DiscussMormonism.com

I sometimes hear defenders dismiss the fact that Egyptologists have, due to the Rosetta Stone and the breakthrough work of Champollion ("translation keys") in the 1830s and 1840s, been able to translate ancient Egyptian hieorglyphs and hieratic characters into English as 'god has his own separate interpretation'.

How likely is that?

For example, if the translation keys only translated one ancient Egyptian writing into a coherent writing in English, that would alone validate those translation keys. A single ancient writing uses some of the same characters more than once each. If the translation keys were off the mark, then the resulting English text would be unintelligble gibberish.

However, those translation keys applied to the same ancient characters that appear on numerous ancient documents have yielded coherent English writings (albeit the Egyptologists doing an interpretation learning new nuances of denotation and connotation of each hieroglyphic or hieratic character with each additional ancient document translated using those translation keys).

Just like the logic that LDS claim the Book of Mormon as a 2nd witness to that of the New Testament of Christ making each corroborate the other and thereby give it greater validity, so too does each additional sensible English text translation of another ancient Egyptian document using these translation keys provide ever more validation of the efficacy of those translation keys.

If there is some "god interpretation" that is different, that would not be the result of applying any kind of a translation tool or key that would have any consistency. The chances that the same characters written in order of a document of any sufficient length yielding two separate but both sensible English texts that differ completely one from the other is unfathomably, infinitesimally minute.

For example, given the millions of documents originally written in French that have been translated into intelligible English, each of which adds another validation to the process and translation keys used to convert French into English, what are the chances that god could have a completely different translation key that yields completely different English texts of each of those French document that make sense and would yield sensible English text when this other, 'god interpretation' translation key is applied to every document written in French? It is astronomically implausible.

So god would have such a key that could yield the story of Abraham from Hor's Breathing Permit? Really? And on top of that, it was Abraham who wrote this ancient Egyptian hieratics and signed his name to this papyrus that centuries later Egyptians mistook for being a Breathing Permit for Hor?

I find those of you defenders incredulous that latch onto this hope that god has his own special translation key that somehow does all this. You believe in a god that would go to untold lengths, perhaps logically impossible lengths, to secretly code writings so that only JSJr could translate them and make sense of what they mean, in the meantime depriving billions of his children living on the planet in between the times of Abraham and JSJr of the 'sacred truths' contained therein?

The BoAbr is nothing short of an indefensible hoax, and with it, the whole house of LDS cards falls.

I don't think God has his own interpretation of the hieratics. I think it more likely that the names and events have been changed to protect the Egyptian religion and ruling class. Plus there is still the matter of the missing papyri which makes it impossible to falsify the Book of Abraham.

bcspace wrote:I don't think God has his own interpretation of the hieratics. I think it more likely that the names and events have been changed to protect the Egyptian religion and ruling class. Plus there is still the matter of the missing papyri which makes it impossible to falsify the Book of Abraham.

Facsimiles 2 & 3. Present, identifiable, datable, translatable.

bcspace wrote:I don't think God has his own interpretation of the hieratics. I think it more likely that the names and events have been changed to protect the Egyptian religion and ruling class. Plus there is still the matter of the missing papyri which makes it impossible to falsify the Book of Abraham.

Well, that brings forth a plethora of questions.

What names/events do you believe to be in the original? My guess is you think that its about Abraham in the original, but let me know if you think the original was something else.

Do you believe the names and events were changed to be Hor's Breathing Permit?

Who do you think made the change and when? What evidence do you have for so thinking? I'm hoping this is not just a thin air theory you are now alluding to.

Does your theory posit that once Abraham wrote on the papyrus and signed it (nevermind for the moment the timeline problems with the dating of the papyrus and when Abraham supposedly lived), then the entire Egyptian people began using different meanings for each of the hieratic symbols from what they meant when Abraham wrote them onto the papyrus?

And not only that, you think that those that caused this change of meaning was so clever as to assign these new meanings in such a way that when those new meanings are given to the Abrahamic writing on the papyrus, they yield a sensible writing, i.e. the Hor Breathing Permit?

How did doing this logical feat protect the Egyptian religion and ruling class? That is, how did hiding Abraham's writings protect the Egyptian religion and ruling class?

Do you see how your theory smacks of being a conspiracy theory?

So, since you ascribe to the 'yet missing papyri' theory, how do you dismiss the KEP and the clear tie that they make between the Sensen papyrus and the BoAbr text through the positioning of those hieratic characters, in order as they appear on the Sensen papyrus, one per paragraph of English (but those characters do not translate into the English paragraphs next to those characters)?

Facsimiles 2 & 3. Present, identifiable, datable, translatable.

Sure. Doesn't change anything I said though.

bcspace wrote:

Facsimiles 2 & 3. Present, identifiable, datable, translatable.

Sure. Doesn't change anything I said though.

No, it just means that you are capable of believing anything.

bcspace wrote:I don't think God has his own interpretation of the hieratics. I think it more likely that the names and events have been changed to protect the Egyptian religion and ruling class. .

LOL
You guys have a conspiracy theory for everything.

Don't ya ever get tired of dodging the simple truth? What a waste of a life.

Sure. Doesn't change anything I said though.

No, it just means that you are capable of believing anything.

No, it means I am willing to take everything into account. In this case, I've already proven this possibility exists scientifically.

bcspace wrote:No, it means I am willing to take everything into account. In this case, I've already proven this possibility exists scientifically.

Maybe you could actually provide specifics on how your theory is suppose to work. I don't think we have seen how it is suppose to be plausible.

bcspace wrote:I don't think God has his own interpretation of the hieratics. I think it more likely that the names and events have been changed to protect the Egyptian religion and ruling class. Plus there is still the matter of the missing papyri which makes it impossible to falsify the Book of Abraham.

Changed the names and events? That's rediculous. So what is the name of the king in Facsimile No. 3, that God so designated? And, why is the so-called king really an immortal goddess? And how do you spell "Shulem"? And why is Anubis a slave? Mocking the gods could have resulted in the death penalty. No priest or scribe loyal to the king and state of Egypt would have preserved such slander on papyri. The probability of such a farce is like President Monson getting up and telling dirty jokes in General Conference and calling Jesus an ass. But, according to bcspace, anythings possible -- so we'll leave it an open book.

Paul O