Gee has lost all credibility. He has a history of fabricating evidence to suit his pet theories. Nobody takes him seriously anymore except himself. But I guess that explains why you like him so much; you do the same thing.
No there isn't.
List the Egyptological journals that vindicate Joseph Smith's erroneous interpretations. Come on, let's see if you will run from three threads in a row. Put up or shut up. It is a waste of everyone's time.
No it isn't.
Translation: the gist of Graham's entire counter argument is "neener, neener, neener".
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
It would be helpful if you bulletized/enumerated your points rather than make a vague reference to them. For example, you might say:
"The real problem for any critic of the Book of Abraham is the manner in which the Book of Abraham appears to have restored numerous aspects of First Temple Judaism:
1) They used to lie on lion couches in the fist temple.
2) They used to have jackal-headed priests administer human sacrifices in the first temple.
3) Monkeys would fly out of everyone's asses as represented by a flying bird... In the first temple."
By enumerating your points you help clarify your points, stay on track, and give the casual reader an idea as to what thought you're attempting to convey. As it stands, you simply appear to be waving your arms around a bit, calling people names, and talking out of your ass.
So clearly, you have not the slightest idea what I'm even talking about. I'd try and educate you a little, but I don't think your educable.
Try to enjoy the daylight shock.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
WS wrote: There is actually a lively and growing debate about just how “incorrect” Joseph Smith’s explanations of the facsimiles really are.
No there isn't.
WS wrote: Of course, no one on this board reads Egyptological journals, so they aren’t aware of the discussion being had there concerning the way Ptolemaic-era Egyptians would have used and interpreted the classic vignettes from the Book of the Dead; therefore they aren’t even in a position to consider the implications of that debate on the questions surrounding the Joseph Smith Papyri.
List the Egyptological journals that vindicate Joseph Smith's erroneous interpretations. Come on, let's see if you will run from three threads in a row. Put up or shut up. It is a waste of everyone's time.
I too am interested in seeing some bibliography on the growing debate about Joseph Smith's explanations of the facsimiles. Could you provide some of that for us, Will? I am not that familiar with the field of Egyptology, but I'll take a look. Perhaps you could also elucidate these arguments about Ptolemaic-era interpretations of Book of the Dead vignettes. I actually do a little work on Ptolemaic Alexandria, which doubles my interest. Just how does this issue relate to the debate about the Book of Abraham?
Are these two things really the same thing? Or are there two separate discussions taking place? Please fill us in.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
That is another funny thing. Dan Peterson informed us years ago that somewhere in the scholarly journals Gee had responded and refuted Ritner. Funny how Gee never provided such a refutation in his FROB articles. In any event, why the secret? What journal issues is he referring to?
When I asked him he told me I needed to email Gee and request that he tell me where I could find them. I did, and Gee never responded. Ritner said he never knew what journal articles responded to him either. Now let's see if Will is willing to provide the list. I suspect he's just talking out of his ass as usual, with this pompous, "You don't read Egyptological journals like me! Because you're not shmart like meeeeeeeee!"
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
dartagnan wrote:That is another funny thing. Dan Peterson informed us years ago that somewhere in the scholarly journals Gee had responded and refuted Ritner. Funny how Gee never provided such a refutation in his FROB articles. In any event, why the secret? What journal issues is he referring to?
When I asked him he told me I needed to email Gee and request that he tell me where I could find them. I did, and Gee never responded. Ritner said he never knew what journal articles responded to him either. Now let's see if Will is willing to provide the list. I suspect he's just talking out of his ass as usual, with this pompous, "You don't read Egyptological journals like me! Because you're not shmart like meeeeeeeee!"
Maybe Will can do us a solid by providing the reference to Gee's refutation of Ritner in a scholarly journal as well. This looks like an excellent opportunity for him to show us all up with some real substance. I am eager to see him produce this material for us. Undoubtedly an interesting discussion will result.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
Until Book of Abraham defenders can produce and publish material in Book of Abraham's defense that turns the heads of non-LDS Egyptological experts--that is, until said defenders produce something that other than Book of Abraham defenders are intellectually able to "get"--I'll regard pro-BoA statements by LDS defenders as little more than (perhaps-unconscious) obfuscation.
Vague statements about First Temple Judaism, Joseph Smith's unwitting prescience, and confident, if obscure, references to Egyptological journals, pre-Ptolemaic thought worlds and the like are routinely trotted out for befogged display.
With regard to Book of Abraham apologetics vis-à-vis any larger ancient historical context, the cliché "always the bridesmaid, never the bribe" still seems apt.
I remain eager to receive the bibliography that Will refers to.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
The problem with the Book of Abraham's 8 lb gorilla is that it becomes less intimidating the longer you look at it.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
Gee has lost all credibility. He has a history of fabricating evidence to suit his pet theories. Nobody takes him seriously anymore except himself. But I guess that explains why you like him so much; you do the same thing.
No there isn't.
List the Egyptological journals that vindicate Joseph Smith's erroneous interpretations. Come on, let's see if you will run from three threads in a row. Put up or shut up. It is a waste of everyone's time.
No it isn't.
Translation: the gist of Graham's entire counter argument is "neener, neener, neener".
You see, it's a bit like this:
A: It is now well accepted that aliens landed on the White House lawn in 1968.
B: No it isn't
and for 99% of normal people, the answer by B is pretty well sufficient.
