KEP and my postings

[SkepticTheist]

(Post edited to read as a list of suggestions to apologists)

I have decided that my tendency to fall into contention with people that I disagree with online necessitates a change in the way I do things.

I have decided to put well-thought-out responses to issues that appear on this message board and others in the form of reviews on my web site, perhaps weekly, rather than responding to them instantly here and wasting time that I don't have.

And my postings on this message board will appear much less frequently.

This new part of my web site for reviews of the content of this message board and others will be at:

http://edwingoble.com/reviews.htm

As for the KEP threads, I can summarize my responses in these few sentences to follow, comprising my "KEP/Book of Breathings Manifesto" so to speak:

(1) I suggest to apologists that they abandon all evasion tactics and explainings away of evidence.

(2) I suggest to apologists that they accept the evidence for the KEP and the papyri as it is.

(3) I suggest to apologists that they concentrate on explanations for the Book of Abraham and KEP translation controversies that actually start out with where the evidence leads.

(4) This means that I suggest that we abandon anything that doesn't accept that the Sensen Papyrus was translated Abrahamically like the rest of the papyri. Whether that means that it is the source of the Book of Abraham, or whether it is just another papyrus like the Hypocephalus with Abrahamic meanings attached, we need scholarship to figure that out.

(5) I suggest to apologists that they reject the idea that just because the KEP is not in the scriptures does not mean that it does not have contents that was produced through revelatory/translation activity. The Book of Abraham was not scripture when it appeared in the Times and Seasons either. Many of Joseph Smith's revelations appear outside the scriptures in manuscripts and so forth, and to hide behind the fact that the KEP is not currently found in the standard works to dismiss it is not good or sound scholarship.

(6) I suggest that we accept that the KEP is part of Joseph Smith's Egyptian translation efforts, just as much as the Book of Abraham is. It provides for much of the context from the translation process from which the Book of Abraham emerged. It needs to be taken seriously as containing revelatory material.

(7) If apologists can support Joseph Smith's translations in the Facsimiles with Egyptian research, I suggest that they can do the same for the KEP, and I assert that that kind of research on the KEP will result in the same kind of results that LDS Egyptologists have been able to come up with for the Explanations for the Facsimiles. They just need to spend the time actually doing that kind of research, and stop making excuses.

(8 ) To say that there are problems with the translations in the Facsimiles Explanations and then turn around and invoke "iconotropy" as the answer, and then assert that "iconotropy" cannot also be invoked in the same way for the KEP translations is a double standard.

(9) To assert that we can accept Joseph Smith's translations in the Facsimiles, which are not Egyptological, that have the same exact problems as the translations in the KEP, and reject the KEP because the KEP translations aren't Egyptological is a double standard.

(10) To say that the word "explanation" when employed in the Facsimiles Explanations can mean "translation" or "interpretation", but deny that the same word employed in the KEP cannot have the same meaning is a double standard.

Ed Goble

[Chris Smith]

(7) If apologists can support Joseph Smith's translations in the Facsimiles with Egyptian research, they can do the same for the KEP, and I assert that that kind of research on the KEP will result in the same kind of results that LDS Egyptologists have been able to come up with for the Explanations for the Facsimiles. They just need to spend the time actually doing that kind of research, and stop making excuses.

I am aware of several such arguments that could be made for the KEP.

FWIW.

[jskains]

You do know that entire post, Ed, is filled with hardcore logical fallacies, right?

You are simply demanding people comply with your world view, and insulting people who do not by "calling them out".

It's the same tactic every critic has used. "Admit the Book of Mormon was a Fraud, or you are nothing but a liar".

*Sigh* You are not asking for dialog, Ed. You simply are demanding people submit or die.

JMS

[jskains]

BTW, I am liking the idea that the Book of Abraham Papyrus that Joseph Smith had is not the actual original, but a copy and that the Facsimiles are Abraham's documents, but re-used by the Egyptians for the Book of Breathings.

Not only does it explain the dating issue, but also explains why the facsimiles are not on the same scrolls as the BoA.

So now what? Do I have to apologize?

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

One thing is for sure. I am done with dialogue with you. You could choose to be nicer.

You do know that entire post, Ed, is filled with hardcore logical fallacies, right?

You are simply demanding people comply with your world view, and insulting people who do not by "calling them out".

It's the same tactic every critic has used. "Admit the Book of Mormon was a Fraud, or you are nothing but a liar".

*Sigh* You are not asking for dialog, Ed. You simply are demanding people submit or die.

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

I don't have a lot of fundamental problem with this proposition, other than the fact that you still argue for a missing papyrus for the text. Again, I won't tell you that I am saying that it is impossible. I just don't believe it. What more dialogue is there to say about that? I'm open to the idea that I could be wrong. I don't believe I'm wrong. But you are kind of late to the party on this issue of re-use, as it has been suggested by other people before.

Alright. Obviously I offended you. What can I do or say to make this right? What would you like from me? I'm perfectly willing to do whatever it takes at this point to try to get on your good side, and try to get nicer responses from you, and try to be nicer myself. Please enlighten me what you would like me to do or say, or what kind of an apology you would like. You are my brother in the Gospel. What can I do to make it right to you?

You said you are in my temple district. Can I offer you a burger as a peace offering, my treat?

Ed

BTW, I am liking the idea that the Book of Abraham Papyrus that Joseph Smith had is not the actual original, but a copy and that the Facsimiles are Abraham's documents, but re-used by the Egyptians for the Book of Breathings.

Not only does it explain the dating issue, but also explains why the facsimiles are not on the same scrolls as the BoA.

So now what? Do I have to apologize?

JMS

[jskains]

One thing is for sure. I am done with dialogue with you. Even after I apologized the other day you are h*ll bent on telling me that I'm a dogmatist.

This isn't even your thread. You could choose to be nicer.

So wait, you call people out demanding people kneel to your view, but I am being mean because I called you out on that? I am missing something here...

JMS

[jskains]

I don't have a lot of fundamental problem with this proposition. But you are kind of late to the party on that as it has been suggested by other people before.

Uh. So? How did you think I heard it? How am I late to the party because now I am starting to see that as an interesting idea? I never claimed it as my own. I simply said I like it. Am I not allowed to like it?

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

Where is the demand? I made a call out for people to consider taking seriously what I said in my Manifesto.

Do you want me to phrase things differently? Is that what you want?

So wait, you call people out demanding people kneel to your view, but I am being mean because I called you out on that? I am missing something here...

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

Go ahead and like it.

Wow. Dude, just because I say that I want people to do things or consider things, or take a certain thing seriously isn't a demand that they bow to a demand.

I just don't get why you are so intense on interpreting every word I say as some kind of demand for people to give up their agency.

Uh. So? How did you think I heard it? How am I late to the party because now I am starting to see that as an interesting idea? I never claimed it as my own. I simply said I like it. Am I not allowed to like it?

JMS

[jskains]

Where is the demand? I made a call out for people to consider taking seriously what I said in my Manifesto.

Do you want me to phrase things differently? Is that what you want?

I just don't think apologists or even some critics are being dishonest. I think everyone is doing their best to understand a supernatural series of events that left difficult scholarly evidence.

In the end, I think this is all part of God's challenge. I think that KEP is something that keeps us on our toes and teaches the lesson of Faith.

JMS

[jskains]

Go ahead and like it.

Wow. Dude, just because I say that I want people to do things or consider things, or take a certain thing seriously isn't a demand that they bow to a demand.

I just don't get why you are so intense on interpreting every word I say as some kind of demand for people to give up their agency.

For me, I think your largest fallacy is #1. I think we can, and should, explain away evidences that "seem" to be against the BoA. It's part of apologetics.

If you say, "I think you are being negative", you hopefully are saying so because of evidences you see. So when I counter that I think I am not, I am in essence "explaining away the evidence".

It's part of the process.

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

I want people to methodologically consider if their position and methods constitute accepting where the evidence leads, or whether it constitutes making something out of the evidence that the evidence simply is not.

If we are into apologetics, we ought to be considering the best explanation according to the evidence, and evaluating it in that way, so that we preserve faith according to having faith in that which is likely to be true We have to find a balance between the secular and the spiritual. We can't maintain testimony in a climate where the critics have the upper hand because they can see evidence before their eyes and we deny it. The missing papyrus issue suffers from a methodological problem. this is all I'm saying.

I just don't think apologists or even some critics are being dishonest. I think everyone is doing their best to understand a supernatural series of events that left difficult scholarly evidence.

In the end, I think this is all part of God's challenge. I think that KEP is something that keeps us on our toes and teaches the lesson of Faith.

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

Ok man, Let me buy you the burger....

For me, I think your largest fallacy is #1. I think we can, and should, explain away evidences that "seem" to be against the BoA. It's part of apologetics.

If you say, "I think you are being negative", you hopefully are saying so because of evidences you see. So when I counter that I think I am not, I am in essence "explaining away the evidence".

It's part of the process.

JMS

[jskains]

I want people to methodologically consider if their position and methods constitute accepting where the evidence leads, or whether it constitutes making something out of the evidence that the evidence simply is not.

If we are into apologetics, we ought to be considering the best explanation according to the evidence, and evaluating it in that way, so that we preserve faith according to having faith in that which is likely to be true We have to find a balance between the secular and the spiritual. We can't maintain testimony in a climate where the critics have the upper hand because they can see evidence before their eyes and we deny it. The missing papyrus issue suffers from a methodological problem. this is all I'm saying.

But then again, how many people were found guilty with all the evidence in the world, only to be found innocent with that one DNA test? For me, the spirit is the DNA test. And some evidences I think are leading us all down the wrong paths.

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

I understand your position. Thanks for clarifying it.

But then again, how many people were found guilty with all the evidence in the world, only to be found innocent with that one DNA test? For me, the spirit is the DNA test. And some evidences I think are leading us all down the wrong paths.

JMS

[SkepticTheist]

Since you found my wording in the original post in this thread not the way you would prefer it, I edited it to read as a list of suggestions.

Ed

But then again, how many people were found guilty with all the evidence in the world, only to be found innocent with that one DNA test? For me, the spirit is the DNA test. And some evidences I think are leading us all down the wrong paths.

JMS