DiscussMormonism.com

Amazon just alerted me that the print version of Dan's new book "Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique" is being delivered this Friday.

Hope many of you will read it and then watch the Mopologists react- Dan could be in for a hit piece but I hope not.

k

I hope there is a "hit" piece from the mopes, or at least a response. Gee and Muhlestein are probably going to look pretty bad in the book and there are some at the JSP who agree with Dan Vogel's analysis. So, my money is on a response, and I would guess it won't be by Gee or Muhlestein as they will pretend that the non PhD Dan Vogel isn't at their level. I bet someone like Jeff Lindsay will provide the book review.

Dr Exiled wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:05 pm

I hope there is a "hit" piece from the mopes, or at least a response. Gee and Muhlestein are probably going to look pretty bad in the book and there are some at the JSP who agree with Dan Vogel's analysis. So, my money is on a response, and I would guess it won't be by Gee or Muhlestein as they will pretend that the non PhD Dan Vogel isn't at their level. I bet someone like Jeff Lindsay will provide the book review.

Perhaps Lou Midgley will desire to pay him a "visit" and perhaps with his Stake President, they could hash some things out.....

If it’s by Jeff Lindsay I’ll be very surprised if it’s a hit piece. A critical review, sure, but I’d really expect Lindsay to make a fair and honest critique.

Physics Guy wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:09 pm

If it’s by Jeff Lindsay I’ll be very surprised if it’s a hit piece. A critical review, sure, but I’d really expect Lindsay to make a fair and honest critique.

I agree that something by Lindsay wouldn't have much venom. He seems above that sort of thing.

I received my copy the other day and will start posting notes and comments as I work my way through it.

The extant pieces and copies of the Joseph Smith papyri have all been translated and there is near universal agreement about what is written on them and that they say nothing about Abraham. What is one to do if one is a faithful LDS Egyptian scholar employed at BYU? Obviously, the only alternative is to argue that the Book of Abraham was on parts of the Joseph Smith papyri that were lost or destroyed in the Chicago museum fire. Which is why we are still dealing with the “missing scroll theory”. Vogel's first chapter deals with some of the underlying arguments on which the missing scroll theory rest, namely some of the KEP documents and when/why they were created.

The documents are the GAEL (Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language - Smith's attempt at creating an Egyptian Lexicon) and two Book of Abraham translation manuscripts all of which contain glyphs from the extant papyri next to English interpretations of those glyphs. The two translation documents are similar copies in English of Abr1:4-2:18 with Egyptian glyphs in the left margins at the start of paragraphs in the handwriting of Frederick Williams and Warren Parrish. The glyphs on the translation documents were taken in order from an extant portion of the Hor scroll except where lacuna occurred in which case they just invented their own glyphs. In order to claim that the Book of Abraham is actually located on papyri we no longer have, Nibley, Gee, Muhlestein et al have to show that both the GAEL & these two translation documents were created after our current Book of Abraham (and more not published) was actually translated and that the translation documents are just copies made by the scribes in a failed attempt to reverse engineer the Book of Abraham from a non-extant original English translation document, otherwise these two documents are the translation documents.

It is important to understand something here. This is not an argument between defenders of the church and its critics. This is an argument between textual criticism experts, many of who are faithful LDS and a few BYU Egyptologist. The textual side claims that Joseph Smith couldn’t and didn’t translate the Book of Abraham from an existing Egyptian document though that may be what he thought he was doing, while the Egyptologist are saying he could translate Egyptian and did so from a now missing papyrus or papyri that was part of the artifacts purchased from Michael Chandler in late June/early July 1835.

Dan,

I'm happy to say that I just ordered your new book via Amazon Prime!

I look forward to digesting this work and will treasure my copy.

Thanks,

Shulem

Time to pony up the money!

bump

Philo Sofee wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 23, 2022 5:53 am

bump

Thanks, Kerry.