My JWHA Paper on the Egyptian Alphabet

[William Schryver]

You neglected to mention our voodoo dolls.

And please tell us about the innumerable historical reports of a long scroll that would make Carl Sagan proud.

I've you've ever given a "dry, scientific report" I must have missed it.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, you must show your work to get credit.

I can say one thing: it's become quite apparent in recent months that your underlying hostility towards Mormonism is growing by leaps and bounds and that it is increasingly becoming a motive force in your life.

As for the historical reports of a long scroll, there are several. I imagine there are some about which you are unaware. Matt Roper is to be credited for turning up some new references. Even so, the existing references I have read have been unduly maligned by critics for whom it appears the notion of a long scroll of Horos is anathema. No matter. It has been my observation that they only convince the already deconverted with such arguments.

As for the papyrus measurements Brian and I made last Friday, I am not surprised to see them attacked in the fashion we have seen on this thread. It was so utterly predictable that no one could possibly be surprised by it. That's just the way it works with these things. Still, I am patient and confident that the truth will prevail in the end.

[Paul Osborne]

Come on Chris, you need to get out of here. It's not healthy to keep beating this dead horse with these people regarding thickeness and length of the papyrus. People are going to believe what they want to believe and see and interpret facts how they want to see them.

Now, come on, go do something else for a while and forget about this. Do you have hiking boots? Take a stroll and go for a hike. Go get some fresh air and forget about all this for a while.

Paul O

[William Schryver]

It's not healthy to keep beating this dead horse with these people regarding thickeness and length of the papyrus.

Yeah, who cares about the "facts" when it's just so much easier to cling to your presuppositions?

People are going to believe what they want to believe and see and interpret facts how they want to see them.

I'll bet even micrometers have a mind of their own. Depending on the time of the month and the phase of the moon, they could tell you just about anything!

By the way, Paul, what would be your reaction if you were to find out that a significant portion of the text of the Book of Abraham was revealed before the Kirtland Egyptian Papers were ever produced?

Or does it even matter now that you've fallen into the abyss of total apostasy, just as I predicted several years ago (and as I also predicted for Kevin Graham). Both of you objected vociferously at the time of the respective predictions, but it looks like I'm the one that was right on that score, eh?

[William Schryver]

Will, suppose Chris were to come back and say that his micrometer measurements show a thickness of 0.8 mm; what would be your reaction?

I would ask him why he was measuring four sheets at a time.

You see, both the micrometer and the naked eye revealed the simple undeniable fact that the Joseph Smith papyri are nowhere even close to 800 microns; nowhere even close to 400 microns; in fact, I predict that, when an ultrasonic micrometer can be employed to measure the entire papyri collection, not a single sampling point will attest a papyrus thickness greater than 200 microns, if even that. Indeed, I predict that the scroll of Semminis will produce several measurements less than 100 microns; perhaps as thin as 80 microns. In my judgment, it was visibly thinner than the scroll of Horos.

[wenglund]

Hi Wade,

I think that the translation process is quite clearly explained in the first two pages of the GAEL, which expounds D&C 9:7-11. I see the process as follows:

1) Look at the number of "connecting points found in the character" to determine how many "connecting parts of speech" must be used ("or, the full sense of the writer is not conveyed").

2) "Study it out in your own mind," i.e., imagine something from Genesis, The Book of Jasher, Antiquities of the Jews, The Zohar, The Philosophy of a Future State and/or The Six Books of Proclus on the Theology of Plato.

3) If you don't get a "stupor of thought," then it is "expedient" that you continue translating, but if you "fear" then the "time" will be "past".

That is an interesting propossal.

However, before addressing the question of the translation, I would like to first ask about the "characters" ("hieratic symbols"?). Have all the characters in the KEPE's and the KEPA's been accounted for in the extant papyri?

I realize that three characters from the KEPE which you believe were used as a key to translate Abr. 1:1-3, are not extant, but are presumed by scholars to have once existed on a missing "flake" or "lacuna". Is the same true for any and all of the characters that may not be accounted for in the extant papyri? Have experts determined that they all came from the supposed "Book of Breathings" (as some call it)?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[William Schryver]

wenglund:

Have all the characters in the KEPE's and the KEPA's been accounted for in the extant papyri?

John Gee has identified all but three.

Have experts determined that they all came from the supposed "Book of Breathings" (as some call it)?

They do NOT all come from the Document of Fellowship Written by Isis (that is the correct name of the document).

[Mortal Man]

That is an interesting propossal.

However, before addressing the question of the translation, I would like to first ask about the "characters" ("hieratic symbols"?). Have all the characters in the KEPE's and the KEPA's been accounted for in the extant papyri?

I realize that three characters from the KEPE which you believe were used as a key to translate Abr. 1:1-3, are not extant, but are presumed by scholars to have once existed on a missing "flake" or "lacuna". Is the same true for any and all of the characters that may not be accounted for in the extant papyri? Have experts determined that they all came from the supposed "Book of Breathings" (as some call it)?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The first character in the GAEL, an Egyptian "j", is the first character in the instructions column on the piece that flaked off. It is also the first character in the translation manuscripts and in the instructions column of Papyrus Louvre 3284. It's a 5th degree character that can have positive or negative "significations" and is shown dissected into its component parts.

The second charcter in the GAEL, an Egyptian "w", is the second character in the instructions column on the piece that flaked off. It is also the second character in the translation manuscripts and in the instructions column of Papyrus Louvre 3284. This is the "Abraham" character that JS was fond of pointing out.

The third character in the GAEL is made up, although it looks to me like the right edge of it was extant when JS had the papyri. This character was likely torn when Chandler opened the coffins and pulled the scroll from its casing. This is another composite character which contains the "Abraham" lexeme.

I posted a picture here.

[wenglund]

wenglund:

John Gee has identified all but three.

They do NOT all come from the Document of Fellowship Written by Isis (that is the correct name of the document).

I appreciate the clarification. Is there an article (hopefully online) where Gee identifies the source document(s) from whence the various characters were likely derived?

Does he provide an explanation for the three characters for which he wasn't able to account?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Paul Osborne]

By the way, Paul, what would be your reaction if you were to find out that a significant portion of the text of the Book of Abraham was revealed before the Kirtland Egyptian Papers were ever produced?

Or does it even matter now that you've fallen into the abyss of total apostasy, just as I predicted several years ago (and as I also predicted for Kevin Graham). Both of you objected vociferously at the time of the respective predictions, but it looks like I'm the one that was right on that score, eh?

Will, If I found out that a significant portion of the BofA was translated before the KEP, it wouldn't change my opinion of the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3. You can't use a micrometer to justify the thickness of those explanations. They are are what they are, and they aren't what the original Egyptian scribe intended.

Now, I have a prediction too. You will join me and Kevin in that pit that you mentioned. Then, both of us will be right on the prediction score. In the mean time, hang in there my friend.

Darth Paul O

[William Schryver]

Mortal Man:

It's the "Abraham" character that JS was fond of pointing out.

You have absolutely no evidence to support your assertion here. None. Zero. Zilch.

Not that it matters a whole lot, but you know very well that there is no evidence to support your claim.

The third character in the GAEL is made up

[Paul Osborne]

didn

[Mortal Man]

Are you sure?

I believe that this is the third character that the scribe wrote in the instructions column, which JS was trying to reconstruct when he produced this character, which derives from this character, which derives from this hieroglyph. The hieroglyph and hieratic character are both part of groupings related to Osiris, whereas JS related them both to Abraham. Were I Kerry Shirts, I would point this out as more remarkable evidence that Osiris=Abraham.

[William Schryver]

I believe that this is the third character that the scribe wrote in the instructions column, which JS was trying to reconstruct when he produced this character, which derives from this character, which derives from this hieroglyph. The hieroglyph and hieratic character are both part of groupings related to Osiris, whereas JS related them both to Abraham. Were I Kerry Shirts, I would point this out as more remarkable evidence that Osiris=Abraham.

You've completely misunderstood me.

The question is not whether the documents show a connection between this character and "Abraham," but whether or not Joseph Smith is known to have pointed at this character and claimed it to be "the signature of Abraham." That is what you were suggesting, and I'm calling BS on it, because there is no evidence indicating anything of the sort, your spiffy little doctored photo of the papyri with a pointing hand notwithstanding.

[Chris Smith]

The question is not whether the documents show a connection between this character and "Abraham," but whether or not Joseph Smith is known to have pointed at this character and claimed it to be "the signature of Abraham." That is what you were suggesting, and I'm calling BS on it, because there is no evidence indicating anything of the sort, your spiffy little doctored photo of the papyri with a pointing hand notwithstanding.

"No evidence" is a bit of an overstatement, isn't it? There is evidence that this is the character that was interpreted as the name of Abraham, and there is evidence that Joseph Smith pointed at a character that he believed was Abraham's signature. Mortal Man is just connecting the dots, as it were. And he's made no secret that that's what he's doing.

[William Schryver]

"No evidence" is a bit of an overstatement, isn't it? There is evidence that this is the character that was interpreted as the name of Abraham, and there is evidence that Joseph Smith pointed at a character that he believed was Abraham's signature. Mortal Man is just connecting the dots, as it were. And he's made no secret that that's what he's doing.

I, for one, have never found the evidence for Joseph Smith pointing at Abraham's "signature" very persuasive at all. I tend to be pretty selective when dealing with accounts authored by arrogant and denigrating sources who appear to be expending their best effort to make Joseph Smith look stupid.

[Chris Smith]

Josiah Quincy was arrogant and denigrating in some respects, but begrudgingly admiring in others. And although the Quincy Whig editorialist had a negative view of the Mormons, that frankly doesn't mean we can just throw out everything the man said. Everyone has biases and opinions. If we threw out all opinionated accounts, then there would be no historical sources left to us.

[wenglund]

Does anyone know about these characters published in "Life in Utah: or the mysteries and crimes of Mormonism" by J. H. Beadle:

Supposedly, they are a facsimile of writings on the plates from whence the Book of Mormon was translated.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

Wade:

Not yet. He

[Brent Metcalfe]

Hi Wade,

Does anyone know about these characters published in "Life in Utah: or the mysteries and crimes of Mormonism" by J. H. Beadle... [*snip!*]

At first glance, the image looks like a redrawing of published versions of characters from the (Whitmer) Anthon Transcript (e.g., as printed in The Prophet etc.), which depicted three horizontal lines of characters.

(BTW, I was fortunate enough to see the original [Whitmer] Anthon Transcript last year

[wenglund]

I have spent the last several days scouring online through a number of old newspapers and journals, and I have found more historical data relating to scriptural translations, particularly the BoA. I have included the new data, along with links to source material, in an update of the file I attached earlier in the thread. I will attach the newly updated file to this post. To ease locating the new additions, I have bolded the dates.

Of particular interest to me were these statements, in addition to those already posted to this thread, that speak what was of value to the saints and the manner of translation and what was translated:

"Mr. C. [Chandler] had also obtained from learned men the best translation he could of some few characters, which however, was not a translation, but more in the shape of their ideas with regard to it, their acquaintance with the language not being sufficient to enable them to translate it literally. After some conversation with the Prophet Joseph, Mr. Chandler presented to him the ancient characters, asking him if he could translate them. The Prophet took them and repaired to his room and inquired of the Lord concerning them. The Lord told him they were sacred records, containing the inspired writings of Abraham when he was in Egypt, and also those of Joseph, while he was in Egypt; and they had been deposited, with these mummies, which had been exhumed. And he also enquired of the Lord concerning some few characters which Mr. Chandler, gave him by way of a test, to see if he could translate them. The Prophet Joseph translated these characters and returned them, with the translation to Mr. Chandler; and who, in comparing it with the translation of the same few characters by learned men, that he had before obtained, found the two to agree. The Prophet Joseph having learned the value of these ancient writings was very anxious to obtain them, and expressed himself wishful to purchase them. But Mr. Chandler told him that he would not sell the writings, unless he could sell the mummies, for it would detract from the curiosity of his exhibition; Mr. Smith inquired of him the price which was a considerable sum, and finally purchased the mummies and the writing, all of which he retained in his possession for many years; and they were seen by all the church that saw proper to visit the house of the Prophet Joseph and also by hundreds of strangers. The Prophet translated the part of these writings which, as I have said is contained in the Pearl of Great Price, and known as the Book of Abraham." (REMARKS OF CHURCH LEADERS PUBLISHED IN JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, 26 VOLS. LIVERPOOL, 1855-1886)

August 5, 1825: "We are credibly informed that the Mormons have purchased of Mr. Chandler, three of the mummies, which he recently exhibited in this village; and that the prophet Joe has ascertained, by examining the papyrus through his spectacles, that they are the bodies of Joseph (the son of Abraham,) and King Abimeleck, and his daughter

Translation timeline.doc

[Chris Smith]

Thanks, Wade. I've seen these before, but reading them in light of our discussion on this thread is quite useful. In particular:

"Mr. C. [Chandler] had also obtained from learned men the best translation he could of some few characters, which however, was not a translation, but more in the shape of their ideas with regard to it, their acquaintance with the language not being sufficient to enable them to translate it literally.

This of course is what I argued earlier: that Chandler knew there was an epitaph and an astronomical representation, but didn't have a literal translation of anything.

After some conversation with the Prophet Joseph, Mr. Chandler presented to him the ancient characters, asking him if he could translate them. The Prophet took them and repaired to his room and inquired of the Lord concerning them. The Lord told him they were sacred records, containing the inspired writings of Abraham when he was in Egypt, and also those of Joseph, while he was in Egypt; and they had been deposited, with these mummies, which had been exhumed. And he also enquired of the Lord concerning some few characters which Mr. Chandler, gave him by way of a test, to see if he could translate them. The Prophet Joseph translated these characters and returned them, with the translation to Mr. Chandler; and who, in comparing it with the translation of the same few characters by learned men, that he had before obtained, found the two to agree.

Here we have JS receiving the knowledge that these are the records of Abraham and Joseph by direct inspiration. This is distinct from his translation of the characters given him by Chandler.

Last summer a man came to Kirtland and brought among the Mormons four Egyptian mummies. The exhibition exactly struck their fancy. All the Mormons flocked to see the wonderful sight; and Joseph deciphered some of the hieroglyphics, and made known in writing the name and character and antiquity of some of the mummies; -- this was an additional proof of his divine inspiration. The man continued with them a week; and then a command was given them to purchase the whole, which they did for $2400.

Here the prophet gives the identity of the mummies prior to the purchase of the papyri.

Anyway, Wade, what you seem to be fixating on is the use of direct divine inspiration to translate the BoA. That's not inconsistent with what I've argued in this thread, which is that there were really only a few verses that used the GAEL as a translation key, and even in those cases there was inspiration involved in both the production of the GAEL and the use of the GAEL to produce the translation. The large majority of the BoA was indeed "penned down... by direct inspiration of Heaven."

Peace,

-Chris

[structurecop]

I hope the Archivists will be adding this thread to the library.

[wenglund]

Anyway, Wade, what you seem to be fixating on is the use of direct divine inspiration to translate the BoA. That's not inconsistent with what I've argued in this thread, which is that there were really only a few verses that used the GAEL as a translation key, and even in those cases there was inspiration involved in both the production of the GAEL and the use of the GAEL to produce the translation. The large majority of the BoA was indeed "penned down... by direct inspiration of Heaven." Peace, -Chris

The reason for my "fixation" is because there are other participants in the discussion here, or at least other major participants in the BoA controversy, who may be looking at things in a purely naturalistic way, and who may not be aware of all the evidence and arguments in support of divine involvement. In fact, it was these good folks that I had in mind when I asked and re-asked several times, the question that only you have yet to answer.

The other reason is because, out of most all that tends to be debated on the issue, it is all that is really relevant to the BoA as scripture and one's faith in the verity and viability of the restored gospel of Christ. I hope to make this more clear as I proceed in the discussion.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Mortal Man]

There seems to be this idea floating around that Chandler was on a pilgrimage to get the papyri translated. In reality, had he not had the good fortune of obtaining the coffins, he would have been selling snake oil. He dodged his creditors and misrepresented himself as Lebolo's nephew. I see him as a used car salesman who knew how to flatter his customers to make a sale. To him, it was a no brainer to feed Joseph's ego and make him look good in front of his fellow saints.

[Chris Smith]

There seems to be this idea floating around that Chandler was on a pilgrimage to get the papyri translated. In reality, had he not had the good fortune of obtaining the coffins, he would have been selling snake oil. He dodged his creditors and misrepresented himself as Lebolo's nephew. I see him as a used car salesman who knew how to flatter his customers to make a sale. To him, it was a no brainer to feed Joseph's ego and make him look good in front of his fellow saints.

True. Although, I still think he did make an effort to get his papyri translated in New York and Philadelphia, mostly because of the additional value it would add to his exhibition.