Skousen & McGuire apologetics on the Book of Abraham.

[Kishkumen]

Fair enough!

I am the best Book of Abraham critic on the planet.

Yeah baby!

Maybe. I don’t know. You are very prolific and indefatigable on this board. Before his death, Prof. Ritner was the best Book of Abraham critic.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

What con man explains his con to his victims? If one wants to believe Smith really believed his own nonsense then so be it. I would suggest most people who are privy to this affair, rightfully so, see through and are disgusted by it.

- Doc

Yes, if we assume that Smith is a con man, then not explaining the “translation” process would easily fit into the con man paradigm. I agree that those things work together nicely to reaffirm our views. That is not the only way to interpret the evidence, but it is the way that will be most welcome here. Ben McGuire’s views are understandably not so attractive in these parts.

I can’t speak for others (obviously), but I didn’t assume anything. I learned he was a con man because of people like Shulem. I got the LDS narrative, and it doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. I don’t think it rises to the level of pious fraud, either. It’s plainly obvious he invented the Book of Abraham, brilliant as it maybe.

- Doc

[Shulem]

Maybe. I don’t know. You are very prolific and indefatigable on this board. Before his death, Prof. Ritner was the best Book of Abraham critic.

Not a chance! Ritner was a world class Egyptologist but his understanding of Mormonism was limited and his ability to provide critical analysis about Book of Abraham history from various angles was limited. He would have been the first to admit that.

RIP

[Shulem]

What con man explains his con to his victims? If one wants to believe Smith really believed his own nonsense then so be it. I would suggest most people who are privy to this affair, rightfully so, see through and are disgusted by it.

- Doc

Yes, if we assume that Smith is a con man

Yes, I assume it.

con man
noun
a man who cheats or tricks someone by gaining their trust and persuading them to believe something that is not true.

[Kishkumen]

I can’t speak for others (obviously), but I didn’t assume anything. I learned he was a con man because of people like Shulem. I got the LDS narrative, and it doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. I don’t think it rises to the level of pious fraud, either. It’s plainly obvious he invented the Book of Abraham, brilliant as it maybe.

- Doc

The most powerful assumptions are the ones we don’t recognize in ourselves. Of course the con man model is assumed. The evidence is marshaled in a way that makes the conclusion seem self evident, and then the reader is easily convinced. Because of this, one ought to be especially wary of the easy conclusion.

This isn’t a simple binary between con man and true prophet either. There are other models to consider. One does not have to accept that Smith is a true prophet because the con man model does not work and vice versa. That is a false dilemma.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I can’t speak for others (obviously), but I didn’t assume anything. I learned he was a con man because of people like Shulem. I got the LDS narrative, and it doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. I don’t think it rises to the level of pious fraud, either. It’s plainly obvious he invented the Book of Abraham, brilliant as it maybe.

- Doc

The most powerful assumptions are the ones we don’t recognize in ourselves. Of course the con man model is assumed. The evidence is marshaled in a way that makes the conclusion seem self evident, and then the reader is easily convinced. Because of this, one ought to be especially wary of the easy conclusion.

This isn’t a simple binary between con man and true prophet either. There are other models to consider. One does not have to accept that Smith is a true prophet because the con man model does not work and vice versa. That is a false dilemma.

Hrm. If con man, pious fraud, and fraud don’t work, then what does?

- Doc

[Kishkumen]

Not a chance! Ritner was a world class Egyptologist but his understanding of Mormonism was limited and his ability to provide critical analysis about Book of Abraham history from various angles was limited. He would have been the first to admit that.

RIP

I never questioned his great contribution to Egyptology. He was also bigoted against Mormonism and a class-A Book of Abraham critic. Indeed, the best ever. The GOAT, as it were.

[Shulem]

Hrm. If con man, pious fraud, and fraud don’t work, then what does?

- Doc

Time to go back to church and pay your 10% and confess your sins.

Kishy goes first!

[Kishkumen]

Hrm. If con man, pious fraud, and fraud don’t work, then what does?

- Doc

There are other models to look at for comparanda. Shamans are good to look at. But the point here, at least for me, is that real understanding does not emerge from a rush to find a convenient label, especially an obviously pejorative one.

[Marcus]

A satirical riff on the use of 'repurposing' as a severity softening word:

Similarly, Dan Peterson "most definitely repurposed" other people's intellectual property when he plagiarized. When people write, their writings have "one purpose" and are designated as their intellectual property. DCP used other people's intellectual property "to another purpose. What gets you [people] worked up is that he did not explain to others that this is what he was doing. That is because he called what he did translating[paraphrasing, or note-taking, or accidental lack of quotation marks, references, sources, and/or acknowledgement of a different author].

[DCP] doesn’t "care what anyone believes or does not believe about any of that. You are free to surmise that his process is evidence of dishonesty or fraud. You can also believe that whatever his process was should be understood as part of the act of translation [plagiarism]."

"In either case, [DCP] objectively did repurpose [other people's intellectual property] by modifying them and reinterpreting them [also known as stealing them and plagiarizing them] in an idiosyncratic way."

All intellectual theft is idiosyncratic because all plagiarisers are unique. Please, be respectful of the uniqueness of those who lie, steal and con.