Containing 5,717 Articles Spanning 332 Topics
Ex-Mormon News, Stories And Recovery
Online Since January 1, 2005
|
|
PLEASE NOTE:
If you have reached this page from an outside source such as an
Internet Search or forum referral, please note that this page
(the one you just landed on)
is an archive containing articles on
"JOHN GEE".
This website,
The Mormon Curtain
- is a website that blogs the Ex-Mormon world. You can
read
The Mormon Curtain FAQ
to understand the purpose of this website.
⇒
CLICK HERE to visit the main page of The Mormon Curtain.
|
| |
JOHN GEE
Total Articles:
3
John Gee, Mormon Apologist.
|
|
| Does Apologist John Gee Seriously Believe His Own Writings? Monday, Aug 24, 2009, at 07:36 AM Original Author(s): Baura Topic: JOHN GEE -Link To MC Article- | ↑ | The role of Mormon apologist is to make it possible to believe. All Gee has to do is find some way around the "proofs" that JS was full of it. If he can come up with one way JS can still be a prophet, no matter how tortuous the route, then he's presented an "out" for those who want it to be true.
This is very similar to a defense attorney trying to raise "reasonable doubt" in the minds of a jury. He doesn't have to present a likely case that his client is not guilty, just a possibility that the prosecution's case has not proven things completely.
Gee may not necessarily believe that the points he makes are true but only needs to believe that they COULD BE true, that they are not logically impossible.
He believes that JS was a prophet for non-scholarly reasons and so must adjust the scholarship to defend that conclusion. Often Mormon scholars, such as Gee, believe things that would be shocking to mainstream Mormons but have to defend a more orthodox view of JS. Again this is similar to a defense attorney who argues to keep certain evidence out of the trial in order to present the jury with a more favorable picture of his client than even he knows is true.
| | Same Old Themes From LDS Apologetics Friday, Jul 30, 2010, at 12:14 PM Original Author(s): Korihor's Attorney Topic: JOHN GEE -Link To MC Article- | ↑ | 1) Paint apostates as 'just too stupid' (with a subtle intimidation aimed at the TBM layman: Go back to paying, praying, and obeying and leave 'deep doctrine' to the 'scholars'):
"It should go without saying that people in ancient times thought differently about their world than modern people do. Some customs of ancient Egyptians should make this obvious."
2) Lame Excuses dumbed down for us 'stupid folk':
"Gee quotes several experts on the placement of drawings within Egyptian religious texts. At some times in Egyptian history, it was common for the drawings to be misaligned with the text. Frequently a drawing was attached to the wrong text - and the correct text was nowhere within the document.
This would be like the drawings from "Goodnight Moon" being used to illustrate "Where the Wild Things Are." It may seem weird, but is not, apparently, very weird to some ancient Egyptians."
3) Failure to acknowledge the bleeding obvious conclusion that Facimile #1 represents a common embalming scene - except for the parts erroneously drawn in by JS (noteably the bald human head where there ought to be a jackel head)
"To the modern mind, this all seems odd. But it also helps explain why the papyrus that contains the drawing of Facsimile 1 could be attached to something that was not the text of the Book of Abraham. It also may shed some light on why Facsimile 1, which at first glance may appear like many other lion couch vignettes, "is, in fact, unique."
4) A testimony (in case anybody had any illusions of objectivity)
" It took a prophet to make the connection and put the drawing back into its intended context"
| | John Gee "Under Siege": Has His Book Of Abraham Work Been "Terminated"? Monday, Dec 2, 2013, at 07:40 AM Original Author(s): Doctor Scratch Topic: JOHN GEE -Link To MC Article- | ↑ | As I noted in a recent thread, Prof. Gee, along with at least one other Mopologist (who would apparently rather read anti-Mormon material on the Internet than spend time with his family on a multi-turkey Thanksgiving) has recently been engaged in some rather questionable hijinx with respect to Mormon Studies. It turns out that there may very well be a deeper and more problematic explanation for his bizarre antics. We all know how deeply immersed in Book of Abraham apologetics Gee has been, and, of course, we know further that he very much needs the institutional support of the Church/BYU to carry that out.
So, as others have noted, it seems odd that he would openly and repeatedly criticize the Maxwell Institute's "change of course" towards a more "Mormon Studies"-friendly course. Indeed, it seems that such animosity has been stirred up that Gee has begun to feel like he's hunkered down in a bunker, awaiting the apocalypse. Consider this exchange from Sic et Non:
Daniel C. Peterson on Sic et Non, from the comments writes:
There's no inconsistency between my willingness to criticize certain views of the Pope, who doesn't know me and won't feel betrayed by me, and my unwillingness to criticize my friend John Gee, who doesn't need public criticism at a time when he is effectively under siege. Additionally, any disagreement that I might have with him, however slight, would instantly be turned by certain obsessive critics into a weapon with which to beat him. The community within Mormonism that cares about such things is very small, and sometimes quite nasty. The Pope, by contrast, will proceed serenely on with his views, utterly unconcerned at my dissent.
I've expressed my views on the matter very clearly, I think. And I'll probably do so at least once more, in a formal written way. I feel no need to personalize anything. Despite your repeated entreaties that I do it.
(emphasis added)
It's odd…. Why would *Gee* feel as if he's "under siege"? Are the Mormon Studies scholars--none of whom, as far as I can tell, is employed at BYU or the MI, btw--he's been attacking lately going after him somehow? Or, instead, is this some kind of passive-aggressive lashing-out at someone closer to home who's publicly expressed support for "Mormon Studies"?
It turns out that, perhaps rather quietly, a project close to Gee's heart seems to have been terminated:
Quote:
The Book of Abraham project was started by the Board at the precursor to the Maxwell Institute, the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies in 1998. The purpose of the project was to support the historicity of the Book of Abraham. The original principle investigators were William Hamblin and John Gee. In 1999, William Hamblin was replaced by Brian Smith and Brian Hauglid. Brian Smith left because of other duties in 2000. Brian Hauglid left when he became director of the Willes Center in 2013. In 2013 the Project itself was discontinued and only the series Studies in the Book of Abraham was retained.
This is certainly news to me… Does it mean that the MI has effectively "terminated" the entire corpus of Gee's Book of Abraham apologetics? Are the MI Powers-That-Be sending a subtle message that they've opted to distance themselves from "two inks" and other controversy-plagued Book of Abraham "theories"? Regardless, you have to admit that this is an intriguing development.
Further, unless I'm mistaken, Gee is the last "classic-FARMS" holdout at the Maxwell Institute. One wonders if he--and this project--were dragged down by the "classic-FARMS" people's influence. It will be interesting to see what--if anything--develops from this.
| |
|
Search The Mormon Curtain | | How to navigate:- Click the subject below to go directly to the article.
- Click the blue arrow on the article to return to the top.
- Right-Click and copy the "-Guid-" (the Link Location URL) for a direct link to the page and article.
Archived Blogs:
| | Donate to help keep the MormonCurtain and Mormon Resignation websites up and running! Note: Dontations are done via my AvoBase, LLC. PayPal Business Account. | |
Articles posted here are © by their respective owners when designated.
Website © 2005-2016
Compiled With: Caligra 1.119
HOSTED BY
| | | |