New Book of Abraham Research Group

[_EdGoble]

With that reply you underscored once again your insufferable arrogance and intellectual vacuity. I agree it is not productive to engage with you on this topic, any more than it is productive to debate a fanatical flat-earther. Nothing is more glaringly obvious to me than that by far the most unreliable approach to discerning truth is the religious faith in divine revelation approach. The simple, undeniable fact that there are so many thousands of mutually contradictory religious belief systems, all of whose adherents are absolutely convinced that their convictions are a product of personal inspiration and revelation from God or the Holy Ghost is indisputable proof of that. Even if one of these mutually contradictory belief systems really were the absolute, God given truth it claims to be (which no more than one of them can be, since no two of them agree with each other), the unreliability of that approach is still established beyond all reasonable doubt.

I will now leave you to your delusions!

I didn't ask to talk to you. You are an invader to my thread, and come here to disturb my peace and make accusations. I didn't invite you here. I didn't ask you to respond. I came here with one purpose. And that was to seek out those truly interested in what I think. Nothing more, nothing less.

[_EdGoble]

EdGoble apparently does not realize that it is not an ad-hominem to truthfully point out (as Lemmie did) that EdGoble had lied. Refusing to consider the merits of an argument because its presenter has previously been caught in a lie would be a valid example of ad-hominem. Even a known liar can occasionally come up with a valid argument. No one lies 100% of the time.

I invite you to leave the thread. What do you want? Do you want me to come to you physically and buy you a burger as a token of peace because you have decided to make an enemy when you are an invader of a thread and a disturber of peace on the Celestial forum?

[_Lemmie]

EdGoble apparently does not realize that it is not an ad-hominem to truthfully point out (as Lemmie did) that EdGoble had lied. Refusing to consider the merits of an argument because its presenter has previously been caught in a lie would be a valid example of ad-hominem. Even a known liar can occasionally come up with a valid argument. No one lies 100% of the time.

I invite you to leave the thread. What do you want? Do you want me to come to you physically and buy you a burger as a token of peace because you have decided to make an enemy when you are an invader of a thread and a disturber of peace on the Celestial forum?

Hey, no disinviting allowed. You are breaking the rules!!

Although it's funny you define being disagreed with as 'disturbing the peace.'

[_Maksutov]

EdGoble apparently does not realize that it is not an ad-hominem to truthfully point out (as Lemmie did) that EdGoble had lied. Refusing to consider the merits of an argument because its presenter has previously been caught in a lie would be a valid example of ad-hominem. Even a known liar can occasionally come up with a valid argument. No one lies 100% of the time.

I invite you to leave the thread. What do you want? Do you want me to come to you physically and buy you a burger as a token of peace because you have decided to make an enemy when you are an invader of a thread and a disturber of peace on the Celestial forum?

I think you owe us all a round of burgers, Ed.

Seriously, this is not a board where you can approach with such a colossal chip on your shoulder and have no repercussions.

[_Themis]

So are you suggesting that God or that the person who created the papyri assigned meanings to each hieroglyph different then the Egyptology meaning Egyptology would translate into a coherent story?

1) I'm suggesting that Abraham himself wrote a book anciently.

No evidence for this but ok.

2) This book got into the hands of the Egyptians in the Greco-Roman era.

No evidence for this but ok.

3) Egyptians love word and symbol games.

Not sure what evidence you have for what exactly they liked to do and how it relates to individual hieroglyphs having about a paragraph of English text.

4) Egyptians in the Greco-Roman era thought it would be artistic and neat to take characters from the papyrus and decorate an ancient book of Abraham copy with them, and play word games with the symbols and tie them in with the wording of the Book of Abraham. Its like somebody decided that these characters would make a fun numbering or marking system for paragraphs of text.

Not sure what you mean here. The papyri has a well established stories involving the people they were buried with. The iconography of all three facsimiles fits that story found on the papyri. Are you suggesting they made the papyri for their dead relatives with a second meaning for each Hieroglyph?

5) Joseph Smith reconstituted this numbering/decoration/text marking system, along with the text that they were used anciently marked.

How does this numbering system work?

6) Neither Joseph Smith nor the ancient Egyptians ever made the suggestion or claim that these were the source of the text, but rather that they aligned with thematic subject matter.

The evidence only tells us about a common story from these ancient Egyptians. I do believe Joseph has said the papyri was the Book of Abraham and that he could translate ancient Egyptian just as he claimed to be able to translate reformed Egyptian. He even made a couple of other stabs and failed.

[_Maksutov]

1) I'm suggesting that Abraham himself wrote a book anciently.

No evidence for this but ok.

2) This book got into the hands of the Egyptians in the Greco-Roman era.

No evidence for this but ok.

3) Egyptians love word and symbol games.

Not sure what evidence you have for what exactly they liked to do and how it relates to individual hieroglyphs having about a paragraph of English text.

4) Egyptians in the Greco-Roman era thought it would be artistic and neat to take characters from the papyrus and decorate an ancient book of Abraham copy with them, and play word games with the symbols and tie them in with the wording of the Book of Abraham. Its like somebody decided that these characters would make a fun numbering or marking system for paragraphs of text.

Not sure what you mean here. The papyri has a well established stories involving the people they were buried with. The iconography of all three facsimiles fits that story found on the papyri. Are you suggesting they made the papyri for their dead relatives with a second meaning for each Hieroglyph?

5) Joseph Smith reconstituted this numbering/decoration/text marking system, along with the text that they were used anciently marked.

How does this numbering system work?

6) Neither Joseph Smith nor the ancient Egyptians ever made the suggestion or claim that these were the source of the text, but rather that they aligned with thematic subject matter.

The evidence only tells us about a common story from these ancient Egyptians. I do believe Joseph has said the papyri was the Book of Abraham and that he could translate ancient Egyptian just as he claimed to be able to translate reformed Egyptian. He even made a couple of other stabs and failed.

We should give the Kinderhook Plates and the Greek Psalter equal treatment. "Zelph" has about as much credibility as "Abraham" in the hands of Joseph Smith, Jr.

[_EdGoble]

Although it's funny you define being disagreed with as 'disturbing the peace.'

All of you already know that most of us disagree on a fundamental point that for me is not negotiable, because in asking me to give that up, you are asking me to give up identity. It is a point that is not negotiable because in my reality, it is fundamental and in my perception it is true. You say that we cannot even begin to have a conversation unless I give that up. I never agreed to have a conversation like that, and told you that. You won't let it go. You've already stated that you disagree. Yet some of you also decided to nitpick on the smallest of things that I have said and blow it way out of proportion and go for the jugular. I didn't come here to have people making railing accusations. I came here in search of fellow Mormons. I had no intention of having unproductive conversations with ex-Mormons. I see no point in a conversation like that. So, either this conversation is going to change, and those of you who are doing this will leave or stop, or I'm going to leave myself, or perhaps I will just stop replying to you. Either way, this is going to stop. If I feel like there is no value anymore in this soon because you won't stop, I will just leave the conversation entirely myself to bring it to an end.

[_Themis]

We should give the Kinderhook Plates and the Greek Psalter equal treatment. "Zelph" has about as much credibility as "Abraham" in the hands of Joseph Smith, Jr.

They are not equal in that Joseph never spent much time on them as he did with the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham. What it does show is that Joseph was willing to try and deceive people into thinking he could translate other languages into English. Zelph is Joseph making up stories to impress. He has a history of this starting at least with his treasure hunting days, but I believe his mother also said he would tell detailed and entertaining stories.

[_Maksutov]

They are not equal in that Joseph never spent much time on them as he did with the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham. What it does show is that Joseph was willing to try and deceive people into thinking he could translate other languages into English. Zelph is Joseph making up stories to impress. He has a history of this starting at least with his treasure hunting days, but I believe his mother also said he would tell detailed and entertaining stories.

in my opinion Joseph was an inventor and an opportunist. He was willing to improvise as required. If there had been sufficient time and ROI for him to work on either of them, he might have. But he was also producing a lot of "revelation" with no other prop than his lips moving in the presence of a scribe. So I think that the physical phenomena, including fabrications, was on its way out. He did still have the "sealed portion" of the Book of Mormon in his back pocket if he ever needed it. He didn't live long enough.

[Guest]

All of you already know that most of us disagree on a fundamental point that for me is not negotiable, because in asking me to give that up, you are asking me to give up identity. It is a point that is not negotiable because in my reality, it is fundamental and in my perception it is true

And other people than yourself also have fundamental, non-negotiable points, perceptions, and identities. What's your point?

You say that we cannot even begin to have a conversation unless I give that up. I never agreed to have a conversation like that, and told you that. You won't let it go. You've already stated that you disagree. Yet some of you also decided to nitpick on the smallest of things that I have said and blow it way out of proportion and go for the jugular. I didn't come here to have people making railing accusations. I came here in search of fellow Mormons. I had no intention of having unproductive conversations with ex-Mormons. I see no point in a conversation like that.

Ok, then don't. But... I sense that you are not okay with determining your own behavior but would like to also dictate others' behaviors....

So, either this conversation is going to change, and those of you who are doing this will leave or stop, or I'm going to leave myself, or perhaps I will just stop replying to you. Either way, this is going to stop. If I feel like there is no value anymore in this soon because you won't stop, I will just leave the conversation entirely myself to bring it to an end.

Ah, yes. The ultimatum. You come here, start a thread, don't like the responses, then you tell people to stop it because you have opinions and others shouldn't rudely or even politely disagree. If not, you are leaving! Got it. Please note you cannot control other people.

This is an interesting phenomena. Why is it some Mormons feel they have a special right to exist, have opinions, identities, beliefs, and the inhabitants of the entire rest of the world (the non-members) don't?