My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _Shulem »

Gadianton wrote:That's fascinating, Shulem. Are you aware of any legitimate Egyptian symbols used by Joseph Smith in any context that don't have an obvious source?
Nope. As far as I know, Smith transferred characters from funerary material in his possession and incorporated them into the Facsimile lacuna. Everything Smith borrowed was originally meant to attribute glory to Egyptian religion. The Hypocephalus is a tribute to the Egyptian gods. Jehovah be damned! He, was no friend of Egypt! It's utterly ironic that the Mormons publish these spells in their book of canon.
Gadianton wrote:Also, one of the tenets of every Chapel Mormon's faith is that Egyptian is so compact, that one glyph can generate pages of English text, which the Joseph Smith-Egyptian papers confirm, but which in the world we know as "reality" simply is not true.
Actually, that is an old apologetic consideration that begun with Nibley but didn't persist. Chapel Mormons today that believe such nonsense are not intelligent or informed.
Gadianton wrote:It's interesting that the proposed scroll length is 41 feet. There wasn't a subconscious target length was there? How much Egyptian scroll does it take to produce the amount of text in the Book of Abraham?
That's a question best put to professor Gee. He knows the answer to your question and has probably already written out the entire text in Egyptian form to match papyrus specifications from the documents Smith had.

Now this is IMPORTANT and I want you to listen closely to what I'm saying, so lean forward and catch my drift:

IF Joseph Smith had a copy of John Gee's transcription of the Book of Abraham in hieroglyphic form -- Smith would translate it to be anything OTHER than the Book of Abraham.

Isn't that right, John? You know it, and I know it.

:wink:
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _moksha »

Shulem wrote:
Sun Jul 12, 2020 9:08 pm
Actually, that is an old apologetic consideration that begun with Nibley but didn't persist.
So you are saying that Abraham did not infuse that writing with algorithms that could be fully expanded upon with an upgraded seer stone placed in a hat? Do you have any geology citations which could back up that contention?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _Shulem »

moksha wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2020 12:18 am
So you are saying that Abraham did not infuse that writing with algorithms that could be fully expanded upon with an upgraded seer stone placed in a hat? Do you have any geology citations which could back up that contention?
Yeah, I guess that's what I'm saying, moksha. I don't know of any geology citations which would disprove that contention.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _moksha »

Shulem wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2020 12:52 am
I don't know of any geology citations which would disprove that contention.
Well, that's gneiss (actually, it was something like banded iron jasperite/hematite with some special property that could only be gained from a newly dug wishing well).
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Simon Southerton
_Emeritus
Posts: 623
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:09 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _Simon Southerton »

moksha wrote:
Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:21 am
At SeN Dr. Hauglid has been labeled as a non-believer. I am thinking that this is grossly unfair to Dr. Hauglid. Seems to me that Dr. Hauglid said he didn't believe the Egyptian origin story of the Book of Abraham, not that he disavowed anything else. This apologetic step to cast him as a non-believer seems unfair, both to Dr. Hauglid and to anyone else at BYU who wishes to come clean in terms of intellectual honesty.
Towards the end of the interview Brian admits to believing both the Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon were creations of the 19th century.

I'm surprised Peterson hasn't used the anti-Mormon label yet, or maybe he has. He knows his audience. Its very important to attach that label so he can shut down their critical thinking skills as soon as possible.
LDS apologetics --> "It's not the crime, it's the cover-up, which creates the scandal."
"Bigfoot is a crucial part of the ecosystem, if he exists. So let's all help keep Bigfoot possibly alive for future generations to enjoy, unless he doesn't exist." - Futurama
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _moksha »

Simon Southerton wrote:
Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:34 am
moksha wrote:
Sat Jul 11, 2020 2:21 am
At SeN Dr. Hauglid has been labeled as a non-believer. I am thinking that this is grossly unfair to Dr. Hauglid. Seems to me that Dr. Hauglid said he didn't believe the Egyptian origin story of the Book of Abraham, not that he disavowed anything else. This apologetic step to cast him as a non-believer seems unfair, both to Dr. Hauglid and to anyone else at BYU who wishes to come clean in terms of intellectual honesty.
Towards the end of the interview Brian admits to believing both the Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon were creations of the 19th century.

I'm surprised Peterson hasn't used the anti-Mormon label yet, or maybe he has. He knows his audience. Its very important to attach that label so he can shut down their critical thinking skills as soon as possible.
Seems to me that he can still be a non-orthodox Mormon (faith is a voluntary endeavor) until Dr. Hauglid declares himself non-affiliated. D. Michael Quinn has held onto his belief years after his ex-communication. This ex-communication business is a messy affair since the important relationship is between the believer and God. Thank goodness it cannot be performed on the SeN blog.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _Shulem »

Peterson knows that the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham are 19th century works. He knows it.

He knows!

Peterson is navigating his way through Mormon apologetics -- protecting his job and securing his pension.

Hi, Dan!

It's Shulem.

Satan tells me secrets. All I need to know. I learned that from my mother who is also an apostate and who attended BYU long ago.

:twisted:
_Hagoth
_Emeritus
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:16 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _Hagoth »

Gadianton wrote:
Sat Jul 11, 2020 4:36 am
John Gee says the other scroll is 41 feet long??
And yet was rolled up small enough to be gripped in a mummy's hand.
"Be excellent to each other." - Bill and Ted
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” - Mark Twain
_Philo Sofee
_Emeritus
Posts: 6660
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:04 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _Philo Sofee »

Hagoth wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 1:14 pm
Gadianton wrote:
Sat Jul 11, 2020 4:36 am
John Gee says the other scroll is 41 feet long??
And yet was rolled up small enough to be gripped in a mummy's hand.
Perhaps Gee needs to get Chris Smith's help in measuring the size of the ancient Egyptian hands (use their skeletons) so we can verify that indeed, there is evidence for a longer scroll! See? There is yet hope for the Book of Abraham... :rolleyes:
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
_consiglieri
_Emeritus
Posts: 6186
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:47 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by _consiglieri »

There is a sudden groundswell of support for an interview of Kerry Shirts on Radio Free Mormon. What do you say Kerry?
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
Post Reply