Paul Osborne wrote: Clearly this is NOT a conventional translation. Paul O
Right. It is called a florid imagination.
You could say the same of any prophet in the history of the world.
Yes, one could indeed say the same thing of any prophet in the history of the world. You're catching on, albeit unwittingly. How's that for an oxymoron?
It's all about faith. That is the spiritual nature of religion as we know it. My goodness, we are not out to prove our religion! That would destroy faith. That would be bad.
Paul Osborne wrote:I agree with Dan. The usage of the word translation is just fine. Furthermore, the Book of Abraham is true and is a unique work in itself.
Porter, you are spritually blind.
Paul O
Take another pill Paul, you need one this morning.
It says translated not interpreted.
Further, why didn't the supposed next prophet/seer/revelator finish the translation of the papyrus into the book of Joseph?
I already took my pills today, you silly man. By the way, you have a new playmate!
Daniel Peterson wrote:To reiterate, I'm quite confident about what I said in the Ensign article, and I stand behind it.
You put Abraham in the Middle Kingdom? That's just plain wrong. Apparently you go with the false chronology fostered by Egypotologists today. You will have a hard time finding room for the Old Kingdom and Pre-Dynastic Egypt which occured AFTER the flood. Abraham lived long before the Midddle Kingdom. You need to harmonize the timeline with scripture and the teachings of the prophets. John Gee has a hard time doing this.
Well what were the true concepts? I see a few that look false (like the astronomy).
The concepts in the KEP are not complete. It wasn't canonized, yet. Those concepts were being sifted and sorted - they needed to be properly organized in their fulness before they could be canonized. What the world says regarding astronomy is sometimes a joke. Too many scientists put limits on the universe as if there is no end to space.
Paul O
You just asked me to judge it by it's contents. What are the truths?
And, how is saying there is no end to space the same as putting limits? Isn't that backwards? What example do you have of a scientists putting limits on the universe? Give an example, pleeeez
Not quite. I'm asking you to accept those things on faith.
What things? What are the truths fro mthe Book of Abraham that I am to have faith in? Also, in any case why should I have faith in them and not the bagadgavita or the writtings of L Ron Hubbard?
That is what religion is based on. The KEP and the astronomy teachings therein should be taken with an eye of faith.
In what way? Just mutely imagine there is something profound in there without saying what?
I've read many times how scientists put a number on how many stars there are in the universe. I've heard them say that there is a fixed number of star systems - infinity therefore is not in their cards.
Oh my how wrong you are. There are possible infinities beyond any infinity (transfinite arithmetic)) and possible univeres beyond imagination:
Look here to get your mind blown: http://www.homestead.com/WinterSteel/fi ... iverse.pdf
There's just one problem with all this .... the characters he translated don't mean what he said they mean. So, In other words, he made them up.
The characters represent what the prophet said. Think about that!
"The Egyptian characters used by the prophet Joseph Smith in making the Grammar & Alphabet and the Book of Abraham are a curious work indeed. Did Joseph Smith interpret Egyptian characters in the manner Egyptologists do today? Of course not. The purpose of the characters is to teach the value of symbolism; through the means of representationalism the mysteries of godliness can be revealed spiritually.
Translations of Egyptian hieroglyphs and other characters given through Joseph Smith are not patterned after the manner of the world. The characters are symbolic representations of the story given by revelation. The Book of Abraham Translation Manuscripts and Grammar & Alphabet of the Egyptian Language show how a single character from the papyrus could generate an entire sentence and multiple characters together produced whole paragraphs"!
Paul O
Like I said .... He made them up!
"What does God need with a starship?" - Captain James T. Kirk
Most people would like to be delivered from temptation but would like it to keep in touch. - Robert Orben
Paul Osborne wrote: Clearly this is NOT a conventional translation. Paul O
Right. It is called a florid imagination.
You could say the same of any prophet in the history of the world. Lehi's son thought their father was a foolish man with a silly imagination; did they not? The Jews thought Jesus was a nut. The point of the matter boils down to whether the concepts given by a prophet are true or not.
I find the things of the KEP to be quite interesting. It gets pretty involved too.
Paul O
No, it boils down to: Is what he said the characters mean what they really mean?
Obviously, they don't.
"What does God need with a starship?" - Captain James T. Kirk
Most people would like to be delivered from temptation but would like it to keep in touch. - Robert Orben
Sethbag wrote:Dude, I don't need to tell you how that crap can stand as a conventional translation. That's because I view this in an even better and more logical way; that Joseph Smith made it up. The whole degrees and whatnot was just the smoke he was blowing up the butts of his gullible followers. He was giving them what they wanted to hear. Whoever said it had to be logical?
Fair enough. But don't ever let me hear you say that the KEP was considered to be a conventional translation. I don't think anyone in Kirtland that was involved in the project thought it was. They saw concepts being born out of the prophet's mind. Too many critics are constantly bitching about how the Mormon prophet failed to translate like Egyptologists do. But let me tell you something: Egyptologists fail to translate like Joseph Smith did!
Paul O
And you really can't see that you're making the point?
You write "They saw concepts being born out of the prophet's mind."
Most people would call that "making stuff up."
"What does God need with a starship?" - Captain James T. Kirk
Most people would like to be delivered from temptation but would like it to keep in touch. - Robert Orben
Trinity wrote:Speaking of evolving interpretations of the word translation, I am interested in knowing if DCP still agrees with everything he wrote for this Ensign article in 1994 or has he modified his position at all?
I'm aware of nothing that would lead me to modify my position as stated in that article.
Of course not! Stubborn demagogues don't give in to things like facts and the contradictions to their worldview.
Why are you still Tenured? Oh, that's right...your defending the faith.
Sigh.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning