! (This is derelict of duty)

:evil:

:lol:
Reporting in Sir! (Salutes).... just finished listening to Gee hem haw, stutter and sputter. I shall eviscerate him shortly! I will alert you all when the new video is up for watching... Gee is literally out to lunch in every single way. This is the singular most dismal performance of his life, yet. He really just ought to stop and go fishing. It is time to retire John.
User avatar
Everybody Wang Chung
God
Posts: 1623
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:52 am

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Everybody Wang Chung »

Write a review of the current state of evidence for John Gee’s arguments on the length of book of Abraham scroll


“ John Gee, a scholar and researcher of early Mormonism, has made significant contributions to the study of the Book of Abraham, a text that is regarded as scripture by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. One of his arguments concerns the length of the original scroll from which the text is said to have been translated.

While Gee's argument regarding the length of the scroll is intriguing, there are several concerns that have been raised about its validity. Firstly, there is a lack of concrete evidence to support Gee's claim about the length of the original scroll. While he cites various sources and documents in support of his argument, many of these sources are not universally accepted or considered authoritative, and their reliability is often in question.

Secondly, even if we were to accept the evidence that Gee presents in support of his argument, it is still not clear how this evidence directly supports his conclusion about the length of the scroll. Gee's argument appears to rely on a series of assumptions and inferences, rather than direct evidence, which raises questions about the reliability of his conclusions.

Thirdly, Gee's argument about the length of the scroll is not the only possible interpretation of the evidence. There are other scholars who have presented alternative perspectives on the length of the original scroll, and some of these perspectives are based on more concrete and reliable evidence.

In conclusion, while John Gee's argument about the length of the original scroll from which the Book of Abraham was translated is intriguing, it is not without its limitations and weaknesses. The reliability of the evidence that he presents is questionable, and the argument relies on a series of assumptions and inferences that are not universally accepted. Therefore, it is important to engage with Gee's argument critically and to consider other perspectives on the issue.”
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
hauslern
1st Counselor
Posts: 474
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2020 2:36 am

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by hauslern »

It seems Givens and Skousen have taken the view the whole project was given by revelation. Those folks who bought Nibley's books must be livered.

Is the response by Chris Smith and Andrew Cook still the best argument over the length of the scroll..
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/article ... ll-of-hor/

How do you tell from a few scraps of papyri the original length of the scroll?
Last edited by hauslern on Sun Feb 05, 2023 9:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Shulem »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Sun Feb 05, 2023 8:41 pm
Reporting in Sir! (Salutes).... just finished listening to Gee hem haw, stutter and sputter. I shall eviscerate him shortly! I will alert you all when the new video is up for watching... Gee is literally out to lunch in every single way. This is the singular most dismal performance of his life, yet. He really just ought to stop and go fishing. It is time to retire John.

Woohoo, it's gonna be a fun video. Wow, somewhat depressing because we are watching a man (John Gee) simply fall apart at the seams. He has no spirit. He talks with zero conviction. I honestly think he's more or less faking it. I think he's losing his testimony and is just trying to ride it out. His conversation and presentation was absolutely awful and totally unconvincing. He must be contemplating retirement and upcoming changes. He's probably in a state of mind that Brian Hauglid was when he finished his term.

Poor Gee.

Poor Gee. It sucks to be him.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Shulem »

hauslern wrote:
Sun Feb 05, 2023 9:52 pm
It seems Givens and Skousen have taken the view the whole project was given by revelation. Those folks who bought Nibley's books must be livered.

Regardless of how he translated; the whole process and end result was considered a revelation. Just as he translated the Book of Mormon on the gold plates by revelation he also translated the Book of Abraham on the papyrus by revelation. It was all revelation whether papyrus, plates, parchments, or whatever. Everything Smith revealed was a revelation.

But we know that Joseph Smith's translation of all things Egyptian totally suck. Smith's ideas of ancient Egypt suck. The whole Book of Abraham reads like a fake narrative pawned off by a 19th century conman.
drumdude
God
Posts: 5213
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by drumdude »

I always enjoy seeing Shulem shine in Book of Abraham threads.

No apologist would dare debate him. They'd get eviscerated!
Fence Sitter
High Priest
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:02 am

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Fence Sitter »

hauslern wrote:
Sun Feb 05, 2023 9:52 pm
It seems Givens and Skousen have taken the view the whole project was given by revelation. Those folks who bought Nibley's books must be livered.

Is the response by Chris Smith and Andrew Cook still the best argument over the length of the scroll..
https://www.dialoguejournal.com/article ... ll-of-hor/

How do you tell from a few scraps of papyri the original length of the scroll?
Determining the original length of the Hor scroll is fairly simple. There are two ways we know how long it was and they cross check each other.

1. When the original scroll was unwound it was damaged at the edges. This damage occurred at regular intervals along the edge (think the circumference of a spiral) of the scroll. By measuring the reducing distance between the damage marks along the edge of this spiral (which are called winding measurements) one can accurately extrapolate how much is missing in the middle and how far it is to the interior end of the scroll. Think of it like this. Take a toilet paper roll that has about 5'-0" of paper remaining on the roll, unroll it, remove the cardboard tube and loosely reroll it. Take some scissors and cut a grove from the center out to the exterior edge. Unroll the paper and remove about a two-foot section from the middle of the roll and you have a rough replica of about what exists with the extant pieces of the Hor scroll. This way of measuring has been done over and over again by Ritner, and other Egyptologist going back 100 years or more as well as being used by Smith & Cook who formally published their methodology along with their results in 2010, all of whom came up with about an overall scroll length of about 5'-0" with about 22" (56cm) missing from the center. Gee is the only one who has determined a different length of about 41'-0" which, shockingly enough, is about the length needed to record the existing portions of the Book of Abraham in Hieratic text on a papyrus scroll. Gee rebutted the Smith Cook article without providing even basic information to check his work and Smith and Cook responded in 2012 to Gee's rebuttal. https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-cont ... 03_122.pdf Gee has not responded since then nor do I expect him to because it was/is obvious that Gee doesn't possess the mathematic chops to understand how the formula works and he woefully misapplied it in his response to Smith & Cook. Andrew Cook, on the other hand, has a PhD in physics. Gee may be able to habla Egyptian, but he does not know math and seems too arrogant to even ask for help with it before publishing.
2. The Joseph Smith Hor scroll is a very specific Egyptian funerary text or permit which is called the Document of Breathings Made by Isis for Her Brother Osiris. This specific form of permit was used in and around Thebes by interrelated priestly families for a few hundred years starting around 200 B.C. to 200 A.D. There are about 30 or so known copies of this text and their content and length is known. The scribe of the Hor scroll would have needed about 5'-0" to record a complete version of the particular version of the Book of Breathings. The measurements along the damaged edge of the scroll accurately predicted the length of scroll that would have been needed to record it.
Last edited by Fence Sitter on Mon Feb 06, 2023 1:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7090
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Shulem »

drumdude wrote:
Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:01 am
I always enjoy seeing Shulem shine in Book of Abraham threads.

No apologist would dare debate him. They'd get eviscerated!

Thank you and you're absolutely right.

I can't wait for the Backyard Professor to post his new video!

Poor John. He's about to crack. I can sense it, I think.

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

Re: John Gee and the length of the Book of Abraham etc

Post by Shulem »

Fence Sitter wrote:
Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:42 am
Gee is the only one who has determined a different length of about 41'-0" which, shockingly enough, is about the length needed to record the existing portions of the Book of Abraham in Hieratic text on a papyrus scroll.

One would think that the Church would have commissioned Egyptologist John Gee to produce a replica on actual papyrus using the hieratic script as a prop at the Visitor Center in Salt Lake City. What better way to exhibit the Book of Abraham than to produce a like copy of the original. A copy of a copy written by his own hand!

But the Church doesn't seem interested in doing this because it will raise far too many questions about the authenticity of the Book of Abraham. The Church knows it would be shooting itself in the foot.

I'm really looking forward to the Backyard Professor's response on Gee's apologetic tired drivel.

Hurry, hurry!!!!

:lol:
Post Reply