KEP Dictation Argument: The Evidence

[_Kevin Graham]

Thanks for the generous offer, DaftJ. But I have friends much higher on the ladder than the inimitable Dr. Peterson. I know it has been commonly assumed that I've gotten this far on the basis of my good looks alone, but I'm afraid that's just not the case. ;-)

Pfft! Farting at conferences, insulting adult women, smack talking people when you know they are far away from you while kissing their arse when up close and personal.... you look and act like a big pussy to me.

[_Kevin Graham]

Critics have, however, claimed that the KEP was, in part, intended to translate the papyri into English.

Who wade???

I'll go on record right now for the umpteenth time, and say that for me, it doesn't matter if the GAEL were produced before or after the translation. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've explained by belief on the matter. Joseph Smith didn't use an conventional means to translate documents. He did it from his imagination, which you will interpret as revelation. This is what he did with teh D&C and the Book of Mormon so I don't see any reason why he would need to "use" any kind of grammar to translate something.

OK?

Somehow I think the straw man will continue, because it seems to be all that Wilbur has left to cling on to. I look forward to him prublishing something, claiming critics argue "XYZ" when in fact they do not. He has a history of this because it is the only way he can make himself appear victorious against the evil "enemies of the Church."

[_wenglund]

The question is not whether the KEP could possibly in some universe have been intended as a cipher, but whether they were, in fact, historically intended as such in the minds of their authors. There is no evidence that they were, and to interpret them as such actually requires a highly counterintuitive and improbable reading of the evidence.

Evidently there are some who, in terms of the historical record, look, yet see not, having not eyes with which to see. :)

Here, in part, is what is recorded in the blessing given to Warren Parrish in Nov. of 1835: "Behold, it shall come to pass in his day, that he shall see great things show forth themselves unto my people; he shall see much of my ancient records, and shall know of hidden things, and shall be endowed with a knowledge of hidden languages; and if he desire and shall seek it at my hands…" (History of the Church, Vol.2, Ch.23, p.311--emphasis mine)

It may be of interest to note that the Greek word, "cryptography", which is synonymous with "cipher", means "hidden writing"

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Kevin Graham]

Here, in part, is what is recorded in the blessing given to Warren Parrish in Nov. of 1835: "Behold, it shall come to pass in his day, that he shall see great things show forth themselves unto my people; he shall see much of my ancient records, and shall know of hidden things, and shall be endowed with a knowledge of hidden languages; and if he desire and shall seek it at my hands…" (History of the Church, Vol.2, Ch.23, p.311--emphasis mine)

And?

Are you saying the language spoken of that was "hidden" is not the Egyptian language, but rather the "English" language that would be encrypted?

Seriously?

It may be of interest to note that the Greek word, "cryptography", which is synonymous with "cipher", means "hidden writing"

But he didn't say hidden writing, he said hidden languages. We've been arguing from the start that it was a LANGUAGE that was being translated, whereas you've been following Will's lead by arguing for a code that was encrypted. Your own piece of evidence works against that thesis.

[_wenglund]

Critics have, however, claimed that the KEP was, in part, intended to translate the papyri into English.

Who wade???

Mortal Man clearly stated as much in his response to me on the previous page. Read and learn.

I'll go on record right now for the umpteenth time, and say that for me, it doesn't matter if the GAEL were produced before or after the translation. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've explained by belief on the matter. Joseph Smith didn't use an conventional means to translate documents. He did it from his imagination, which you will interpret as revelation. This is what he did with the D&C and the Book of Mormon so I don't see any reason why he would need to "use" any kind of grammar to translate something.

OK?

I am grateful for the clarification.

Now, in light of this admission, if you would be so kind as to explain what you mean by "Rosetta Stone" in comparison to the KEP.

I ask because there are two common connotations for that metaphor--i.e. idiomatic uses: 1) a cipher key used to decipher (which you apparently ruled out earlier); and 2) a means for learning and translating languages (you have evidently ruled out the KEP as a key for translating the papyri) (see: HERE), and so I am wondering what connotation of "Rosetta Stone" you had in mind.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

And?

Are you saying the language spoken of that was "hidden" is not the Egyptian language, but rather the "English" language that would be encrypted?

Seriously?

No. The cipher is the hidden language. Obviously. It is a language that is hidden in meaning, though not hidden from sight.

However, given your periodic lack of comprehension, the English language appears to be somewhat hidden in meaning from you, though not hidden from your sight--not that such decipherment-challenges are relevant to the KEP except in so far as you fail to grasp what Will and I have said, in English, on the matter. ;)

It may be of interest to note that the Greek word, "cryptography", which is synonymous with "cipher", means "hidden writing"

But he didn't say hidden writing, he said hidden languages. We've been arguing from the start that it was a LANGUAGE that was being translated, whereas you've been following Will's lead by arguing for a code that was encrypted. Your own piece of evidence works against that thesis.

In Chris' response to me, he acknowledged that some ciphers were languages and some languages were ciphers. Read and learn.

Also, while you and others may have argued that a language was being translated (here you may have inadvertantly contradicted your earlier claim that you aren't arguing that the KEP was intended as a key to translate the Egyptian papyri), I have been arguing that a "pure language" was being produced. We are both talking about languages. Read and learn.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Darth J]

Wow! Wade has demonstrated that when the Lord talks about "hidden languages," he means "ciphers"!

Since hidden things refers to Joseph Smith's extracurricular activities, we can use Wade's same reasoning and infer that the Word of Wisdom promises that we will be successful money diggers!

18 And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones;
19 And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures;

Doctrine and Covenants 89

And in case there's any doubt at all that this is exactly what the Word of Wisdom is talking about:

"STATE OF NEW YORK v. JOSEPH SMITH.
Warrant issued upon written complaint upon oath of Peter G. Bridgeman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an impostor. Prisoner brought before Court March 20, 1826.

Prisoner examined: says that he came from the town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowel in Bainbridge most oftime since; had small part of time been employed by said Stowel on his farm, and going to school. That he had a certain stone which he had occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel several times, and had informed him where he could find these treasures, and Mr. Stowel had been engaged in digging for them.

That at Palmyra he pretended to tell by looking at this stone where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account of its injuring his health, especially his eyes, making them sore; that he did not solicit business of this kind, and had always rather declined having anything to do with this business."

[_Kevin Graham]

Now, in light of this admission, if you would be so kind as to explain what you mean by "Rosetta Stone" in comparison to the KEP.

Why don't you just "read and learn" since I already explained this twice now?

I ask because there are two common connotations for that metaphor--i.e. idiomatic uses: 1) a cipher key used to decipher (which you apparently ruled out earlier); and 2) a means for learning and translating languages (you have evidently ruled out the KEP as a key for translating the papyri)

Not the papyri no, but the project was most likely intended for future educational purposes unrelated to translating scripture. Obviously it was designed to provide understanding of a lost language, and obviously it could be used to translate, but the papyrus was already translated. It was probably translated by the usual method. So if the brethren were presented other papyri in the future they could use the GAEL to translate them. Perhaps they had intentions to sell the rights, assuming they could convince others that it was legit. I mean who wouldn't want to be able to translate a lost language like Egyptian? If I had what I believed to be a valid translation of the original "pure" language, then I could do something similar, my making a quasi-Rosetta Stone, depending on the length of the translation. It is perfectly logical from every angle.

1. Joseph Smith "translated" the Book of Abraham, probably in a manner similar to the way he "translated" the Book of Mormon and JST. Meaning, the "translations" appeared in his head and they were dictated to a scribe. There was no preexistent "grammar" or "alphabet" needed, since any knowledge of said alphabet and grammar would have to come from revelation just the same.

2. After translating the papyrus, Joseph Smith decided at some point that it would be cool to use his translation serve as a Rosetta Stone of sorts. The translation he provided from the papyrus derived from its characters, but the relatively few characters on the short papyrus did not provide us with a comprehensive Alphabet and Grammar of the Egyptian Language which he wanted to use for future educational purposes.

3. So in my view, the translation itself was the "Rosetta Stone," since they could simply take a character, along with its corresponding English translation - with added imagination - chop it up into multiple graphemes, and attribute to each segment a submeaning relative to the translated text. This is obviously what was going on here, and it makes sense given the contemporary understanding that single Egyptian characters involved entire phraases and even sentences of meaning.

So I have explained my position thrice now, with evidence supporting it. When will you present evidence supporting Will's crazy enciphering theory?

[_Kevin Graham]

In Chris' response to me, he acknowledged that some ciphers were languages and some languages were ciphers. Read and learn.

So what??? That doesn't make them synonymous nor does it justify your cray attempt to make them so. Is this really the ONLY thing you got from Chris?? No wonder you're an apologist. You hear only what you want to hear.

Also, while you and others may have argued that a language was being translated (here you may have inadvertantly contradicted your earlier claim that you aren't arguing that the KEP was intended as a key to translate the Egyptian papyri), I have been arguing that a "pure language" was being produced. We are both talking about languages. Read and learn.

Look, moron. You are the one who has a serious problem comprehending here. And comprehension isn't even your main problem. Your main problem is that your mind is just too simple. Earlier you threw out four citations that you seriously believed supported what you were trying to gather from my position. So likewise, when I say the KEP was intended as a Rosetta Stone, but wasn't intended to translate the Egyptian papyrus, well according to your simple mind this has to be a contradiction. Because apparently your brain just connects the words "translate" and "Rosetta Stone" and then you run to wikipedia to mine irrelevaant articles to obfuscate a very simple point.

So for the FOURTH time now, let me spell it out for you.

In my view the GAEL was intended to serve an educational purpose and for future translation. It was not intended to "translate the paapyri" because the papyrus of Abraham was already translated by "revelation"(i.e Smith's FUBARed imagination)

[_beastie]

As I suspected.

Nibley was talking about the A&G, and your quote does not support your assertion. Nibley did recognize that many of the characters given explanations were not found on the papyri, but he did not, as you suggested, ever make the claim that the characters were not Egyptian at all.

At any rate, it's a minor point, but just another example of how you quite frequently fail in the area of reading comprehension.

LOL. Poor Wee Willie, desperately looking for any "win" he can score.

The fact is, dear Wee Willie, that it was YOU who demonstrate poor reading comprehension. My question and response, was quite clear:

beastie's earlier question

Did or did not Nibley recognize that there were nonEgyptian characters on the KEP?

My answer to myself:

Although I haven't had time to read the entire paper, and likely will not do so tonight, a quick skim revealed that yes, Nibley knew there were nonEgyptian characters used on the KEP. And yet he still believed it served as a Rosetta Stone, reverse engineered. Go figure. What a dummy.

Will, eager to score some win, asked:

Please do cite the relevant portion of the article where Professor Nibley states that there were non-Egyptian characters used in the A&G.

Even after pointing out my question was originally about the entire KEP, and even after I tried to accommodate his question by skimming the article quickly, Will still pretends to score a hit.

Nibley did, indeed, recognize there were nonEgyptian characters in the KEP.

The Richards text ("Bk. of Abr. Ms. #4") is dated 1841—the date is written on the back of it in the hand of Thomas Bullock—and contains no Egyptian characters.

by the way, I'm unconvinced you are correct in your assertion that Nibley didn't know there were nonEgyptian characters in the A&G, but I will have to read more to find out.

Now, it's obvious why you ignored the other part of my citation from Nibley:

It was not the habit of Joseph Smith to suppress his revelations. He made every effort to see to it that each excerpt from the book of Abraham was published to the world the moment it was presentable. "One cannot read the pages of the early periodicals of the Church," writes James R. Clark, " . . . without being impressed with the fact that to Joseph Smith, availability of the new revelations of God where people could read them and immediately profit by their instruction was more important than the technicality of having acomplete text of these ancient records at the start . . . " Hence, Clark notes, it was his custom to publish them in the form of extracts as he went along.30

This directly contradicts your cipher thesis.

Well, at least you actually tried to score a real "win", as meager as it was, instead of just insulting my looks and (incorrect) age. Progress.