Adamic/KEP logical connection

[_Scottie]

Sorry for my ignorance here, but what is the KEP??

[_Who Knows]

Sorry for my ignorance here, but what is the KEP??

See here. It'll give you a good overview, but ignore the apologetic bullcrap. They weren't merely 'study documents' - they are the translation working documents of the Book of Abraham.

[_Scottie]

Sorry for my ignorance here, but what is the KEP??

See here. It'll give you a good overview, but ignore the apologetic bullcrap. They weren't merely 'study documents' - they are the translation working documents of the Book of Abraham.

Thanks!

[_Sethbag]

Evolving, that stuff about Dee and Kelly, and the Liber Loagaeth, was really interesting! Thanks for posting it. I guess it helps show how other people were making up alphabets, words, records, angelic visits, etc., so that Joseph Smith doing the same wasn't quite so unique after all. He may well have gotten the idea for some of these things from these other tails of things people had previously reported happening.

[_charity]

Charity you are avoiding the point again and dodging the question.

Let me make this simple, since you seem to insist on getting carried away with this irrelevant " means."

To say you know Egyptian is one thing.

To say you can translate Egyptian into English is quite another.

Nobody here has said Joseph Smith believed he "knew" Egyptian. But he did believe he had the ability to translate Egyptian into English. The "means" is irrelevant to the point that Joseph Smith could not do what he said.

What definition of "translate" are you falling back on in order to give Smith enough leeway to get it all wrong? You won't answer because you have no understanding of this apologetic.

The sense of "translate" is to get some work in one language into another.

To "get some work in"? What the hell kind of comment is that?

The fact is Joseph Smith believed, and he convinced his followers that he had the ability to translate the Egyptian language in the same exact sense we understand the term "translate" today.

Gosh, Kevin, I know several translators and not one of them relies on a particular gift of the spirit to accomplish their work today. They are fluent in two languages. They can take a work written in one language and "get it into" the second language. "Get it into" is a way to say "translate" without using the word. I don't know what your problem is with that.

I think Joseph amply demosntrated his ability to "translate." Book of Mormon, JST, Book of Abraham. The KEP are not impressive as refutation, in my book. You completely ignore the textual issues involved because you think you have some little criticism in the production. There are enough questions about your interpretation of what you have to keep you on shaky grounds.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Sorry for my ignorance here, but what is the KEP??

See here. It'll give you a good overview, but ignore the apologetic bullcrap. They weren't merely 'study documents' - they are the translation working documents of the Book of Abraham.

Thanks!

Better yet, check them out for yourself!

http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/wiki/ind ... ian_Papers

[_beastie]

I think Joseph amply demosntrated his ability to "translate."

How in the world has Joseph amply demonstrated his ability to "translate"?

[_charity]

I think Joseph amply demosntrated his ability to "translate."

How in the world has Joseph amply demonstrated his ability to "translate"?

If you would get past your revulsion about angels and plates and supernatural means for producing a book, and look at the textual evidences, you would agree that the Book of Mormon is a pretty amazing work. And since the best, most credible evidence for the source of the Book of Mormon is that Joseph "translated" it by some means not completely understood, that stands as pretty good evidence of his ability to "translate." JST is another one. And the textual evidence of the validity of the Book of Abraham is pretty substantial, too.

That is how Joseph "amply demonstrated" his ability to "translate."

[_cksalmon]

I think Joseph amply demosntrated his ability to "translate."

How in the world has Joseph amply demonstrated his ability to "translate"?

If you would get past your revulsion about angels and plates and supernatural means for producing a book, and look at the textual evidences, you would agree that the Book of Mormon is a pretty amazing work.

What textual evidence? Chiasmus? Sorenson's ambiguous parallels?

And since the best, most credible evidence for the source of the Book of Mormon is that Joseph "translated" it by some means not completely understood, that stands as pretty good evidence of his ability to "translate."

"Best" and "most credible" to whom? LDS? What is the "best," "most credible" evidence? Who published it? Was it an LDS organization? I'm curious, Charity: where can one find the "best" and "most credible" evidence supportive of your belief? To what publications or articles would you point us?

To echo another poster, have you read anything not produced by an LDS apologetic organization on Book of Abraham? on Book of Mormon? On the Kinderhook Plates?

Your constant erasure of the notion of translation via your placing the Joseph Smith version of it in quotation marks amply evidences the fact that you don't count Joseph Smith's "translations" as real-world translations. But then you want to talk about textual evidence? There simply are no originary source texts underneath his "translations." What textual evidence could you be referring to that stands on its own without reference to an actual underlying source document?

JST is another one.

Examples? (You might want to see Consiglieri's thread on MADB from three or so months ago on this topic.)

And the textual evidence of the validity of the Book of Abraham is pretty substantial, too.

This is actually the weakest of all, to my mind. What is the textual evidence that you consider "pretty substantial" for Book of Abraham? It must not involve an originary source document, I suppose, as you consider Joseph Smith's translation merely a "translation."

CKS

[_beastie]

If you would get past your revulsion about angels and plates and supernatural means for producing a book, and look at the textual evidences, you would agree that the Book of Mormon is a pretty amazing work. And since the best, most credible evidence for the source of the Book of Mormon is that Joseph "translated" it by some means not completely understood, that stands as pretty good evidence of his ability to "translate." JST is another one. And the textual evidence of the validity of the Book of Abraham is pretty substantial, too.

That is how Joseph "amply demonstrated" his ability to "translate."

It has nothing to do with my "revulsion about angels and plates and supernatural means" whatsoever.

It has everything to do with the context of the Book of Mormon, and how it is almost completely contradictory to ancient Mesoamerica, except for the most generic "matches", like people fight wars.

I have invited you several times to read my essays on the subject, but clearly you haven't bothered. They are here:

http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/wiki/ind ... esoamerica