KEP Dictation Argument: The Evidence

[_sock puppet]

And poof, it was gone

Sorry, "The Meaning and Purpose of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers - Part 1" was deleted at 12:32:39 Tue Oct 26, 2010. We have no more information about it on our mainframe or elsewhere.

[_thews]

Thought this was interesting from CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/intern ... cnn?hpt=C2

In it, they claimed the person picked what was written on the papyrus they were buried with.

[_Darth J]

Thought this was interesting from CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/intern ... cnn?hpt=C2

In it, they claimed the person picked what was written on the papyrus they were buried with.

Well, there you go. The Lebolo mummies were Mormons.

[Guest]

Mr. William "Gookie Cookie" Schryver's "thesis" is nonsense.

Coming from you, this is hardly much of a condemnation. While I haven't read many of your posts over the years, you have never impressed me as having anything more than merely average intelligence. While I don’t agree with much said by the apostates on this board, at least some of them come across as having a moderate level of education and intellect. You are not one of them. That’s why your only recourse to dealing with Schryver’s KEP arguments is to call them nonsense and challenge him to personal combat. I bet you suffer from a standard case of Napoleon Complex, and have probably spent your life secretly wishing you could be taller and smarter than you really are.

Uh-huh. I'm sorry you're such a puss that you can't back up all the hubris you've vomited all over this board.

Listen.

One of us believes in a God-Man-God who lives on a planet near Kolob.

One of us believes in dressing up like a baker and using "secret combinations" to get to Heaven.

One of us actually has a pair of testicles, and is willing to back up loud mouthy shit-talkin' Internet Tough Guy talk.

Your ability to read some nonsense, and then create more nonsense doesn't make you smart. It makes you this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwyMB19q ... r_embedded

Having someone like yourself lecture me on "intelligence" or whatever is akin to having a monkey lecture me on Global Warming or the Grand Unified Theory. All I'm gonna get is crap. So put that in your pipe and smoke it. Oh. Wait. You can't.

V/R
Dr. Cam

[_sock puppet]

My point in posting today is to relate a very interesting development that I heard about from a former member of my local ward who now lives in the vicinity of Hartford, CT. He had occasion recently to attend a meeting where Elder Marlin K. Jensen spoke. Elder Jensen took questions from the audience afterwards. One of the questions concerned the Book of Abraham controversy. In response, Elder Jensen referred to what he termed "soon-to-be-published studies" showing that the amount of papyri we have now is only a small fraction of what Joseph Smith had originally. Then he recommended that the questioner view the online video of William Schryver’s KEP presentation from the FAIR conference in order to understand the relationship of the KEP to the production of the Book of Abraham. My friend had never even known there was a controversy about the the Book of Abraham, but knew that I was interested in that kind of stuff, so he e-mailed me and asked if I had heard about any of this. Well, that turned into a rather long conversation. He had no idea that I know Schryver through the occasional overlap of our professional work.

Anyway, I thought it was significant that the Schryver’s KEP theories have evidently managed to persuade the church historian enough to recommend his FAIR presentation to a questioner.

Elder Jensen also recommended (in response to a different questioner) Greg Smith’s polygamy paper from the 2009 FAIR conference. Sounds like FAIR still in the “good graces” of at least some of the general authorities.

Nomad,

Thanks for sharing this new information. As will be no surprise, I have a few questions.

1-Did Elder Jensen say where on Facsimile No. 3 are the Egyptian characters for the name "Shulem"?

2-Did Elder Jensen explain why the only hieratic appearing on the restored Facsimile No. 2 are those characters drawn from the Sensen papyri put by Joseph Smith in those portions that were damaged and missing, and have been restored, while all the original Egyptian characters that survived as part of Facsimile No. 2 are hieroglyphic characters? Related question, did he venture an opinion on whether Joseph Smith even knew the difference between hieratic and hieroglyphic characters?

3-Did Elder Jensen explain why no part of the Explanation to Facsimile No. 2 includes attempts at what the Egyptian characters translate to read in English, just interpretations of the pictograph portions?

4-Did Elder Jensen explain how it was that the System of astronomy only unfolded to Joseph Smith and his scribes on October 1, 1835 if as Will posits, the BoAbr, including Chapter 3 (the astronomy) was completed before the end of July 1835 when the 'subsequent' EA&G was begun?

5-Did Elder Jensen tell those in attendance that once you peer through all the shrubbery that Will filled his 50 minutes at FAIR with, Will's claims that the EA&G came after an already completed BoAbr text is that the BoAbr text has a more developed story line than the EA&G (and that Will has yet to counter the point that such is to be expected if the EA&G were developed first, along the lines of working papers leading the BoAbr)?

6-Did Elder Jensen say when the COJCOLDS would make all the KEP documents open for public inspection and photographing? Or, conversely, did he explain why the COJCOLDS does not make them public?

7-Did Elder Jensen join in Will's opinion that he (Elder Jensen) would not be surprised if the Facsimiles are someday removed from the canon scripture, despite Abr 1:12 inextricably linking them?

8-Did Elder Jensen explain why there is so much repetition of concepts in Abr 1:1-3 as compared to the rest of Abr, and how that was the only part penned by W W Phelps, and how that mimics the progressions found in the five degrees of the GAEL, but in the parts of penned by other scribes, there is no such correlation in the Abr text?

Inquiring minds want to know.

BUMP for Nomad--and answers.

[_Kevin Graham]

Bump...

[_suniluni2]

Brent claims he has a better explanation that he will be publishing in his upcoming volume, and my experience with him tells me I won't be disappointed with what he presents.

So you're deferring that argument to Brent? I should not wait for you to respond on my thread? It's my understanding that Brent's publication has been in limbo for years. Are you really requesting I just wait for his publication, whenever it may appear?

Any word on Brent Metcalfe's publication, or did I miss it?

[_suniluni2]

Your theory doesn't work because it presumes the text was dictated by someone reading another source document.

This is circular and begs the question. You've yet to provide a word of evidence that supports the notion that it's problematic to conclude there was a source document.

Mak, would you care to post a link to your thread on the dittograph? It seems you missed the whole point of Kevin's thread, which argued for dictation, which in turn supports the notion that it's problematic to conclude there was a source document. Sorry it that was addressed later in the thread.

It seems Mak conceded there's evidence for dictation and Kevin conceded (or never argued against) the dittograph was a copy.

[_suniluni2]

So you're deferring that argument to Brent? I should not wait for you to respond on my thread? It's my understanding that Brent's publication has been in limbo for years. Are you really requesting I just wait for his publication, whenever it may appear?

Any word on Brent Metcalfe's publication, or did I miss it?

It's that dead, huh?

[_Shulem]

Bumping to celebrate John Gee's downfall.