tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post461974552724274641..comments2023-11-02T07:25:45.884-05:00Comments on Mormanity - a blog for those interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: John Gee's Introduction to the Book of Abraham: A Lifetime of Book of Abraham Scholarship Distilled into a Valuable Book for a Broad AudienceJeff Lindsayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comBlogger28125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-17989463936248160442017-12-04T08:58:38.032-06:002017-12-04T08:58:38.032-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-77545058917373788962017-12-03T10:29:48.968-06:002017-12-03T10:29:48.968-06:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-21297618759306243192017-12-03T08:19:42.041-06:002017-12-03T08:19:42.041-06:00I am tired of this line of dialogue. If you have s...I am tired of this line of dialogue. If you have something on topic to share, please do so.Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-6693636451753742412017-12-03T05:16:00.648-06:002017-12-03T05:16:00.648-06:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-4290314679331373552017-12-02T15:16:07.722-06:002017-12-02T15:16:07.722-06:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-49302045077209430852017-12-02T06:12:26.121-06:002017-12-02T06:12:26.121-06:00Ramer – There you go again. You say you want a tr...Ramer – There you go again. You say you want a truce, I agree, and then you break it. Just goes to show you character, or lack of it. You struggle to follow the teachings of your religion, like alcoholics struggling to quit drinking.<br /><br />Neither one of you have answered OK’s really basic question (copied below), so until you do, all you have is because-I-said-so reasoning.<br /><br />“How can anyone possibly determine whether I'm right or wrong? It's just my interpretation, no? There's nothing one can point to that can either validate or invalidate that interpretation, so it all boils down to "Trust me, I know what I'm doing." <br /><br />It seems to me that, under your theory, we face the same problem with Joseph and his interpretation of the Book of Abraham papyri: we simply have to trust his claim that he got it right.”<br />Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-91163509606544894322017-11-30T11:22:34.482-06:002017-11-30T11:22:34.482-06:00Not the mnemonic theory at all. Nothing like it.Not the mnemonic theory at all. Nothing like it.Kokobimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00412452758630992618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-70088202917379549792017-11-29T11:36:52.648-06:002017-11-29T11:36:52.648-06:00Don't worry Mr. Goble, I know your articles ar...Don't worry Mr. Goble, I know your articles aren't "because I said so" arguments. Mormography has a history of taking logical fallacies people say he is using (even if they only say it once), and then claiming everyone else he interacts with is using them.<br /><br />And yes, I would definitely need to look further into your theory if I want to understand it. I think you might be advocating the mnemonic theory (or a variation), but this is after a single reading. I'd probably need to read through it a few times for better understanding.Ramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-17156216120495897192017-11-28T18:22:13.342-06:002017-11-28T18:22:13.342-06:00Hi. Ed Goble again. My last name is not globe, t...Hi. Ed Goble again. My last name is not globe, thanks. I have dignity, and I won't have my name disrespected just because someone wants to gain some points in an argument. I'm not here to argue. And I suggest you spend some time, or you won't get it. I even spent some time trying to clarify a few things, so I did a rewrite on this article:<br /><br />http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/p/what-are-basics-of-this-theory-about.html<br /><br />And this one might help:<br /><br />http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/2017/11/misinterpretations-of-my-positions-on.html<br /><br />And this one might help too:<br /><br />http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/2017/11/a-contrast-between-my-approach-and.html<br /><br />And no, it isn't just a because I said so argument. I have rewritten this stuff so many ways, over quite a number of years. So I suggest you guys really actually read it all very carefully if you genuinely want to understand. If not, then I can't help you.Kokobimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00412452758630992618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-78964561331265289842017-11-19T16:30:37.662-06:002017-11-19T16:30:37.662-06:00You first.You first.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-12374281914231638432017-11-19T15:41:47.266-06:002017-11-19T15:41:47.266-06:00Stop the insults, Mormography.Stop the insults, Mormography.Ramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-485973228965570572017-11-19T05:14:59.369-06:002017-11-19T05:14:59.369-06:00If by “explaining” you mean merely typing, by “ask...If by “explaining” you mean merely typing, by “asking” you mean desperate non-sensical pleas, and by “bullying and insulting” you mean engaging in behavior you initiated.<br /><br />If by anti-Mormon you mean not being irrationally biased and engaging in mental gymnastics to reinvent and reform Mormonism, then yes. But course that makes you anti-every-other-religion. Nice to see you finally admit it.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-32174568704871569322017-11-18T21:19:25.977-06:002017-11-18T21:19:25.977-06:00Now you are begging me to quit exposing you.
If by...<i>Now you are begging me to quit exposing you.</i><br />If by "begging" you mean "asking," and by "exposing" you mean "bullying and insulting."<br /><br /><i>you are conceding the premise</i><br />If by "conceding the premise" you mean "explaining why it is incorrect."Ramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-75336983394542820402017-11-18T16:44:18.742-06:002017-11-18T16:44:18.742-06:00Ramer - Now you are begging me to quit exposing yo...Ramer - Now you are begging me to quit exposing you. Cute. After several attempts, you still have not answered OK's question, because you are conceding the premise...Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-14357450694993534512017-11-18T12:25:42.464-06:002017-11-18T12:25:42.464-06:00Well, OK, I guess there actually is one interpreta...Well, OK, I guess there actually is one interpretation I've heard of that involves the actual hieroglyphs being "interpreted" differently than their literal translation: what's written on the surviving papyrus could be some sort of mnemonic for the actual Book of Abraham. I suppose that's technically possible, although I don't really buy that theory myself. I'm of the opinion that the Book of Abraham text (or at least, parts of it - the catalyst theory could also be valid) was on the longer scroll that was destroyed/lost.<br /><br />Mormography, you need to stop throwing out claims that everyone else is using a logical fallacy that someone once claimed you were using. <a href="https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/115/Just-Because-Fallacy" rel="nofollow">You're not even using them right.</a><br /><i>how then does one know the interpretation is correct or wrong?</i><br />Just because there are multiple different interpretations doesn't automatically mean only one is "correct" and all the others are "wrong."Ramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-23738684002822511822017-11-18T11:17:12.940-06:002017-11-18T11:17:12.940-06:00Regardless even if Globe was referring to the facs...Regardless even if Globe was referring to the facsimile, the questions would still be the same. Ramer's arguing the point is just misdirection. If an interpretation can be literal, metaphorical, or allegorical, how then does one know the interpretation is correct or wrong? Globe is using one giant convoluted because I said so argument.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-28824584902705682232017-11-18T10:37:34.058-06:002017-11-18T10:37:34.058-06:00Ramer writes, I'm pretty sure Mr. Goble is tal...Ramer writes, <i>I'm pretty sure Mr. Goble is talking about the facsimiles - not the hieroglyphics - when he's mentioning "interpreting" pictures.</i><br /><br />Actually, Goble makes it pretty clear he <i>is</i> talking about the hieroglyphs.<br /><br />For example, <a href="http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/p/what-are-basics-of-this-theory-about.html" rel="nofollow">Goble writes:</a> "What is on the papyrus? A whole bunch of pictures.... Even things typically thought of as 'text' on there are just small illustrations, because all Egyptian hieroglyphics are just pictures."<br /><br />So: <i>[A]ll Egyptian hieroglyphics are just pictures.</i><br /><br />And: <i>Even things typically thought of as "text" on there are just small illustrations.</i><br /><br />Sure looks to me like he's treating the hieroglyphs as pictures.<br /><br />-- OKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-10781443390381019772017-11-17T03:17:00.258-06:002017-11-17T03:17:00.258-06:00It is obvious to everyone except Ramer, that Ramer...It is obvious to everyone except Ramer, that Ramer does not know what the words obvious, clearly, and invalid mean. Ramer did not only did not answer OK's questions, he validated the premise of them.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-21376354845294018082017-11-16T17:53:15.541-06:002017-11-16T17:53:15.541-06:00And in any case I hope it's obvious to anyone ...And in any case I hope it's obvious to anyone who reads this that there was no silence to OK's questions - I very clearly responded to them. Informing someone that their premise is invalid is still a response.Ramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-9928799561988416272017-11-16T17:48:52.690-06:002017-11-16T17:48:52.690-06:00Silence does not mean people agree with the statem...Silence does not mean people agree with the statement. It can also mean that no one's had time to respond yet, or that the statement (or its premise) is so far off the mark that no one can be bothered to respond.Ramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-20648388089522732232017-11-16T16:35:25.587-06:002017-11-16T16:35:25.587-06:00OK - The silence to your basic questions is deafen...OK - The silence to your basic questions is deafening. It appears you are right, we just have to trust JS's claim he got it right. It is the "because I said so" reasoning.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-30650144573459918262017-11-15T11:23:49.118-06:002017-11-15T11:23:49.118-06:00OK, I'm pretty sure Mr. Goble is talking about...OK, I'm pretty sure Mr. Goble is talking about the facsimiles - not the hieroglyphics - when he's mentioning "interpreting" pictures. And he's right, there is definitely more than one way to interpret images. Depending on the interpretation, they could be literal, metaphorical, or allegorical.Ramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-75490773789980761152017-11-14T11:01:36.444-06:002017-11-14T11:01:36.444-06:00Mr. Goble, you write that your position solves all...Mr. Goble, you write that your <i>position solves all the problems at hand.</i><br /><br />Well, yes---but then again it seems like a theory that could explain <i>any</i> interpretation of the papyri.<br /><br />If I'm reading you correctly, you're arguing that the figures on the papyri do not have to be "read," they can also be treated as pictures and "interpreted." But how does this interpretation actually work? <br /><br />Is this interpretation constrained by any kind of rules or conventions? Or is it a purely creative act on the part of the interpreter? <br /><br />If the latter, it's hard to see how your position differs from the Church's theory that Joseph Smith used the papyri as a catalyst for his own vision.<br /><br />Suppose I say that this line of Kolobian hieroglyphics ---<br /><br /> <) ^# ((- )) l*^<br /><br />--- means <i>Gorillas wear green socks</i>.<br /><br />Suppose you then ask me, "How in the heck did you come up with <i>that</i>?" and I answer by saying, "Well, I'm <i>interpreting</i> those symbols as pictures." <br /><br />How can anyone possibly determine whether I'm right or wrong? It's just my interpretation, no? There's nothing one can point to that can either validate or invalidate that interpretation, so it all boils down to "Trust me, I know what I'm doing." <br /><br />It seems to me that, under your theory, we face the same problem with Joseph and his interpretation of the Book of Abraham papyri: we simply have to trust his claim that he got it right.<br /><br />-- OKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-77665559130407118062017-11-13T09:35:57.488-06:002017-11-13T09:35:57.488-06:00I would like to respectfully submit my own take on...I would like to respectfully submit my own take on the Book of Abraham and the Kirtland Egyptian Papers:<br /><br />http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/2017/10/why-arent-novel-new-ideas-on-book-of.html<br /><br />http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/2017/10/a-final-overview-of-what-joseph-smith.html<br /><br />I believe that my position solves all the problems at hand. Thank you.<br /><br />Ed GobleKokobimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00412452758630992618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-25071859413216266862017-11-11T10:40:09.248-06:002017-11-11T10:40:09.248-06:00Yes, to distill the position the apologists are co...Yes, to distill the position the apologists are cornered into, the actual papyrus used must have burned, Joseph Smith must not have had knowledge of the scribe working with the Egyptian Alphabet, and the printer filled in the facsimiles fragments wrong, not JS. Though, the facsimiles are printed in the canon and many of the translations are bizarre, JS got the four corners of the earth part correct.<br /><br />I have witness Mormon Shamans make similar “fascinating connections”, “fascinating issues”, and “rich associations of meanings” between Maya hieroglyphs and Mormon folklore. Given every imaginative process has at least a “hint of evidence”, and if there are only 24 hours in a day, I highly recommend the fascinating works of Isaac Asimov and Carl Sagan.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.com