I knew I had never argued this, and I was pretty sure none of the other critics had either. So I asked Chris earlier last week and he confirmed what I suspected. He only argued that the Alphabet and Grammar were used in the production of Abr 1:1-3 and a few other places where the text was not extant on the papyrus.
So then I noticed Dan Vogel denied believing this early yesterday, and Wade seemed confused that his beloved hero, Will Schryver, could get it so wrong on such a basic point. So instead of providing evidence, Will comes in and essentially tells Wade that he knows what our position is better than we do:
The reason they have now chosen to greatly limit the idea of the Alphabet and Grammar as the modus operandi for the translation of the Book of Abraham (except for verses 1:1 - 1:3) is because of the inconvenient fact that the Abraham manuscripts they insist to be the "dictated translation manuscripts" don't reference any characters from the Alphabet and Grammar.
This is a textbook straw man.
Aside from the ridiculous statement that the manuscripts do not reference any characters from the A&G (which I disproved yesterday) Will is simply afraid to admit he got it wrong. But this is to be expected given his track record of deficient comprehension and failure to obtain even a basic grasp of the relavant documents.
Brent Metcalfe: "I don't know a single scholar who has ever argued that the Egyptian alphabet and grammar project provided a translation key for the entire BoAbr (though I believe a strong case can be made that Abr. 1:1–3 evolved out of the project)."
Dan Vogel: "I certainly don’t think the GAEL and Alphabets were necessary before translation could begin."
Chris Smith: "[I believe the A&G were used to translate] those three verses [Abr 1:1-3] and a few others in chapter 1."
Kevin Graham: "I do not believe the GAEL were used to translate much beyond Abr 1:1-3
We can also include Edward Ashment in this category, which means Will is left with some obscure RLDS figure named Richard Howard.
So I challenge Will or Wade to either come clean and admit they screwed up by misrepresenting our position, or produce evidence that "the critics" have argued this.