Mormon Egyptologist Debunks the Book of Abraham

[_Corpsegrinder]

When did you stop selling crack to 6th graders, CG?

Why? Do you want a refund?

[_Droopy]

Oh really? Name me a single instance where you demonstrated any knowledge on this subject whatsoever.

Nothing I could say would ever convince you, as nothing said by those the most educated and with the deepest actual knowledge of the subject (Nibley, Gee, Rhodes, Schryver, Englund etc) counts for you, steeped as you are in the now Jurassic arguments of the actual sources of your own views, Ashment, Larson, Metcalf et al, as legitimate knowledge. Its nothing but bigoted dismissal, of course, not serious engagement of their arguments, but that's just you.

No, you really don't understand the KEP issue in an overall scholarly sense. You understand it, and pointedly so, from one and only one agenda oriented perspective, the anti-Mormon Ashment/Larson/Metcalf perspective, and you have never shown the slightest inclination to meet dissenting views in the marketplace of ideas in an honest, rigorous, or scholarly manner.

I'm not interested in whether or not you got the other two stooges (Englund/Schryver) to clap their hands. The fact is, these are the only "others" who may have appealed to something you've said, but they do so only because they are only more interested in keeping loyalties strong.

As you continue to display your pathological narcissism and delusions of self importance in public, the nails in the coffin of your credibility are pounded ever deeper.

As it is, your own home forum wants nothing to do with you because you're an embarrassment to the group. You have to come to an apostate forum because only here do they allow freedom of speech to complain.

I have a number of friends there, including some who disagree with me on various things, and most of us get along just fine, thank you. My problems in that forum has traditionally been with a few highly sensitive mods who do not like me because of my political philosophy, and we (and others) have clashed on that basis and the double standards applied (in Bokovoy's case, for example) in the case of overtly ideological discussions.

Such as? The only person I can think of is William Schryver, who is just a proven liar who has been refuted more times than we can keep track of anymore.

You've never "refuted" him or any other serious apologist once in your entire life except in one place: the legend that is you that exists between your own ears and nowhere else.

No serious thinkers believe he has credibility anymore. LDS scholars are distancing themselves from him as we speak.

Well, we shall see, won't we? He's promised to publish in the future, and has long mentioned that distinguished LDS scholars who have seen his work and consulted with him on it have been impressed by it, and will support in as it becomes available in teh public sphere.

We shall see.

Uh, I was the one who educated Schryver on this subject back in 2006. The exchange is online in the MAD archives. William Schryver was as dumb about this subject then as you are now. He thought the KEP and the papyri were the same thing! ROFL! Then when I explained what they were, and pointed out that he had no idea what they were, he tried to squirm his way out of it by saying he had studied these documents as extensively as anyone had. Of course, he was too stupid to know at the time that these documents weren't available for "extensive" study. He just tried to lie his way out of another lie, which is generally what you and wade do too. It is pretty hilarious to watch to be honest.

I've said you are a pseudo-scholar. I've said you are a flailing bigot. I've said you are a demagogue, and, given the slightest chance, you will dutifully prove me right sentence after sentence after sentence after sentence. I need rarely rest my case regarding you, as you're quite capable of doing it for me all on your own.

So you have no idea what you are talking about when you refer to LDS apologists who have been studying the KEP for years while I've been doing nothing.

I never said this. I've said that you've been lifting wholesale arguments from claims made long ago by the traditional critics of the Chuch such as Ashment, Larson, and Metcalf, among others. While the LDS apologists, and especially those like Schryver and a few select others, have had access to the original source documents, you've been lifting and regurgitating, in your own words, the conjectures, speculations, and leaps of inference of others who themselves never had access to the sources and who have not done enough of their own homework outside their own narrow box, dedicated as they are a priori to the KEP dependence theory from the outset.

Both Will and, of late, Wade, have done a very nice job of showing that, although no certainty is possible here, the inferential strength of the dependence theory is, on the merits, inferentially weak and not a good fit with the evidence as the KEP presents it.

Gee has done NOTHING but lie about this subject.

Credibility: zero.

Schryver has been spending years trying to force-feed the evidence into his idiotic theories, but his problem is that we know this stuff better than he does, and so the only people he can ever hope to convince are his "ignorant" folks at MAD, as he frequently describes them.

Credibility: -1

As far as I can tell, the only BYU scholar who has studied these documents to any degree is Brian Hauglid, and he emailed me out of the blue a few weeks ago to tell me to keep up the good work in refuting Will's Cipher nonsense.

Uh huh...

Remember, Hauglid as William's star expert for years until Hauglid told him he didn't agree with his theories. At that point William left in a huff like a crying baby and hasn't spoken to Hauglid since. His ego cannot handle rejection, even from his own experts.

Lack of credibility: near infinity. By the way, does Brian accept the Book of Abraham as a legitimate ancient document that restores lost doctrinal truths and which was translated by Joseph Smith through the principle of revelation? Just asking, because if he does, then I have a bit of a difficult time understanding why he would not make his contrary views known, such at on the scholar's forum at MDD, and would instead make common cause with one of the most uncivil and least qualified critics of the church who's core mission is to destroy the Book of Abraham and the faith and testimony of LDS members in that book of scripture, Joseph Smith, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints in toto.

I think we will, eventually Kevin, find out who the liar has been. It may take time, but the time will, I'm confident, come.

It isn't a lie. You clearly believed the Breathings Text was synonymous with the Hypocephalus. Your idiotic comment is documented online and it will forever haunt you as long as you persist in this subject.

No, it was a misstatement written in haste for which I immediately corrected myself when it was pointed out. I've been reading on the Book of Abraham for quite a few years (though not the detailed text-critical arguments) since you were probably in Middle School stealing lunch money from the "special needs" kids, and I have long been well aware of the difference between the Sensen and the hypocephalus.

You're actually far worse a psychoanalyst than you are a textual critic.

At least they don't have to lie. Gee, Nibley and now Schryver are notorious liars.

Among those of us involved in this debate, someone is indeed a liar, and in time, he will be revealed for who and what he is.

All in good time, as the Wicked Witch of the West said, all in good time.

Who needs "original" arguments when the ones that already exist are on solid ground and haven't been moved an inch?

You can't be serious?

Unlike Loran, I get invited to speak on these subjects because of what I know. Loran is usually invited to leave discussions about this subject. I also get invited to publish, and I get spontaneous emails from LDS scholars thanking me for my work on the subject.

A list please.

I'm not like Blood and Schryver who have to either pimp themselves as a "Think tank" specialist, or lobby themselves with the BYU faculty, desperately looking for some sympathetic "scholar" who is willing to give them the time of day. How pathetic when the only thing you have going for you is a Mormon testimony.

Credibility: out near the event horizon, and receding fast.

The folks at BYU are sympathetic to any Mormon knuckle-dragger who is willing to say whatever is required to help the Church. Truth doesn't really matter. Retaining memberships is what matters.

The Kevin Klux Klan rides through the night upholding its honor and righting wrongs - by any means necessary. Scholars sit at your feet and thank your for your demagoguery, bloviating polemics, and for regurgitating the work of others as you smear the character of any who disagree with you? Who are these "scholars," by the way?

Hey there is nothing wrong with having learning disabilities, as Wade Englund admittedly has. But it is frustrating to see someone suffering from these cognitive deficiencies while at the same time refusing to accept the possibility that he isn't properly understanding what is being said. No, not for wade. It has to be the other guy who is having comprehension issues! His ego won't allow it any other way. He has to be in teaching mode constantly, even when it is painfully clear he has no friggin clue what he is talking about. It is embarrassing that the most vocal apologists on this subject are two uneducated, single, sexually frustrated men in their 50's; one with known learning disabilities and the other with unknown learning disabilities.

I really have met and had the misfortune to be associated with truly vile human beings in my life, but frankly, I have rarely personally known an individual so thoroughly imbued with unalloyed venality such as I and others have experienced at your hands.

You know, at some point in the future, after your near psychotic arrogance, narcissism, grandiose pomposity, and short fused mean-spiritedness have caused the loss of everything you value in your life, including most likely your wife and children (who I'm more than convinced are receiving the same treatment on a regular basis, when they cross you in a way you don't like, as we, who you do not really even know personally, receive on a continual basis), and come crawling on your scaled belly back to the Church, seeking to salvage something from the dark circus you've made of your soul and your life, guess what?

It and we will be there to receive you, no matter what you've said and done and no matter how viscous and reptilian its nature.

I know we can expect no quarter from you, but in the end, that would not be returned in kind.

A poor, angry, bitter, neurotic, ranting intellectual hack, filled with sound and fury, spitting personal insults and cut downs at anyone who sees things differently than he does, poorly read and narrowly, shallowly educated, strutting and preening as a serious thinker to cover his inability to so much as approach that ideal, and seething with hate for the Church of Jesus Christ and all it stands for.

Yes, I know that as a LDS myself, I'm not supposed to return railing accusation for railing accusation. But though the spirit is willing, the flesh, when dealing with Graham, is proverbially weak. It is something I'm well aware of and something I need continual work on, I admit openly.

The hell with this intellectual and moral fraud. Even Wade, Mr. civility himself, has finally realized that serious, reasoned, civil discourse with Graham is impossible.

[_Droopy]

When did you stop selling crack to 6th graders, CG?

Why? Do you want a refund?

Graham does need to turn in his crack pipe for a bong. I mean this guy needs to mellow out big time.

[_harmony]

I'm moving this thread to Terrestial, due to the high number of personal attacks.

[_Buffalo]

Graham does need to turn in his crack pipe for a bong. I mean this guy needs to mellow out big time.

Ironically you can't even mention Graham without turning catatonic with rage. :)

U mad, bro?

[_Droopy]

I'm moving this thread to Terrestial, due to the high number of personal attacks.

At least there's no pictures of naked men wearing skirts.

[_Darth J]

I'm moving this thread to Terrestial, due to the high number of personal attacks.

At least there's no pictures of naked men wearing skirts.

Or pictures of bald men with Afros.

[_Buffalo]

At least there's no pictures of naked men wearing skirts.

I can only assume this is a request.



You can save this one for later.

[_Droopy]

At least there's no pictures of naked men wearing skirts.

I can only assume this is a request.



You can save this one for later.

Just wondering, Buff, how long have you been out of High School?

[_Buffalo]

Just wondering, Buff, how long have you been out of High School?

You can pretend you're mad all you like. We all know you right clicked and saved that for your alone time. ;)