Jump to content

Primer on the KEP


Analytics

Recommended Posts

In my opinion, what is most damning about the Book of Abraham are the facsimiles that are canonized in the Book of Abraham. Those facsimiles are what clearly link the Book of Abraham to common Egyptian funeral documents. Further, the canonized translations of the facsimiles are proof that Joseph Smith couldn
Link to comment

You started a thread about the KEP, and yet your expressed opinion above is in regards to the facsimilies. What relationships do you suppose exist between the KEP and the facsimilies? Are the facsimilies even mentioned in the KEP?

I ask because Will's presentation is titled, "The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers," and not "The Meaning of the Facsimilies". As such, one may logically conclude that the "game changing" has to do with the meaning of the KEP and not the meaning of he facsimilies. Right?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Maybe Analytics already realizes the game is over as far as the KEP is concerned and is turning his attention to a (supposedly) more vulnerable target. :P

Glenn

Link to comment
In 1968, Jay Todd suggested that the Grammar may have been reverse-engineered from an inspired Book of Abraham translation.[8] In 1971, Hugh Nibley expanded on Todd's argument, explaining that the Alphabet and Grammar materials were largely an uninspired production of Joseph Smith's scribes, who had turned against him and were working independently of him at the time.[9] This view is also accepted by John Gee.[10]

Who created the Wiki?

When?

When did Hugh Nibley die?

What is Gee's position today?

Link to comment

According to the Wikipedia article on the KEP,

The papers are a source of controversy, because according to Egyptologists they show a lack of understanding of the Egyptian language, and cast doubt on the Book of Abraham as a literal translation of the Joseph Smith Papyri.

So that I can recognize and appreciate a true game changer, is that the status of the old game?

So says Wikipedia. Can anyone substantiate the claim that Egyptologists have examined the KEP and demonstrated that they show a lack of understanding of the Egyptian language?

WW

Link to comment

I fail to find the facsimiles damming. For all we know God used pre-existing artwork to help Joseph tell a story.

And just because they are in with the BoA does not necessarily make them canonized, does it? Are the footnotes officially cannon?

JMS

Link to comment

There is a comment along the same lines from Fayette Lapham's 1830 interview with Joseph Smith Sr., as well: "The remaining pages [of the Book of Mormon plates] were closely written over in characters of some unknown tongue, the last containing the alphabet of this unknown language. Joseph, not being able to read the characters, made a copy of some of them, which he showed to some of the most learned men of the vicinity."

It's interesting that Father Smith's comment implies there was an alphabet actually on the plates. Joseph may have conceived of the Abrahamic alphabet in a similar way. For one thing, the Alphabet and Grammar material largely translates the characters from the initial fragment of the Hor scroll, whereas the text of the Book of Abraham itself apparently begins only on the second fragment. Another indication of this is that the History of the Church says that in late July Joseph was "translating an alphabet to the Book of Abraham." Does this imply that Abraham actually provided an alphabet on the scroll, which Joseph Smith then translated? I think so, and LDS scholar James Clark drew the same conclusion in his book The Story of the Pearl of Great Price, despite being unaware of the parallel to Father Smith's description of the gold plates.

Very interesting. Thanks for the reference, Chris.

Link to comment

I fail to find the facsimiles damming. For all we know God used pre-existing artwork to help Joseph tell a story.

JMS

Clever, if it wasn't so blasphemous. God uses pagan texts of pagan God's to relay his message? That's what it has come down to? God the Father is represented by the pagan fertility god Min and the Holy Spirit a serpent? (See Fac. 2, figure 7).

Link to comment

Clever, if it wasn't so blasphemous. God uses pagan texts of pagan God's to relay his message? That's what it has come down to? God the Father is represented by the pagan fertility god Min and the Holy Spirit a serpent? (See Fac. 2, figure 7).

Why is that blasphemous?

Link to comment

What relationships do you suppose exist between the KEP and the facsimilies? Are the facsimilies even mentioned in the KEP?

Off the top of my head I know that a drawing of Fac. 2 is part of the KEP.

We know that Joseph supervised Reuben Hedlock's woodcuts in preparation for publishing the BoA in the Times and Seasons, for which Joseph was the editor:

Friday, March 4, 1842 - At my office exhibiting the Book of Abraham in the original to Brother Reuben Hedlock, so that he might take the size of the several plates or cuts, and prepare the blocks for the Times and Seasons; and also gave instructions concerning the arrangements of the writing on the large cut, illustrating the principles of astronomy [Fac. 2] ... HOC 4:543

We know that Joseph quoted one of his "Egyptian" words published in "The Voice of Truth" pamplet, p.16:

An Egyptian, Su-e-eh-ni; (What other persons are those?)

Which same word we find in the KEP Grammer and A[l]phabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL), p.18:

Su e-eh-ni. The same as in the first degree

Joseph also wrote a letter quoting his "Egyptian" words, published in the Times and Seasons, Nov. 13, 1843:

Were I an Egyptian, I would exclaim Jah-oh-eh, Enish-go-on-dosh, Flo-ees-Flos-is-is; [O the earth! the power of attraction, and the moon passing between her and the sun.]

Which we also find in the GAEL, pp.29-30:

Joh-oh-eh: The earth under the government of an other or the second of the fixed stars, which is called Enish-go-on-dosh or in other words the power of attra[c]tion it has with the earth.

Flo-ees: The moon

Link to comment

You started a thread about the KEP, and yet your expressed opinion above is in regards to the facsimilies. What relationships do you suppose exist between the KEP and the facsimilies? Are the facsimilies even mentioned in the KEP?I ask because Will's presentation is titled, "The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers," and not "The Meaning of the Facsimilies". As such, one may logically conclude that the "game changing" has to do with the meaning of the KEP and not the meaning of he facsimilies. Right? Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Whether or not one can logically draw an inference about the facsimiles depends upon their relationship to the KEP. That

Link to comment
Joseph also wrote a letter quoting his "Egyptian" words, published in the Times and Seasons, Nov. 13, 1843:

Were I an Egyptian, I would exclaim Jah-oh-eh, Enish-go-on-dosh, Flo-ees-Flos-is-is; [O the earth! the power of attraction, and the moon passing between her and the sun.]

Did Joseph Smith write this letter? Are you sure?

Link to comment

There is a comment along the same lines from Fayette Lapham's 1830 interview with Joseph Smith Sr., as well: "The remaining pages [of the Book of Mormon plates] were closely written over in characters of some unknown tongue, the last containing the alphabet of this unknown language. Joseph, not being able to read the characters, made a copy of some of them, which he showed to some of the most learned men of the vicinity."

It's interesting that Father Smith's comment implies there was an alphabet actually on the plates. Joseph may have conceived of the Abrahamic alphabet in a similar way. For one thing, the Alphabet and Grammar material largely translates the characters from the initial fragment of the Hor scroll, whereas the text of the Book of Abraham itself apparently begins only on the second fragment. Another indication of this is that the History of the Church says that in late July Joseph was "translating an alphabet to the Book of Abraham." Does this imply that Abraham actually provided an alphabet on the scroll, which Joseph Smith then translated? I think so, and LDS scholar James Clark drew the same conclusion in his book The Story of the Pearl of Great Price, despite being unaware of the parallel to Father Smith's description of the gold plates.

There are elements of your statement above that are not true. Not that I'm suggesting you are lying, or anything of the sort, just that you appear to "know things that just aren't so." :P

Link to comment

Clever, if it wasn't so blasphemous. God uses pagan texts of pagan God's to relay his message? That's what it has come down to? God the Father is represented by the pagan fertility god Min and the Holy Spirit a serpent? (See Fac. 2, figure 7).

Not this old chestnut.

I suggest you study up abit on what teh ancient Hebrews borrowed from other "pagan" religions of the area.

Link to comment
Fair questions.

Which is why I asked 'em. I don't know the answers to all of 'em, but do know enough to question the assumptions behind the statements both in the Wiki and in your prior post about the "current state of Mormon KEP apologetics."

If only there were a message board where qualified people could tell me whether or not Wikipedia represents the current state of the KEP.

Yup. Troublesome that. Wouldn't the world be a lovely place if only the opponents in debate would excuse one's excesses and errors, find justification for one's excesses and errors, and answer CFRs for one's excesses and errors without one having to go to any effort at all?

Life sucks sometimes, don't it?

Link to comment

Not this old chestnut.

I suggest you study up abit on what teh ancient Hebrews borrowed from other "pagan" religions of the area.

Point number 18 of the True Church:

The True Church borrows doctrine, images, and representations of deity from pagan religions in the surrounding geographical area.

Link to comment

Did Joseph Smith write this letter? Are you sure?

It's likely the W.W. Phelps wrote all or part of Joseph's letter of appeal to the Green Mountain boys however Phelps didn't get these Egyptian words out of thin air. He obviously took them from Joseph's Egyptian translations such as the translation of facsimile #2 or the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar.

Phaedrus

Link to comment
There are elements of your statement above that are not true. Not that I'm suggesting you are lying, or anything of the sort, just that you appear to "know things that just aren't so." :P

Well, it takes one to know one. :-P

I assume you're referring to my remark that the text of the Book of Abraham apparently begins on the second fragment? Or is there something about the documentary evidence itself that I have unknowingly misrepresented?

Link to comment

Well, it takes one to know one. :-P

I assume you're referring to my remark that the text of the Book of Abraham apparently begins on the second fragment? Or is there something about the documentary evidence itself that I have unknowingly misrepresented?

I'm sure that it is simply something you have assumed to be true, but it's not. We'll get a chance to talk about it on Friday.

Link to comment
Is that your response because you know somebody is going to finally prove it wrong this week, or has that always been your response?

I have long distrusted the idea that the GAEL and Abraham manuscripts represented the working papers of a translation in progress. Since the very critics who hung their hat on this notion were always the first ones to point out that it wasn't possible to produce a translation that way, it strikes me as ridiculous that they should not realise that the fact that something couldn't happen a particular way should at least suggest that it didn't.

But yes, the loud guffaw is being made now as I chisel the "RIP" on the headstone of that theory.

Thanks for the clarification. I feel I understand his view much better.

No need to thank me. :P

IIRC, Nibley didn't say that the scribes had already turned against Joseph, but that some of them were getting a bit big-headed and thought they could do better than him. Some did turn against him later, of course. He also pointed out that Joseph worked alongside them on the project, an anomaly that has to be explained if it is to be counted among Joseph's revelatory experiences.

Is it possible for the facsimiles to become irrelevant? It seems to me that they are either going to prove that Joseph Smith could translate Egyptian or that he couldn
Link to comment

I fail to find the facsimiles damming. For all we know God used pre-existing artwork to help Joseph tell a story.

And just because they are in with the BoA does not necessarily make them canonized, does it? Are the footnotes officially cannon?

JMS

A closer analogy would be the maps and pictures that have been attached to the scriptures over the years (these have been changed and added to from time to time).

What would be first important to know imo is how JS viewed the interpretations listed with the facs, did he see them as revelation or interpolations/explanations based on revelation received on other things or something else entirely.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...