KEP Dictation Argument: The Evidence

[_Kevin Graham]

Oh I'll get everything set up for us right here! I'll invite the entire stake and have missionaries ready to translate, since they're mostly Portuguese speakers.

However, I'm confident you're too much of a coward to stick your neck out - and in this case I mean that quite literally.

But we both know that when and if I make it to Utah, you would NEVER sit down with me to have a debate, for the reasons explained above. Why would anyone, especially someone with children, want to embarrass himself and his family like that? Maybe you've got martyrdom syndrome.

[_William Schryver]

… I am responsible for educating Will on the subject of the KEP …

Oh, my! Yes, I owe it all to you.

… just because he's been given color photos under the table …

No one gave me anything “under the table.” I requested and received, by specific permission and under the signature of Elder Marlin K. Jensen, Church Historian, the full set of high-resolution scans of the Joseph Smith Papyri and the Kirtland Egyptian Papers. I also have requested and received, via the same protocol, permission to analyze the original documents (both the JSP and the KEP). I will do so yet again in the near future.

Again, nothing has occurred “under the table.” Everything has been done according to standard operating procedures of the Church Historical Department. I am currently preparing a proposal for additional (and rather extensive) forensic examinations of both sets of documents, pursuant to confirming several very specific findings that will require professional forensic tests for verification.

… when I first raised the issue of the KEP as it relates to the Book of Abraham, WIll thought I was talking about the Joseph Smith Papyri …

A strange delusion you have entertained for over four years now. Why? I’m really not certain, but I’ve ceased trying to explain the workings of your twisted mind.

… MANY examples where William Schryver is willing to flat out lie to his audience …

Funny how the only place I’m ever accused of being a “liar” is here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park©.

<sigh>

It has been both tragic and yet somewhat comical to trace the trajectory of your steady decline into irrelevance and increasingly manifest mental instability. I remember when I first predicted your impending apostasy back in 2006, and you (much like Paul Osborne) vehemently defended your faithfulness. And now you and he have become tragically sad examples of the fruits of apostasy. If you weren’t so deserving of disdain on account of your unremitting obnoxiousness, I would almost feel sorry for you.

.
.
.

Well, I must once again leave you all to your revels, as I have other commitments to which I must attend.

Adieu …

[_sock puppet]

… I am responsible for educating Will on the subject of the KEP …

Oh, my! Yes, I owe it all to you.

… just because he's been given color photos under the table …

No one gave me anything “under the table.” I requested and received, by specific permission and under the signature of Elder Marlin K. Jensen, Church Historian, the full set of high-resolution scans of the Joseph Smith Papyri and the Kirtland Egyptian Papers. I also have requested and received, via the same protocol, permission to analyze the original documents (both the JSP and the KEP). I will do so yet again in the near future.

Again, nothing has occurred “under the table.” Everything has been done according to standard operating procedures of the Church Historical Department. I am currently preparing a proposal for additional (and rather extensive) forensic examinations of both sets of documents, pursuant to confirming several very specific findings that will require professional forensic tests for verification.

… when I first raised the issue of the KEP as it relates to the Book of Abraham, WIll thought I was talking about the Joseph Smith Papyri …

A strange delusion you have entertained for over four years now. Why? I’m really not certain, but I’ve ceased trying to explain the workings of your twisted mind.

… MANY examples where William Schryver is willing to flat out lie to his audience …

Funny how the only place I’m ever accused of being a “liar” is here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park©.

<sigh>

It has been both tragic and yet somewhat comical to trace the trajectory of your steady decline into irrelevance and increasingly manifest mental instability. I remember when I first predicted your impending apostasy back in 2006, and you (much like Paul Osborne) vehemently defended your faithfulness. And now you and he have become tragically sad examples of the fruits of apostasy. If you weren’t so deserving of disdain on account of your unremitting obnoxiousness, I would almost feel sorry for you.

.
.
.

Well, I must once again leave you all to your revels, as I have other commitments to which I must attend.

Adieu …

Hey, Will, can your report any progress (or the lack thereof) by Ben McGuire and maklelan in their search for a 100+ word homoioteleuton type error caused dittograph?

It seems that it might be like the Knights of the Round Table and their quest for the Silver Chalice. You know, they never find it but the struggle as part of the quest builds character.

[_beastie]

Wade's post, from the safety of MAD:

I was involved in a potentially productive KEP discussion on another board, but found it necessary to depart prematurely because one of the participants there began using extremely offensive language in relation to Joseph Smith. So, I have decided to carry on my end of the discussion here.

LOL. Funny how he doesn't mention Wee Willie's offensive behavior.

The issue under discussion is whether the KEP could have been "reverse engineered" and was intended to be used like a "Rosetta Stone", not in its most common idiomatic sense of this appellation--i.e. as a cipher (see HERE), but as a linguistic devise for learning Egyptian (a position I advanced prior to Will's presentation), and as a means for translating Egyptian material, if not also the Egyptian papyri in Joseph's possession.

Wade is still trying to save face, still trying to spin away from the fact that he confused DEcipher with ENcipher. Here's what the linked page says is the "idiomatic" use:

The term Rosetta stone has been used idiomatically to represent a crucial key to the process of decryption of encoded information, especially when a small but representative sample is recognised as the clue to understanding a larger whole.

How in the world Wade makes this a "cipher" is beyond me. Can anyone understand his reasoning? Anyone?

I’m at a loss as to how a “reversed engineered” “Rosetta Stone” could have been used to translate the “Egyptian papyri in Joseph’s possession” when the so-called translation of said papyri were the source of the Rosetta Stone in the first place. What am I missing? Is it possible that Wade is truly this illogical? Does he mean something else I’m missing?

My recent position is that it wasn't intended for that purpose, and I have presented a two-pronged argument in support thereof:

The first prong is in regards to the KEP characters--i.e. many are non-Egyptian, and likely known to have not been Egyptian, and more importantly were not from the papyri, and couldn't and thus evidently weren't intended to translate the papyri, and couldn't be used to translate Egyptian or to learn Egyptian.

Interesting. Wade learns here that there is strong reason to believe that Joseph Smith et al believed the Masonic figures were, indeed, Egyptian, and chooses to ignore the information. Once again I quote:

Joseph Smith's interest in Egypt was also connected to Masonry. Even before Smith's Canandaigua trial for glass-looking in January 1828, John Sheldon had reportedly written a letter in Masonic hieroglyphics to General Solomon Van Rensselaer, the Revolutionary War hero.79 At the time it sensationally underlined the claim of the Explanation of the First Degree Tracing Board: "the usages and customs of Masons have ever corresponded with those of the Egyptian philosophers, to which they bear a near affinity.… they [p.111] concealed their particular tenets … under hieroglyphical figures."80

The Saratoga Baptist Association at Milton, New York, in 1828 took that claim seriously, charging in the second of its fifteen-point indictments that Masonic rites "correspond with the Egyptian."81 The Egyptian obelisks upon which Champollion and Seyffarth had recently turned public attention were said to have been inscribed with Masonic hieroglyphics.82 Combining the Egyptian on the marble pillar fragments, which Solomon could not translate, with the unknown script in which God's name was written on the gold plate in the Royal Arch might produce "reformed Egyptian," which could only be translated with a key which worked by revelation. Like Solomon, Smith received revelation in the manner of a Masonic priest.

Joseph Smith condemned current expressions of Masonry but nevertheless accepted Masonry as a truly ancient form confirming God's relationships with humans from Adam on. He restored a Mason unencumbered by the corruptions and heresies of the lodges and churches in western New York.83 The high percentage of ex-Masons among Smith's early converts in the 1830s, when the anti-Masonic conflict was still fresh, indicates that many were looking not for rejection but for reform. Masonic legend provided support for Christian tradition and a rich lode to mine in combating deism. Joseph Smith took what he felt was true and transformed it for his own use.84

Joseph Smith's Response to Skepticism

by
Robert N. Hullinger

http://www.signaturebookslibrary.org/sk ... apter8.htm

At this point, it seems blatantly dishonest not to even mention the possibility that Joseph Smith et al believed the figures they added in the gaps were, indeed, Egyptian.

Wade earlier admitted he could think of no reason to reject Nibley’s theory if Joseph Smith thought the figures were Egyptian.

The second prong imvolve the KEP sounds/names--many, if not all, are non-Egyptian and clearly not from the papyri, and likely known to have not been Egyptian, and thus couldn't and evidently weren't intended to translate the papyri, and couldn't be used to translate Egyptian or to learn Egyptian.

This is consistent with Nibley’s theory of reverse-engineering a document designed to explore the Egyptian language.

In his presentation, Will provided the third and perhpas most compelling prong in regards to the KEP explanations--some predate the arrival of the papyri, and thus are clearly not from the papyri, and thus couldn't and evidently weren't intended to translate nor were they intended as translations of the papyri, and couldn't be used to translate Egyptian or to learn Egyptian.

This is also consistent with Nibley’s theory.

Here are relevant portions of the script from his presentation:

(from Will's presentation)

I confess that my original thesis was consistent with Professor Hugh Nibley’s idea that the Alphabet and Grammar represent the product of an effort on the part of its authors to “reverse engineer” the Egyptian scrolls by using the pre-existing English text of the Book of Abraham as a “primer.”

In other words, they had in their hands what they believed was an English translation of at least a portion of the scrolls they had purchased, and therefore they logically concluded that they could replicate Champollion’s approach to the Rosetta Stone. You’ll recall that Champollion used the Greek text on the Rosetta Stone as a primer to decipher the corresponding hieroglyphic Egyptian text. I surmised that William Phelps, Joseph Smith, and Oliver Cowdery set out to do something similar with the previously received Book of Abraham text.

However, as my studies of the Alphabet and Grammar materials progressed, I discovered evidence that effectively disproved such a notion. I discovered that several of the explanations in the Alphabet and Grammar documents were dependent not on text from the Book of Abraham but rather on very recognizable passages from others of Joseph Smith’s prior revelations, most prominently sections 76 and 88 of the Doctrine & Covenants.

We could spend an hour discussing nothing but the dependencies on material not found in the Book of Abraham, but we will focus on just one of the impressive examples.

Character #46 [E Beth Ka] makes clear reference to the Celestial Kingdom, where God resides.

Character #47 [Kahtu ain tri eth] merely references “another kingdom governed by different laws,” and as such constitutes nothing more than a place holder for what we shall see must be the Terrestrial Kingdom.

Character #48 [Kah tu-ain], however, was provided with expansions beyond “another kingdom governed by different laws”; explanations that clearly indicate its relationship to specific language employed in section 76 to describe the Telestial Kingdom. There are three components attested: Subjects of this kingdom suffer the wrath of God until some “future period,” or, in the words of section 76, “until the fulness of times.”

Next, and this is the most striking of the correspondences, we read that the inhabitants of this kingdom “differ one from another in glory,” which is precisely what we read in section 76: “as one star differs from another star in glory, even so differs one from another in glory in the telestial world.”

Finally, we read that, in this kingdom, the subjects “behold not the face of God,” for, “where God and Christ dwell they cannot come, worlds without end.”

Next is character #49 [Dah tu Hah dees], which very succinctly references the language from section 88 that describes “a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.”

Thus we see, in the explanations given to four successive characters from the Alphabet and Grammar, very particular references to specific passages from those two giants of Joseph Smith’s previously received revelations—sections 76 and 88. Right in order, this so-called Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language is making reference to the Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial kingdoms, followed immediately by the kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory!

I went on to identify several additional references that are clearly dependent on other passages from the Doctrine and Covenants.

I confess I was rather befuddled by this finding, and it took me several days of contemplation before I began to appreciate its import and implications.

First of all, I came to see that my initial hypothesis could not be true. To the extent this lexicon was built partially on texts that have no relationship to the Egyptian papyri; texts that were written not in Egyptian at all, but in English, then the Alphabet and Grammar simply could not have been intended as a tool to decipher the papyri. Indeed, the more I considered the evidence in this new light, the more I came to believe that these men were not focused on translating the Egyptian papyri at all!

Did anyone else pick up on the sleight of hand here? Will is claiming to debunk Nibley’s theory of reverse engineering, which is that the translation of the papyri occurred first, and then Joseph Smith et al used the results of that translation to attempt to create a sort of Rosetta Stone for understanding and exploring Egyptian.

Yet, in the paragraph I bolded above, what Will is actually debunking isn’t Nibley’s theory at all, but the theory of the imaginary critic who proposes that the KEP were used to translate the Book of Abraham. Nibley’s theory isn’t that “the Alphabet and Grammar [were] intended as a tool to decipher the papyri”, so why is he pretending to debunk Nibley’s theory with this conclusion?

Once again, where is the something “far more definitive” than the non-Egyptian characters? Apparently Wade still doesn’t see it, either.

[_Paul Osborne]

Let's just keep feeding him and poking him and play with him because eventually he will alltogether crack to pieces and he will need some friends. MAD will dump his sorry ass all in good time. His liability to conservative Mormonism has cost the church quite a bundle and he is damaging the church in a tremendous way. His ass is grass.

Hey, Paul, how many months has it been since we wagered on Will's apostasy? I see he is still in the LDS Church. When will I be getting my crisp hundred-dollar bill? How many months do we have to go?

Who the hell are you, K? It's Trevor who is getting the crisp-one. I'll send it to him in November. Are you his twin?

Paul O

[_Kevin Graham]

Oh, my! Yes, I owe it all to you

Only your initial aawareness of the subject. Your much celebrated ignorance on the matter, on the other hand, well, you deserve all the credit for that!

No one gave me anything “under the table.” I requested and received, by specific permission and under the signature of Elder Marlin K. Jensen, Church Historian, the full set of high-resolution scans of the Joseph Smith Papyri and the Kirtland Egyptian Papers. I also have requested and received, via the same protocol, permission to analyze the original documents (both the JSP and the KEP). I will do so yet again in the near future.

Well, this may be true today, but for at least a year after Hauglid's presentation you were passing along snippets of images you were in fact receiving under the table from Hauglid. He even admitted that is where you got them. The fact that you managed to kiss enough ass in the Church to convince the higher powers to hand the materials over to a notorious liar and fraud, well, that is hardly surprising. This is the same organiation that paid a confessed murderer hundreds of thousands of tithe dollars for forged documents.

A strange delusion you have entertained for over four years now. Why? I’m really not certain, but I’ve ceased trying to explain the workings of your twisted mind.

Then why is it you disappear every time I provide the evidence? When I first mentioned the KEP in our "discussion" you ignored what I said until I said it a third time. You then told me that the KEP only matter if the critics can prove this was all the material that was in Joseph Smith's possession - the standard apologetic response relative to the papyri. Your response made absolutely no sense within the context of the KEP, so how do you explain your response then if you were not confusing the KEP with the Papyri?

When I pointed out that you needed to educate yourself on the matter, since you obviously didn't know what the KEP were, you responded with yet another self-incriminating statement:

"I've examined the contents of the KEP at length -- and doing so hasn't persuaded me one iota that the Book of Abraham is anything except what it claims to be.” May 9 2006

You obviously weren't aware of the fact that virtually no one, even the Church's only Egyptologist at the time, had acquired access to the KEP. And yet you, an out of work filmmaker, claimed to have examined them! You proved once again you didn't know what the KEP were, but even worse, you proved you were willing to lie through your teeth just to score points. So what else are you willing to do? You can't get out of your lies with more lies Will. Where is that legendary virility you continuously brag about? Be a man and stop being a mouse. Own up to your pathetic lies for once. I promise you Will, you won't be able to run away from any of this. The more your popularity increases, so will the awareness of your poor character. I promise you this.

Funny how the only place I’m ever accused of being a “liar” is here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park

This is what makes it so exciting to expose you as the liar you really are. There is no fun in pointing out the lies by a known liar. You're a notorious liar among those who know you best, which is why it really isn't a big deal when people point to your lies over here. The best thing about this is that your little sychophants at MADB really have no clue. They think you're a stand-up guy who exposes lies from the critics. You're reputation, if that's what you want to call it, will be put to the test when the time comes that your Schryverism Hall of Shame is exposed to a wider audience. You're gong to be a star Will, just like you always hoped.

This is why you hide out at MADB where you know the moderators refuse to allow accusations or even insinuations that other LDS apologists are lying.

Here are some more hilarious citations from Will's first attempt to address the KEP:

“I'm sure I've read just about every indictment of the Book of Abraham that is out there. And, despite the emergence of some (if not all) of what appear to be the scrolls once in Joseph Smith's possession, the fact is, not much has changed since the "Dream Team" of "Egyptologists" that was put together 100 years ago” -May 4 2006


(He says he has read everything by the critics, yet he thought nothing had changed over the past 100 years!)


“It was my understand from detailed descriptions of the manuscripts that each is of similar content. Perhaps that is my misunderstanding and you could clear that up.” May 11 2006


(Quite an interesting question coming from someone who claims to have had “examined the contents of the KEP at length”)


“At this period of time (when the KEP were being produced) is there any contemporary evidence that any of the individuals in question had been recently or were currently serviing Joseph Smith in the capacity of "scribe"? To my knowledge, neither Cowdery, Phelphs, nor Parrish had served as scribes to Joseph for a considerable time preceeding this period.” May 11 2006


(So much for Will’s “knowledge.”)


“It was not a secret in the 1830s that Egyptian had been shown to be a phonetic language, with many similarities to Hebrew. These men certainly knew this, so how did they convince themselves that one flimsy character could "translate" into dozens of words? This is an demanding question, and one that I don't think has been adequately answered by anyone.”== May 11 2006


(After I refuted this he backtracked with, “I only suggested that it is not unreasonable to suppose that they at least understood that it was primarily a phonetic language.” No, he said they “certainly” knew it.)


“I have observed Metcalfe's approach to the "truth" for almost twenty years now, and I know that he is a committed enemy of the restored gospel and the man who restored it. He will manipulate quotes and data, and heap non sequitur upon non sequitur in his attempts to discredit Joseph Smith. He seeks to destroy people's faith, and his lies have been instrumental in the alienation of many people from the church, and I don't see his reformation on the horizon.” --- May 12 2006


“Now that I've had occasion to closely examine the portions of Ms#2 that we've seen…the sheer brevity of the text in question would seem to preclude the necessity for three separate scribes…” May 13 2006


(But there obviously were three scribes hired to do a job. So what makes more sense here: 1) that three scribes were hired to transcribe a dictation (common practice) or 2) three scribes were hired to copy a text of “sheer brevity” (unheard of)? This is what I have been asking him ever since, with no response in sight)


“I find it very interesting indeed that Metcalfe is so careful to post only selected excerpts from the photos he has. If he has the entire manuscript photographed, why doesn't he allow the rest of us to see it? I suspect that he his hiding something, too. Something that he feels could be turned into a strong apologetic if he were to put it at our disposal…I really wish we had a full set of high quality photos of the manuscripts. I have now become convinced that there is a strong apologetic just waiting on the release of such photos.…” May 13 2006


(Speaks for itself. If we even hint that Gee could be slightly misleading the entire moderator team comes crashing down on us, and Brent was actually involved in this discussion)


“The news of Champollion's deciphering work had made its way "over the pond" at least to the extent that it was known that Egyptian was a phonetic language. That simple piece of knowledge alone would certainly have been known. Not only that, but Joshua Seixas had long since come and gone from Kirtland and is most likely the origin of Joseph's knowledge that Egyptian was read right to left” - May 13 2006


(Actually, Joshua Seixas arrived in 1836, after translation in the KEP had ceased. Yet, Will asserts with confidence that Seixas “had long since come and gone from Kirtland” before Smith started the Egyptian translations.)


"Some of my speculations in my previous post must be rejected by the fact that Joseph Smith did believe he could translate Egyptian in the case of the Facsimiles. Therefore, it is clear he was either: a-pretending to understand Egyptian when he, in reality, did not; or b-had a system for so doing which is unrelated to the conventional translation of Egyptian." May 13 2006


(Contrast this with Will's recent insinuation that Joseph Smith never claimed to be able to translate Egyptian characters. If he changed his opinion 18 months ago, it looks like he changed it back again)


"As to the so-called controversy surrounding the circumstances of its production, I would venture to say that I've looked into the details at least as fully and carefully as anyone ever has." Will Schryver, Nov 6, 2007


Nuff said.

[_Kevin Graham]

So William "Coward" Schryver offered to debate me, and in the same thread refused to debate. I offered him a full LDS audience as well, including my wife who would no doubt be rooting against me.

What's the matter Will, are you so financially destitute that you can't afford a plane ticket?

[_Mortal Man]

Just a brief note to say that even though I have decided to leave this board for a while (for reasons already expressed), I have appreciated some of the discussion that has taken place here, and I have decided to continue with that discussion here:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/ ... 1208908187

Those who are willing and able, and who wish to keep the discussion at least somewhat civil and reasonable, are welcome to join me there.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Most of the interested people here are banned from that thread, including myself.

[_beastie]

Most of the interested people here are banned from that thread, including myself.

You must be kidding. Did they share their rationale for banning you from the thread?

[_Kevin Graham]

You must be kidding. Did they share their rationale for banning you from the thread?

They couldn't stand the fact that Andrew's wit far surpassed that which had been expressed by their apologists.