Who can count the windings?

[_Mortal Man]

Is Gee's article available in print yet?

Yes

It actually makes me feel better to believe that Gee is largely incompetent rather than purposefully deceitful.

He exhibits a rare combination of the two.

[_SteelHead]

Wow..... no formulas, no data, no nothing...... Is this supposed to be a scholarly publication?

[_Mortal Man]

Wow..... no formulas, no data, no nothing...... Is this supposed to be a scholarly publication?

You're missing the point SteelHead. Gee's editor assures us that "John Gee has tackled this relative question with objectivity and precision." That is really all we need to know. When John Gee speaks, the thinking has been done.

[_SteelHead]

Interestingly enough, the call themselves the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship.

Misnomer..........

[_Kevin Graham]

If I were still at MAD I would start a thread dedicated to this subject.

It is indisputable proof that the FARMS guys are only putting on a charade about scholarship.

Where is the peer reviewing here?

It seems to me that this is something that could have easily been avoided, had anyone at NAMIR had the balls to stand up to Gee and tell him he's wrong. Incidentally, Brian Hauglid told me he disagrees with Gee on a number of issues. Particularly the way Gee makes apologetic declarations when the evidence suggests the contrary. For example, Gee's repeated claim that in 1842, Joseph Smith only engaged in "revisions" and "editing" of an already translated Book of Abraham. Why? Because that must be the way it happened for Gee's theory to work. He begins with an apologetic theory and they force feeds all evidence to suit that model.

Never mind the fact that Joseph Smith explicitly claimed to have been engaged in further translations in 1842. For Gee, it is important for him to gloss over or flat out ignore the evidence that disrupts his apologetic nonsense. He is the worst offender against true scholarly methodology over there, and they treat him as if he is above reproach just because he got a degree from Yale. This reflects poorly on all of them who claim to be engaged in scholarship. It is a joke really. No wonder Gee's teacher quickly disowned him and his "scholarship."

[_Shulem]

If I were still at MAD I would start a thread dedicated to this subject.

It is indisputable proof that the FARMS guys are only putting on a charade about scholarship.

Where is the peer reviewing here?

It seems to me that this is something that could have easily been avoided, had anyone at NAMIR had the balls to stand up to Gee and tell him he's wrong. Incidentally, Brian Hauglid told me he disagrees with Gee on a number of issues. Particularly the way Gee makes apologetic declarations when the evidence suggests the contrary. For example, Gee's repeated claim that in 1842, Joseph Smith only engaged in "revisions" and "editing" of an already translated Book of Abraham. Why? Because that must be the way it happened for Gee's theory to work. He begins with an apologetic theory and they force feeds all evidence to suit that model.

Never mind the fact that Joseph Smith explicitly claimed to have been engaged in further translations in 1842. For Gee, it is important for him to gloss over or flat out ignore the evidence that disrupts his apologetic nonsense. He is the worst offender against true scholarly methodology over there, and they treat him as if he is above reproach just because he got a degree from Yale. This reflects poorly on all of them who claim to be engaged in scholarship. It is a joke really. No wonder Gee's teacher quickly disowned him and his "scholarship."

John Gee can shove the Explanations of Facsimile No 3 [Telestial-caliber comment deleted]. I trust that if that sorry bastard ever decides to publish on that account there will be an army of Egyptologists ready to decend upon him and ruin his career and turn him into the laughing stalk of Egyptologists.

Just try it, Gee. Your sorry ass will hang and you'll decend below Budge and worse yet you'll be branded a heretic forever. The name of John Gee will become the name associated with bad Egyptology and Mormon lies

So, when it comes to the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 John Gee better keep his mouth damn shut. Shut it, boy! Or pay the price.

Paul O

[_KimberlyAnn]

If on the Book of Abraham you are tempest-tossed,
If you are discouraged, your testimony lost,
Count the many windings,
Name them one by one,
And it will surprise you what John Gee has done!

(This kind of genius comes effortlessly for me. I apologize for being unable to contain it.)

KA

[_SteelHead]

+1 for KA!

[_Fence Sitter]

Very funny KA!!!

[_3sheets2thewind]

Been thinking on this for a bit.

How can one count the windings on a rolled out scroll, when each winding would be longer than the previous one?