phaedrus ut Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 William,You have access to this catalogue at the church archives?Phaedrus
William Schryver Posted September 28, 2006 Author Posted September 28, 2006 William,You have access to this catalogue at the church archives?Phaedrus Obviously I would not have suggested such a thing if I did not have access to information sufficient to lead me to believe that there is no such document among the "Joseph Smith Egyptian Papers."The better question is: Did Vogel have access to this catalogue in the Church Archives in order to have verified his claim?And the bigger question is: Are there other inaccuracies in The Making of a Prophet that have been noted by astute readers out there?
phaedrus ut Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Is that a YES you have access? Or a NO you do not have access?Phaedrus
William Schryver Posted September 28, 2006 Author Posted September 28, 2006 Is that a YES you have access? Or a NO you do not have access?Phaedrus If I divulged all the details, you'd become an immediate target of the Danites. So let's just leave it at "I have satisfactory access to the inventory of the Joseph Smith Egyptian Papers."
Moksha Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Is that a YES you have access? Or a NO you do not have access?Phaedrus Access to a document locked in an impregnable vault, guarded by scorpions, death rays, a moat and a three headed dog? This is a challenge of an uh-uh that is best met with an uh-huh!
phaedrus ut Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 By six-degrees of separation I have access to every important archive in the world. So likewise I could make equally as vague of statements. I'll take your evasive answer as a no. Phaedrus
The Dude Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 By six-degrees of separation I have access to every important archive in the world. So likewise I could make equally as vague of statements. I'll take your evasive answer as a no. Phaedrus It takes a lot of guts to issue a bold challenge, knowing full well that you will have to evade the obvious follow up questions.I'm willing to take it on Will's special apologetic authority and reputation, for now. I guess Dan's biography is all just a heap of trash. So sad.
Chris Smith Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Will,Why would Dan invent something like that? Maybe he just made a mistake when he said it was part of the Joseph Smith Egyptian papers. Or maybe your second-hand catalogue of the Papers is incomplete. How can you accuse him of fabricating evidence when you obviously don't have all the facts? Wouldn't it be easier to just say, "Hey Dan, my sources tell me there's no such document in the JSEP, so I was wondering if you could help me locate the document you're referring to. Thanks in advance! -Will" Instead we get, "I am left to wonder what it portends about the reliability of the research in this so-called 'definitive' biography of Joseph Smith." That's pretty lame, if you ask me.-CK
William Schryver Posted September 28, 2006 Author Posted September 28, 2006 By six-degrees of separation I have access to every important archive in the world. So likewise I could make equally as vague of statements. I'll take your evasive answer as a no. Phaedrus It takes a lot of guts to issue a bold challenge, knowing full well that you will have to evade the obvious follow up questions.I'm willing to take it on Will's special apologetic authority and reputation, for now. I guess Dan's biography is all just a heap of trash. So sad. Come on, TD!I've said nothing of the sort. I simply have identified what appears to be an inaccurate claim, and I am now asking to see if others have also noted similar inaccuracies.We have seen, on this board, derision heaped upon the late Hugh Nibley by individuals who claim to have found inaccurate footnotes, etc., in his writings. And as a result of that, many critics are now covering Nibley's entire oeuvre with a blanket condemnation.Vogel has made a bold claim regarding something allegedly found in the "Joseph Smith Egyptian Papers." The item he claims is there is nowhere to be found. I have verified this fact via sources to which I have access. I frankly don't care if phaedrus or anyone else chooses to believe it.I have clearly established, on the KEP thread in the School of the Pundits, that I do have access to the Joseph Smith Egyptian Papers. So do Brent Metcalfe, Paul Osborne, Ed Ashment, and others. It's rare, but hardly unheard of.And, to my knowledge, there has never been such a document in that collection as Vogel claims there to be. Apparently, it is a glaring inaccuracy in the Vogel bio of Joseph Smith. And, as such, it makes me wonder if it is not alone.
William Schryver Posted September 28, 2006 Author Posted September 28, 2006 Will,Why would Dan invent something like that? Maybe he just made a mistake when he said it was part of the Joseph Smith Egyptian papers. Or maybe your second-hand catalogue of the Papers is incomplete. How can you accuse him of fabricating evidence when you obviously don't have all the facts? Wouldn't it be easier to just say, "Hey Dan, my sources tell me there's no such document in the JSEP, so I was wondering if you could help me locate the document you're referring to. Thanks in advance! -Will" Instead we get, "I am left to wonder what it portends about the reliability of the research in this so-called 'definitive' biography of Joseph Smith." That's pretty lame, if you ask me.-CK CK:Where did I say that Dan "invented" it? I said nothing of the sort. Here is what I said:According to my research, there is no such document among the
The Dude Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Okay, Will. I'll just second what CK said, since I probably not the best person to give lectures on class.Give me a call when Dan Vogel shows up.
William Schryver Posted September 28, 2006 Author Posted September 28, 2006 Okay, Will. I'll just second what CK said, since I probably not the best person to give lectures on class.Give me a call when Dan Vogel shows up. Maybe you could at least point out where I made the claim that Vogel "fabricated" something?For all I know, Vogel was simply misinformed. Or he listed an inaccurate footnote. Or something of the sort. I'm sure he'll clear it all up for us.Too bad Nibely wasn't afforded the same opportunity.And too bad it's apparently considered "classy" when Metcalfe does it:Nibley CritiqueBut it is "in poor taste" when coming from the other direction.The irony of the double-standard is palpable.
Chris Smith Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 Hi Will,I will refrain from engaging you in a debate about whether your comments or Brent's are in poorer taste. Instead, I will simply point out the old adage that "two wrongs don't make a right".-California "but three lefts do!" Kid
Calm Posted September 28, 2006 Posted September 28, 2006 WS, perhaps there is some info in Larry Morris' FARMS Review article that Dan just posted about:Larry Morris's response to Dan Vogel's book on Joseph Smith
William Schryver Posted September 29, 2006 Author Posted September 29, 2006 d'Unk,Those items are ones with which I am familiar. The document to which Dan refers is something with which I am not. To my knowledge, there is no such document among Joseph Smith's Egytpian Papers. But, I will allow that I could be ignorant of such a thing. I am hoping that Mr. Vogel will clarify this, and enlighten us as to where this document can be found.
noel00 Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 I notice here that Will refers to Dan as Mr Vogal and talks about him in the 3rd person both here and in the thread on the KEP. Seems a tad rude. The others refer to each other as "Dan" "Wil" etc.
Daniel Peterson Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 I notice here that Will refers to Dan as Mr Vogal and talks about him in the 3rd person both here and in the thread on the KEP. Seems a tad rude. The others refer to each other as "Dan" "Wil" etc.Dear Mr. Noel00:Ooh yes. Calling him "Mr. Vogel" is about the wickedest thing I've ever seen. Horrible. Absolutely horrible.Yes, we Mormons are rude, vicious, and awash with disdain and loathing for those who disagree with us. That's why no substantive interaction with us is necessary.Please see my response to you on the "Latter-day Saints View of Islam" thread.Daniel "Mr. Snarls" Peterson
Uncle Dale Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Yes, we Mormons are rude, vicious, and awash with disdain and loathing for those who disagree with us. That's why no substantive interaction with us is necessary.Been hitting the mega-vitamins again, I see.A lower dose of the B-6 will take down the adrenaline levels, perhaps.d'Unk
Daniel Peterson Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Been hitting the mega-vitamins again, I see.A lower dose of the B-6 will take down the adrenaline levels, perhaps.I've grown tired of Mr. Noel00's incessant accusations, calumnies, and personal insults. I'm under no obligation to continue to permit them to pass without comment. You're not his target. It's no great achievement on your part to ignore his continual character assassination.
Uncle Dale Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 You're not his target. It's no great achievement on your part to ignore his continual character assassination. Chill out, bro.Listen to some tunes on the pod and order in a pizza.I think I read that in Ecclesiastes...Uncle "Or maybe it was in Ecclesiasticus; I always get those two mixed up" Dale
Uncle Dale Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 I notice... noel00... you been dissin' the Doc again?Have some respect fer yer elders.yer Unk
KevinG Posted September 29, 2006 Posted September 29, 2006 Ya know I was pondering a response on the purpose of being at fair thread... it was going to include wonderful access to intelligent dialogue between LDS and non-LDS scholars alike......All of these enlightened and scholarly comments from our pundits and high powered posters have convinced me to go to bed instead.
William Schryver Posted September 29, 2006 Author Posted September 29, 2006 May I respectfully request that this thread return to its designated topic?Is there anyone out there who has even read Vogel's The Making of a Prophet?And, if so, have you identified within its covers any factual inaccuracies?Agreed! Posters, please stay on topic and don't turn this into a sniping contest. -mods
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.