Currently at MADB - Will loses his mojo

[_harmony]

In fact, he would have no choice but to forfeit and render them up into the hands of President Monson.

Paul O

What make you think Pres Monson could do anything with them either? It's not like we have a body of revelation from Pres Monson to point to, when we discuss his revelatory ability.

[_Kevin Graham]

David, what is your take on the KEP?

I know you don't have any theological problems with the simultaneous dictation theory, but I've never seen you agree or disagree with it. What do you think the evidence suggests?

[_Paul Osborne]

In fact, he would have no choice but to forfeit and render them up into the hands of President Monson.

Paul O

What make you think Pres Monson could do anything with them either? It's not like we have a body of revelation from Pres Monson to point to, when we discuss his revelatory ability.

Dearest Harmony,

I note you made no objections to my statement about Gee not being able to translate, so, we seem to be in agreement on that part.

Regarding Monson, I think he could do a miracle with the papyrus if he was willing to step forward and ask God to reveal it to him. But, I’m not holding my breath because so far, the prophets, have let me down considerably when it comes to the papyrus and the KEP. I wish they would apologize for letting me down and not filling Joseph Smith’s shoes to my satisfaction. I’ve taken it quite personally.

President Monson should step up to the plate and act like a seer and give a boost. I’m not interested in his poetry and happy little stories. I want action with the KEP! I want to see his faith in action by filling his role as a translater and in turn build my faith.

Paul O

[_Enuma Elish]

Hey Kevin,

David, what is your take on the KEP?

I know you don't have any theological problems with the simultaneous dictation theory, but I've never seen you agree or disagree with it. What do you think the evidence suggests?

I wish I was a text critic and could contribute to the discussion. I'm not, and I still don't feel that I have a strong enough grasp on the issue. Given my understanding of the papyri, the matter had never interested me all that much until late.

I have now read through most of the threads on the topic and am waiting for Brian and Brent's publications before I formulate my opinion. Truth of the matter is that I would actually like Brent's views to be correct, since they would provide so many direct historical insights into the production process, but we'll see.

Rumor has it that Brian has amassed some important scientific evidence that has yet to be presented.

You've mentioned a few threads on the topic that you've directed via your website. Could you provide a link?

Thanks.

[_Enuma Elish]

Hi David,

This has no doubt been pointed out before, however, in my mind, the statement Joseph dictated to Willard Richards for the March 1, 1842 edition of the Times and Seasons completely negates any argument against the notion that Joseph did not believe that Abraham literally wrote the scroll in his possession:

Venturing into the chirographic nightmare that is a Willard Richards holograph, here is my most recent transcription of Joseph Smith's letter to the Times and Seasons:

In the pr[e]sent no. will be found the commencement of the Reccords discovered in Egypt, some time since, {a}s penned by the hand, of Father Abraham, which I shall contin[u]e to translate & publish as fa{s}t a{s} possible till the whole is completed.

[Joseph Smith to the Times and Seasons, March 1842, Joseph Smith Collection, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City, available on Selected Collections from the Archives of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 2002), DVD 20.]

Kind regards,

</brent>

http://mormonscripturestudies.com
(© 2009 Brent Lee Metcalfe. All rights reserved.)
——————————
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown

Very interesting, my Brother. Looking forward to your highly anticipated work. Is Dan still working on his critical edition of the History of the Church? Haven't heard from him in a while, so I assume he's totally consumed by the project.

[_Kevin Graham]

I wish I was a text critic and could contribute to the discussion. I'm not, and I still don't feel that I have a strong enough grasp on the issue.

Brian Hauglid isn't a text critic either. If anything, you should have more formal training in this area. The field of textual criticism focuses on biblical texts that are taken for granted to have been copied. Is there even a specialized area for dictated 19th century texts? You're a Bible scholar, right? Hauglid is an Islamicist.

[_Enuma Elish]

I wish I was a text critic and could contribute to the discussion. I'm not, and I still don't feel that I have a strong enough grasp on the issue.

Brian Hauglid isn't a text critic either. If anything, you should have more formal training in this area. The field of textual criticism focuses on biblical texts that are taken for granted to have been copied. Is there even a specialized area for dictated 19th century texts? You're a Bible scholar, right? Hauglid is an Islamicist.

Yes, I've had some exposure to the issue via course work, reading Tov, etc., however biblical scholarship has become so highly specialized these days that scholars encounter a bit of everything from linguistics and archeology, to literary theory, yet can only specialize in a few areas.

While I deal with textual criticism, I primarily focus on source criticism and analyzing handwriting, etc. is not part of my field.

I'm not trying to suggest, however, that official academic training is necessary in order for one to offer a compelling argument concerning the KEP.

I don't believe that at all. I simply lament the fact that I can not contribute anything of substance to the arguments I've witnessed you, Chris, Brent, Brian, and Will offer.

It's obviously a heated issue, and I'm simply waiting to make my mind up on the matter until I have fully encountered what Brent and Brian both have to say.

Again, the argument for simultaneous diction is interesting from a historical perspective, but I'm just not that concerned with the details since I don't believe that Joseph could have produced an accurate translation of a Egyptian text.

If the KEP are in fact the working papers for the Book of Abraham then that's great, since we'll have a better historical understanding of the way Joseph produced the text.

If not, the Joseph Smith papyri (and the facsimiles themselves) offer non negotiable proof which negates any argument that the Prophet produced a literal translation.

[_harmony]

Again, the argument for simultaneous diction is interesting from a historical perspective, but I'm just not that concerned with the details since I don't believe that Joseph could have produced an accurate translation of a Egyptian text.

I knew I always liked you.

(my emphasis)

[_Trevor]

Again, the argument for simultaneous diction is interesting from a historical perspective, but I'm just not that concerned with the details since I don't believe that Joseph could have produced an accurate translation of a Egyptian text.

I knew I always liked you.

David deserves real credit for his courage in openly taking positions like this one.

[_harmony]

I knew I always liked you.

David deserves real credit for his courage in openly taking positions like this one.

I agree. Unfortunately I only have access to harmony-credit.