Will Schryver's Book of Abraham talk

[Mortal Man]

Here's the link:

http://www.deseretne...63,00.html?pg=1

Thanks.

William, I've got to hand it to you. You've been an absolute genius at promoting your upcoming gig. Don King would be jealous.

[Scott Lloyd]

I guess we are being heard....This is from Deseret News

</h2>

It's no secret that Michael DeGroote is registered and occasionally posts on this board.

[Daniel Peterson]

If I'm not mistaken, my Malevolent Stalker announced some time back that the Church (in the grip of, I believe, the Nelson Faction, or perhaps of the Packer Faction) had ordered coverage of the FAIR conference to be curtailed by the Church News and Mormon Times. Is Michael DeGroote's article an early harbinger of that media blackout? Or does his article signify that the Oaks Faction has regained control? Or that the Stalker's announcement emerged from the Stupefaction, rather than from the reality that ordinary human beings inhabit?

The Stalker also predicted, back in February (I just checked), that, particularly in view of the already rapidly declining pace of new entries on the site, Mormon Scholars Testify would most likely never reach 140 entries. (He mentioned that specific figure.)

He is a very, very reliable source.

[Scott Lloyd]

If I'm not mistaken, my Malevolent Stalker announced some time back that the Church (in the grip of, I believe, the Nelson Faction, or perhaps of the Packer Faction) had ordered coverage of the FAIR conference to be curtailed by the Church News and Mormon Times. Is Michael DeGroote's article an early harbinger of that media blackout? Or does his article signify that the Oaks Faction has regained control? Or that the Stalker's announcement emerged from the Stupefaction, rather than from the reality that ordinary human beings inhabit?

The Stalker also predicted, back in February (I just checked), that, particularly in view of the already rapidly declining pace of new entries on the site, Mormon Scholars Testify would most likely never reach 140 entries. (He mentioned that specific figure.)

He is a very, very reliable source.

FWIW, DeGroote and I as late as Monday briefly discussed coverage of the upcoming conference. Suffice it to say both of us plan to be there and, neither of us has been given even the slightest hint about curtailing or cutting back coverage.

On the contrary, management has given us the directive to divide up the sessions between us. Michael has already staked his claim on the Gee-Schryver presentations, but I'm confident there will be plenty left for me.

[Wiki Wonka]

(g) "Claiming that Schryver's paper makes claims which it does not, and then ridiculing same."

(h) Acting as if the claim that the KEP were translation doctuments was not a key part of the critical argument, and now claiming that they don't matter at all.

(i) Claiming that an argument cannot be assessed based upon the evidence produced unless "experts" or "peers" have declared upon its validity. (The argument from authority). Besides what makes someone think it hasn't been peer reviewed?

Item (h) is now gaining steam in several threads on the other board. The KEP and the time of their production relative to the Book of Abraham appear now to be an inconsequential issue.

Item (i) may be gaining a foothold.

WW

[Nomad]

Item (h) is now gaining steam in several threads on the other board. The KEP and the time of their production relative to the Book of Abraham appear now to be an inconsequential issue.

WW

Not surprising, if you ask me. Still, it is fascinating to watch the conversation evolve in its present vacuum of information.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Thanks.

William, I've got to hand it to you. You've been an absolute genius at promoting your upcoming gig. Don King would be jealous.

I don't think that Don King would be the only one MM.

[Wiki Wonka]

Not surprising, if you ask me. Still, it is fascinating to watch the conversation evolve in its present vacuum of information.

It's interesting to watch that line of reasoning develop. Some time ago I watched one video production by an countercult group about the BoA (I cannot remember what the name of it was - it might have been Search for the Truth), and they pointed out that Joseph took single Egyptian characters and expanded them into full paragraphs of text. They claim that because of this, he obviously couldn't translate Egyptian, and is therefore a false prophet. The meaning of the KEP as it is currently interpreted serves the countercult ministries' purposes just fine.

WW

[wenglund]

Not surprising, if you ask me. Still, it is fascinating to watch the conversation evolve in its present vacuum of information.

While I don't disagree with your overall sentiment, I question your use of the word "evolve". I think a better choice of words would be "devolve".

As for the conditions under which conversations tend to go over there, a vacuum of information seems to me to be more the rule rather than the exception. Some of the more lengthy threads have been in reaction to material that most of the participants there had yet to view.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[why me]

Is Michael DeGroote's article an early harbinger of that media blackout? Or does his article signify that the Oaks Faction has regained control? Or that the Stalker's announcement emerged from the Stupefaction, rather than from the reality that ordinary human beings inhabit?

He is a very, very reliable source.

I have it from well placed and informed sources that the Oaks faction staged a coup at midnight on June 29th. The Packer faction were apprehended and shipped to Nome where they are curently regrouping. At this moment both Lloyd and Degroote are free to cover the conference. However, the situation can change if the Packer faction can organize a militia and march on salt lake. Would it be okay if scot and Degroote hold up in your home if this happens?

We have organized valiant Oaks supporters to protect your home if you agree to hold them up and feed them.

<<<< we are prepared.

[Uncertain]

Well count me in on someone who does not have any in depth knowledge about the KEP. My primary concerns with LDS exclusive truth claims have nothing to do with the BOA. However all this hullabaloo has peaked my interest. If nothing else this may be the most well poisoning I have seen for any presentation on both the critical and the apologetic sides . But in preparation for the big reveal this is how I view the issue please correct me if I am mistaken.

First assume a critic could prove without a doubt the KEP were working translation manuscripts. It is my understanding this is important because the KEP have Egyptian hieroglyphics in front of blocks of text. If they are translation manuscripts then this is strong/ironclad evidence JS thought the given hieroglyphics translated to mean the associated English text. This is a testable claim and most all? experts would say the hieroglyphics do not translate to mean the associated English text. Now it appears to me the crucial component of this argument is that it shows JS thought/claimed the Egyptian hieroglyphics can be translated to mean the associated English text. I would say the ability to conclusively show the KEP were translation manuscripts is the strongest possible critical argument. But there are other versions nearly as strong for example suppose it could be shown the KEP were not translation manuscripts but JS was associated with their production and believed at least some of the given Egyptian hieroglyphics did in fact translate to the associated English text. This critical argument includes the crucial component above that is it shows JS could not correctly translate Egyptian.

Therefore it appears to me in order to be a "game changing" presentation where "game changing" is defined as closing off all strong critical arguments based on the KEP. It is insufficient to show the KEP were not translation manuscripts. Doing so does remove the strongest possible critical argument but it still leaves one that theoretically could be nearly as strong if properly fleshed out. To be "game changing" as defined above it is also necessary to show JS either was not involved in the production of the KEP or the KEP in no way can be taken as evidence JS believed at least some of the hieroglyphics translated to the associated English text. Alternatively JS did believe at least some of the hieroglyphics translated to the associated English text but he claimed to believe this for reasons other than revelation. Let me know if I committed an error in my analysis.

Best,

Uncertain

[Chris Smith]

LOL, why me!

[wenglund]

Let me know if I committed an error in my analysis. Best, Uncertain

Your reasoning is valid. However, like with many of us (me included), some of your premises may be false. If interested, I can point them out to you after the presentation.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Pahoran]

Over on the sty, a certain drunken sot is gibbering with rage and hatred:

Wow, according to Pahorass the BofA is no longer going to be a soft target!

Come here, Pahorass. I want to shove Facsimile No. 3 in your face. You can forget school teacher Nibley. He's in the ground where he belongs. Mr. Gee is in the hot seat now and better come forward and reject Joseph Smith's black boy interpretation of Facsimile No. 3.

So, what have you to say about that, Parhorass?

This is amusing, because it recently came to my attention that a certain superannuated adolescent claimed that anyone who chooses not to wallow in the sty with the swine is "cowering." Clearly said adolescent is unfamiliar with the concept of standards.

Actually the sot seems to be a very unhappy man these days. Doesn't he have anyone who cares enough about him to intervene before he causes actual harm to himself or others? I'm serious about that.

In any event: when he sobers up, he might reflect upon the fact that Will's presentation is focused exclusively upon the Kirtland Egyptian Papers (KEP's), their meaning and purpose. I have gone over the presentation again, and I am confident that the old myth that these were "translation documents" has been exploded.

Without the KEP's, it's rather hard to claim that the Book of Abraham is somehow derived from J.S. Papyri XI and X. Which means that the notion that the Book of Abraham can be torpedoed by facile speculation about translation methodology becomes a failed polemic.

The Facsimiles, of course, are a separate issue; but I rather suspect that Will's approach, or something similar to it, may bear fruit on that front as well.

At which point, an intervention may very well become a matter of some urgency.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Glenn101]

Over on the sty, a certain drunken sot is gibbering with rage and hatred:

This is amusing, because it recently came to my attention that a certain superannuated adolescent claimed that anyone who chooses not to wallow in the sty with the swine is "cowering." Clearly said adolescent is unfamiliar with the concept of standards.

Regards,

Pahoran

Isn't superannuated adolescent a contradiction in terms? Unless you are referring to a hoary person yet adolescent in maturity level.

Glenn

[Somebodyz]

Unless you are referring to a hoary person yet adolescent in maturity level.

Glenn

Nail and head.

[Pahoran]

Isn't superannuated adolescent a contradiction in terms? Unless you are referring to a hoary person yet adolescent in maturity level.

Glenn

Think "Twenty-eight going on seventeen." So, not quite a "hoary person" but certainly adolescent in maturity level. "Superannuated" in the sense that s/he has years above adolescence, but is still functioning there.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Glenn101]

Think "Twenty-eight going on seventeen." So, not quite a "hoary person" but certainly adolescent in maturity level. "Superannuated" in the sense that s/he has years above adolescence, but is still functioning there.

Regards,

Pahoran

Well, I am fighting superannuation. ANd my wife keeps telling me to grow up. I may have to slink off somewhere for a while.

Glenn

[Pahoran]

Brent Metcalfe kept the photos private. Ironically, it will be the church that finally gives access not the critics.

A little question about this one: did Mr. Metcalfe obtain said photos in a completely ethical and above-board manner, and does he have a legal claim of ownership thereof?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Somebodyz]

Well, I am fighting superannuation. ANd my wife keeps telling me to grow up. I may have to slink off somewhere for a while.

Glenn

From what I've seen there is no comparison. (I hope he lives long enough to get hoary,sadly without help soon, I doubt it)

Childish fun is good for us all, at times.

Don't slink.

[juliann]

A little question about this one: did Mr. Metcalfe obtain said photos in a completely ethical and above-board manner, and does he have a legal claim of ownership thereof?

Regards,

Pahoran

I have no reason to doubt what he says. The importance is that it points out the blazing hypocrisy of those who demand the church hand over whatever it has while saying nothing about the withholding of these photos. He was very liberal in showing them. I saw some. But he never released them to scholars for study as the church was attacked for not releasing what they had.

[Ariarates]

Here's a line from the Deseret News article that caught my attention:

If Schryver, a software engineer, is correct in his analysis, the last 40 years of scholarship about the Kirtland Egyptian Papers will need to be revised.

If you look at this objectively, doesn't the whole thing strike you as incredibly amateuristic and dilettantish? Granted, I have not read Schryver's paper, nor am I an Egyptologist, nor does my knowledge about the BoA extend beyond what most fellow LDS will have learned in Seminary and church (at least my own amateurism is amply established) but a sentence like this in any area I am not familiar with would raise a bunch of red flags.

Why is a software engineer dabbling in Egyptology? How is it possible that he found something that "40 years of scholarship" missed? What does that say about the level of that scholarship? What scholarship are we talking about exactly? Doesn't such a groundbreaking discovery merit a more eminent platform such as a world-reknowned Egyptological society or journal?

Well, I guess we'll just have to wait another week...

[Daniel Peterson]

1.

Some of my associates and I had experiences with Mr. Metcalfe's proprietary habits, many years ago, that are consistent with the matter of the KEP photographs. It was surprising. Then.

2.

Well, I guess we'll just have to wait another week...

A very sound idea.

Will Schryver is neither doing Egyptology nor purporting to do so.

[USU78]

Why is a software engineer dabbling in Egyptology? How is it possible that he found something that "40 years of scholarship" missed? What does that say about the level of that scholarship? What scholarship are we talking about exactly? Doesn't such a groundbreaking discovery merit a more eminent platform such as a world-reknowned Egyptological society or journal?

I have a couple of problems with this.

People of my profession are always dabbling in other matters and folks, for the most part, give 'em a pass. Talented dilettantes frequently discover new ways of looking at things. Why should this offend anybody? Data are data.

Making an appeal to authority, then turning around to use the appeal to insult those who've been engaged in BoA/KEP studies [a very young specialty indeed] seems an odd way of doing business.

The KEP aren't something an "Egyptological society or journal" would be interested in.

[Ariarates]

People of my profession are always dabbling in other matters and folks, for the most part, give 'em a pass. Talented dilettantes frequently discover new ways of looking at things. Why should this offend anybody? Data are data.

I'm not offended, just looking at it from a distance. I agree that "data are data" but I disagree that "talented dilettantes frequently discover" stuff. It may have happenednbut "frequently"? I doubt it, especially in a specialist field like Egyptology. But then again, it would appear from DCP's post that the discovery has nothing to do with Egyptology at all.

Making an appeal to authority, then turning around to use the appeal to insult those who've been engaged in BoA/KEP studies [a very young specialty indeed] seems an odd way of doing business.

I'm not sure where the insult lies, but in areas that I don't know much about, I tend to lend more credence to established authorities than outsiders with spectacular claims. But as I said: let's wait another week and see what the hype is all about. Will it be truly spectacular and groundbreaking, or merely more "he said she said apologetics"?