Expect Will to use the JST as evidence. Of course the JST is nothing but a massive attempt to "clarify" an already translated Bible. By contrast, the Book of Abraham claims to be a literal translation of Egyptian documents. But don't expect Will to understand the difference.
By the way, did I mention how sad it is to see how shockingly irrelevant Kevin Graham has become; what a tragic caricature he has evolved into?
You've stated this many times over the course of three years, but it makes little sense. I guess you think you're somehow getting me back for showing the world what a liar and a fraud you really are.
Either way, you've never explained what you mean by it. The put down suggests that I was, once upon a time, "relevant" to the so called "discussion," and that ever since I was banned from MADB, somehow I've become irrelevant. As if MADB had the authority to decide who is and who isn't relevant, via exclusion. As if the controvery never gets debated outside that forum.
I've responded to your idiotic arguments in other forums ever since November of 2006, and you know it. The reason you choose to hide out over there is because you know I am forbidden to respond. Brent and Chris have to mind their manners or else we know they'd be banned too. This is why you are trying to get Chris to call Gee a liar again, so he will be banned and you can avoid looking like an idiot since there will be no one left to refute you in that echo chamber you call a pundits forum. And you know you have yet to respond to numerous detailed refutations I provided on my forum. But fear not, you will get your chance when I consolidate and present them in a venue that will demand a response.
But seriously, do you really think
you've become "relevant" in any meaningful way? After three years you've provided nothing new or innovative. Three years ago you were saying the same crap: that the so-called experts have "confirmed" your theories about Abr 1:12 and the "Haran dittograph." After three years you want to pretend you're advancing an old discussion that was dead in the water when Brian Hauglid chickened out and Brent decided you weren't worth debating? Your various threads at MADB only prove you're a glutton for punishment, and your latest piece in pundits is an utter joke. It was immediately shot down by Chris, who clearly knows far more on this subject than you ever will. He provided a detailed refutation in a deft manner, clearly off the cuff, on a topic it took you more than a year to research (and you
still don't understand it!), with help from a half dozen people. You've turned into one of those amateur "know nothngs" who thinks a high quantity of footnotes will somehow make a crap article appear scholarly.
So to be frank, if what you're doing proves relevance, then I'm happy to be irrelevant. It means I'm not embarrassing my colleagues or making an ass of myself.