Dan Vogel wrote:R.I.P.
Reverse-engineering Theory
R.I.P. Missing-roll Theory too!
Vogel's new book on Abraham
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
R.I.P. Missing-roll Theory too!
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
For the record, I enjoyed the entire Mormon Stories Podcast hosted by John Dehlin with RFM as his trusty assistant. Nearly four and half hours of scholarly fun. For me, personally, everything was familiar and it felt like old stomping ground. I enjoyed the ride down memory lane.
The main point of the whole story is that these works involving the translations with Smith's Egyptian grammar and alphabet are the work of JOSEPH SMITH. It's his work. He was the translator and the man in charge. All of it was a work performed under his management and inspiration.
John Gee, you're a liar. How do you sleep at night knowing you lie every single day of your life? It sucks to be YOU, man. You're pathetic, Gee.
PODCAST:
Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Grammar and Alphabet
The main point of the whole story is that these works involving the translations with Smith's Egyptian grammar and alphabet are the work of JOSEPH SMITH. It's his work. He was the translator and the man in charge. All of it was a work performed under his management and inspiration.
John Gee, you're a liar. How do you sleep at night knowing you lie every single day of your life? It sucks to be YOU, man. You're pathetic, Gee.
PODCAST:
Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Grammar and Alphabet
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
For the record, I agree with Dan Vogel about Smith's self-calling as a prophet of God, the foundation of a pious fraud. Joseph Smith was an amazing man who was able to influence so many people to do his bidding. I no longer have hard feelings or any feelings of contempt for Joseph Smith. He did what he did for the reasons that he did them and I'm not going to judge him. I am however, willing to point out his fraud to show how I understand he was deceiving everyone he ever knew while committing a life of pious fraud.
R.I.P., Joseph.
R.I.P., Joseph.
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
A tug of war exists between the critics and the apologists when it comes to who authored the Alphabet and Grammar. Beginning with Nibley and apologists backing him, the rope is pulled in the direction away from Joseph Smith while the critics pull the rope towards Smith. Thus, the rope is being pulled by opposing forces who stake their claims in winning the game. Winning scenarios are as follows:
1. [x] CRITICS pull the rope wherein the evidence squarely lands on the lap of Joseph Smith
2. [x] APOLOGISTS pull the rope wherein the evidence lands on the laps of Smith's scribes
Thus we see that the apologists want to separate or distance Smith from the Alphabet and Grammar and blame it on the scribes. Therefore it was not Smith's inspired work and could not officially be accepted as Smith's revelation. We see also how the critics want to join Smith with his Alphabet and Grammar and point out by the evidence that his scribes assisted him in the work as duly called to share in the benefits of revelation.
The evidence points to Joseph Smith as the author and his scribes as duly appointed servants to write what the author dictates. It is impossible to separate the work from Joseph Smith because the following hard evidence is PROOF that Smith was involved in authorship:
1) Pen in his hand
2) Ink flowing from the pen in his hand
3) Words and characters on the paper formed by Smith's hand
The proof is inescapable in showing that Smith was writing EXACTLY what *he* was thinking. And if he was writing what he was thinking then not only was he a scribe in this particular instance but he was also the author. Recall that never at any time did anyone translate the Book of Mormon other than Joseph Smith who was the sole AUTHOR of the book. Cowdery, Harris, and others who acted as scribes were ONLY scribes doing the bidding of the TRANSLATOR of the Church. The evidence for the Joseph Smith Papers demonstrates the same conclusion for authorship.
The tug of war is over. The apologists have lost the game. It falls on them to explain how Joseph Smith could have been so wrong and uninspired. That is their problem!
1. [x] CRITICS pull the rope wherein the evidence squarely lands on the lap of Joseph Smith
2. [x] APOLOGISTS pull the rope wherein the evidence lands on the laps of Smith's scribes
Thus we see that the apologists want to separate or distance Smith from the Alphabet and Grammar and blame it on the scribes. Therefore it was not Smith's inspired work and could not officially be accepted as Smith's revelation. We see also how the critics want to join Smith with his Alphabet and Grammar and point out by the evidence that his scribes assisted him in the work as duly called to share in the benefits of revelation.
The evidence points to Joseph Smith as the author and his scribes as duly appointed servants to write what the author dictates. It is impossible to separate the work from Joseph Smith because the following hard evidence is PROOF that Smith was involved in authorship:
1) Pen in his hand
2) Ink flowing from the pen in his hand
3) Words and characters on the paper formed by Smith's hand
The proof is inescapable in showing that Smith was writing EXACTLY what *he* was thinking. And if he was writing what he was thinking then not only was he a scribe in this particular instance but he was also the author. Recall that never at any time did anyone translate the Book of Mormon other than Joseph Smith who was the sole AUTHOR of the book. Cowdery, Harris, and others who acted as scribes were ONLY scribes doing the bidding of the TRANSLATOR of the Church. The evidence for the Joseph Smith Papers demonstrates the same conclusion for authorship.
The tug of war is over. The apologists have lost the game. It falls on them to explain how Joseph Smith could have been so wrong and uninspired. That is their problem!
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
Dan,
When Smith lost the 116 page manuscript he learned a valuable lesson that would go with him through the balance of his life. Keep multiple copies! An original can be lost but multiple copies ensures it will be preserved.
Just saying. And loved your presentation. Love the hair too. Looks like a cross from John Paul Jones and Jimmy Page and you sound like them too.
When Smith lost the 116 page manuscript he learned a valuable lesson that would go with him through the balance of his life. Keep multiple copies! An original can be lost but multiple copies ensures it will be preserved.
Just saying. And loved your presentation. Love the hair too. Looks like a cross from John Paul Jones and Jimmy Page and you sound like them too.
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
Thanks, Shulem. It was fun.
-
Philo Sofee
- God
- Posts: 5058
- Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
I didn't get to the live portion, but saw the recording. Very well done Dan! I guess I could also thank the other two goons.... 
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
There is an interview with Gee where he claims he is flexible about the catalyst theory vs the missing scroll theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7f0s53lTfY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7f0s53lTfY
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
hauslern wrote: ↑Sun Dec 19, 2021 10:58 amThere is an interview with Gee where he claims he is flexible about the catalyst theory vs the missing scroll theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7f0s53lTfY
Right. I started a thread on that earlier entitled John Gee FAIR interview with Scott Gordon but purposely left off the link but here it is for everyone to view, compliments to your link.
Gee Starts out with poor persecuted me.
Then John says that the critics don't really get into the contents of the Book of Abraham. Give me a freaking break, John. You want to discuss the Book of Abraham and the CONTENTS? Let's discuss every single verse, come to Discuss Mormonism and we will do just that and put it all in historic context and see how it works out.
Gee, I'm rolling my eyes.
Re: Vogel's new book on Abraham
Looks like I took over Vogel's thread. Oh well, I trust he's okay with that.
John Gee admits that he feels the Catalyst theory is a "decent second choice" and yet in the same breath he says that he has been unable to embrace that theory because it simply lacks "evidence". Do you see the problem? Gee is willing to dump the Missing Roll theory out of expediency or rather a necessity, thus he's willing to abandon one theory which everyone knows there is no evidence for another theory in which Gee confesses there is no evidence. When it comes to Joseph Smith and his Book of Abraham translation there simply is no evidence to favor it. Isn't that right, John? Where is the evidence? Where is the beef? Where is the King's name? Where is Anubis's nose?!
The Catalyst theory is DOA and the moment the Church officially endorses it there will be an immediate response from me and it won't go well for the Church.
John Gee admits that he feels the Catalyst theory is a "decent second choice" and yet in the same breath he says that he has been unable to embrace that theory because it simply lacks "evidence". Do you see the problem? Gee is willing to dump the Missing Roll theory out of expediency or rather a necessity, thus he's willing to abandon one theory which everyone knows there is no evidence for another theory in which Gee confesses there is no evidence. When it comes to Joseph Smith and his Book of Abraham translation there simply is no evidence to favor it. Isn't that right, John? Where is the evidence? Where is the beef? Where is the King's name? Where is Anubis's nose?!
The Catalyst theory is DOA and the moment the Church officially endorses it there will be an immediate response from me and it won't go well for the Church.