Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: MarkBsnr; Osage Orange

Here is one thing that has NEVER made any sense. The Book of Mormon is purported to be a testament of Jesus Christ, yet Smith claimed that the gold plates were written in hieroglyphics. Why would it not have been written in Greek as ALL other Christian works in the early centuries were? Greek was the established language of writing during this period and had been for a long time before Christ. Why hieroglyphics?


102 posted on 04/29/2008 10:59:32 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]


To: wagglebee; MarkBsnr; Osage Orange
Why would it not have been written in Greek as ALL other Christian works in the early centuries were?

The arguement being that the alledged date of migration is pre-greek conquest - thus greek language was not used. But then Smith couldn't read greek anyway

http://www.mormonthink.com/greekweb.htm

The 'reformed hieroglyphics' is even more problematical, since no such beast exists in the first place. But secondly, the Egyptians were hated by the Jews because of their slavery. That alone would be reason NOT to use hieroglyphics. Jewish writing in that period was in Hebrew until 3d century bc and the greek conquest.

108 posted on 04/29/2008 11:10:46 AM PDT by Godzilla (I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

One explanation is that there were enough Greek scholars throughout American culture; as well, there were certainly enough Greek immigrants that could put the lie to anything that they saw.

Egyptian scholars were definitely in short supply and Joseph Smith not only had a more exotic story, there were fewer people who could possibly debunk this fabrication.


110 posted on 04/29/2008 11:14:26 AM PDT by MarkBsnr ( I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee
The Book of Mormon is purported to be a testament of Jesus Christ, yet Smith claimed that the gold plates were written in hieroglyphics.



 The "Caractors" are the only tangible evidence in existence related to Smith's story. No gold plates, no brass plates, no peep stones, no Urim and Thummim... only these "Caractors," not a single one of which is in the purported languages.


Smith's translation of the Caractors. According to Martin Harris (Joseph Smith - History, 1:64), "I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated,* and he said they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters."

Speak right up now in all truthfulness. Isn't it revealing how Smith started out making a stab at creating believable "caractors" but quckly gave up and produced nothing but squiggles, ending up wih a series of nothing more than crude little scribbles? Yet Professor Anthon supposedly translated them!
*Harris must have had two or three pieces of paper with him—one with characters and a translation of them (on the same paper or a separate one) and one with untranslated characters—quite likely the "Caractors." Some Mormon "scholars" have gone out on a limb, sawed it off, and knocked themselves out trying to translate from these true Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic characters a segment that would correspond with a verse from 1 Nephi.


Modern-day experts in Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic. In 1829, any knowledge of these languages possessed by U.S. scholars would have been rudimentary at best. Expertise in them has vastly improved since then. So go ahead, do it. Get any modern expert in these languages to identify which of these "Caractors" are Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac and Arabic. Better still, accept the claim of Mormon apologists that Anthon did indeed so testify and that his appraisal of the Caractors was correct. (Op. cit, pp. 73-75)

Save your money! Samples of Assyriac/Aramaic and Arabic writing:




What say you? Which of Smith's "Caractors" resemble the Assyriac and Arabic ones? No need to pay experts for their analysis. A child could accurately check this out. These writing systems have remained constant for well over 3000 years.

152 posted on 04/29/2008 12:41:16 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Why Hieroglyphics? Ever been the National Masonic memorial in Alexandria, VA?


439 posted on 05/01/2008 6:11:45 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson