Reformed Egyptian = Latin Short Hand? Celestial version

[_ELYSAB]

Dear DrW.
I am much more than 20 web-persons... I have so many pen names in web, since long time ago. For example, for Jews one of my names is ELIJAH or EL-IJAH and for Islam, ALIJAH or AL-IJAH or ALL-IJAH, etc. Even for posting in FAIR website, I used so many pen names, that maybe I was discussing with I myself under distinct names... Proper pen names avoid religious and cultural/linguistic/political barriers, for example. Thus it is natural that in search web devices I am found in a contradictory thread way. My sister married a Muslim man... My niece is married an Irish man who lives in USA. My other sister has Italian citizenship and lives in England where is married with a Scotland man and they have a child... Other niece married there an England and they have a child... Small world.

Sabellian was the generic name of Ancient inhabitant of Italy, excluding those of Greek and Phoenician colonies, speaking some type of language originated (corrupted) from Greece (and some Phoenicia).

I knew the Nephitic and Ancient Sabellicus, of many centuries BC, were the same language, in a "family revelation" that took place in the Hotel that I was in Rome, in 1998. As if blindness fell from my eyes and I started to see they were the same language. And in my joy I asked to the Hotel send fax (email?) to some important persons of the Church informing them about so important discovery. Also I made a very detailed report telling what was discovered and how...

Knowing such information, it was possible to determine the pathway of Nephites from nearby Rome (Orvieto?) to Africa Coast, not going South (there were hostile Greek and Phoenician colonies) by through Sardinia island and coasting. At the Africa Coast they coasted up to the point the Nile River discharge into Mediterranean Sea. Nephites moved upstream... It was EASY to find the town NEFICH (it is in language of NEPHI, without PH, but "F" on the map), which means NEFI+CH, "property of NEFI, town for the NEPHITES". It survived and now it is NAFIAHSH, in Arab, a suburb of ISHMAILIAH big town of Egypt). From there they moved to Jerusalem... I wrote a report on that in FAIR in 2005... And many other sites, as in YAHOO.

I also made many posts about HAGOTh, which name in Nefitich = Sabellich is RAGGOTTI, because of the rule of doubling consonants (it came from old Hebrew... and was introduced into Sabellicus, Joel 3:6).

MY THREAD----> I guess in FAIR. Another TBM, with the screen name of Not Hagoth 7, also claimed Nephites were found in Ireland on that thread.

Is it your contention that the Nephites left for the New World from the Italian Peninsula? YES TRUE. EXAMINE "FAIR, 2005" and Jews sites.
This is only a preliminary search of sites in FAIR: many names used...

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=3231&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=3254&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=3256&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=3261&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=3249&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=3237&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2756&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2671&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2541&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2708&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2665&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2668&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2666&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2689&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2622&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2685&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2504&highlight=savelli

http://ldsfriends.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=2689&highlight=celsoely Possibly many sites are not included in list.

The above list is only a SUGGESTION. Probably many sites are not updated and thus are of little value. Thus don't waste time with them.

What specifically is the connection of the Nephites to Ireland in your view? One group of SABELLIS, quite like a "sub-group" named NEPH people, split in two. One moved North, toward the region of the huge town of Italy named MILAN. There they joined the CELTS (see map on previous posting). And then they started a huge RIOT through Europe. One Group of CELTS, with such group of SABELLI (NEPH), went to FRANCE, and crossed the CHANNEL (where it is the island named DIEU, or ADIEU, a Greek name for a Mythological GOD) to conquer Great Britain. Due some unknown reason, the group of NEPH (Sabellians) decided to gather in the north of Ireland, where they live since thousand years, being limited by the 4 tallest peaks of Ireland, named NEPHIN = NEPH + IN, which is IN + NEPH in Nephitic language, thus IN = LIVING PLACE of NEPH. Thus the NEPHITES are living in the NEPHIN land, limited by the 4 NEPHIN peaks.

The other group of NEPH, other family group, decided to go to opposite direction, toward the AFRICA COAST and to EGYPT, to become RICH there, making the construction of a great navigation channel to the king Pharaoh NECHOH II. Who in payment gave them 2 great irrigated lands between the Bitter Lake and Red Sea: see map. There NEPH learned to build great sail ship and navigate with them, with Greek and also with Phoenician technology, as such 2 factories were nearby...

Was there a city named Nehom in the ancient Roman Empire between Jerusalem and Rome? THE NAME OF THE TOWN WAS and YET IS "NEFICH". You can go there, visit it or see TURISTIC SITES OF IT... Even you can see it by SATELITE with very huge enlargement of image. LDS never found it because they were searching for Hebrew...

I found the harbor from where Nephites departed to USA. The place has a Nephitic name, just easy to identify as a corruption from Book of Mormon (Mosiah... thus Mosiah might has come a name that was known from the boarding place... on USA Navy map) and was good mapped (high precision) by the US NAVY with such names and you can see the "Lord Mountain" on there. They didn't know: fly over it. Plenty of ore of metals mined since very ancient days: ground surface.


This superimposition takes place at the beginning of the list of CARACTORS. From the first line (on top), from the left to the right. I was able to solve this puzzle some 10 years ago. Notice that we don't have an ABSURD character that does not exist in SABELLICUS (Ancient Italian language). But it is just to pay attention, and we can separate a small character "k", on left, then the character "N" (between a character "k" and the other big character "K" on right), and going below N we have a separation with other character that is "Í" or II (in English...). Between characters "39" and "40" we have a horizontal "bar" that means a separation between two distinct gold plates. Thus what comes from the right (as character "40") is already from "other Gold Plate"). I ALREADY PROVIDED A TRANSLATION ON WORDS THAT WAS WRITTEN ON CHARACTERS LIST. It is very easy to see where such WORDS are written. Just be "smart" and "be clever"...

It is important to understand these aspects to translate the KINDERHOOH plates, because they use the information that is in CARACTORS and more. In CARACTORS you can find CHARACTERS that are PLAIN "GREEK CHARACTERS", never Italian Characters. That is because of Joel 3:6. Also you can find PLAIN "PHOENICIAN" characters because of the same reason.

That is much more important when dealing with KINDERHOOK, because here Joseph Smith was not SELECTING the CHARACTERS to be easier. And in some case we could consider them as being used for sending information that was put in a way requiring good knowledge of Nephitic (Sabellicus) language quite like to unveil (decipher) the cryptographed message. Instead of characters being separated, as usual, they were GATHERED, as at the start of the list CARACTORS. And for that it was used mainly the CARACTOR "I" placed in several positions, not "in line", and the characters were put to "rotate". But we can notice, because of the CHARACTERS used, that the difference of dates between CARACTORS and KINDERHOOK, is not so great.

http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/d00a1f008bb46984795e9a9b7456baa12cfc32e05786d0268de331f49c8900fa6g.jpg CLICK TO ENLARGE


The same, reduced. Notice the comparison of the "A" from the list of CARACTORS (almost all, except one, are triangles with a DOT inside) with the "A" from the Kinderhook, which is typically Phoenician, BUT there are some "A" that are very ITALIC). Notice the rotation.

One word written in the list of CARACTORS. It is written ITI.

http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/2b688d8a81bcdb10dd4a7643975c3453a846b25442eaba626c2d731f755b0c246g.jpg
CLICK ON URL to enlarge very much the image



You can see the translation of each character of the plate 1, face 1, of the Kinderhook plate. There are the MAIN CHARACTERS that are easy to see. Then we have quite like "hidden" characters, usually vowels ("I" is the case) that can be free or can be "glued" on some point of the main characters, making them very difficult to recognize (cryptography). But we have here quite didactic book teaching how to use such "feature", as comparing "S" with and without use of "I". And also to make things difficult characters are rotated. It is what we have to access some computer sites that we have to recognize characters that are rotated and even some "dumb" letters are added. You must "reason" about what is the character, even rotated, and with lines crossing them or touching them/ending at them, to separate what is the true character and what is the false one. In this way it was suggested in web what was written on such plate.

Quite like in old days, a "signal" was provided to know when a word had finished. Thus you stop reading the characters at that point to generate a word. See how they could read words in written Sabellicus in very ancient time?

[_Chap]

So, basically still no response to the OP from anyone likely to be recognized by LDS as 'one of ours' ....

[_DrW]

So, basically still no response to the OP from anyone likely to be recognized by LDS as 'one of ours' ....

The last time I am aware of that this came up the apologists did not do well, even on their own turf (the MADBoard). It would appear that this is just another (heavy) item that must be placed on the "shelf" where contrary evidence that cannot adequately be explained away is stored (in the hope that it will be adequately explained in the next life).

It would be interesting to know if this one has been a "shelf breaker" for anyone. I have seen it included on lists of "shelf" inventories, but never mentioned as the "shelf breaker" (the last item to go onto said shelf before it broke).

In the case of my dear wife, this one brought a tear to her eye when she learned about it as a TBM, but her shelf breaker was the same as it is for many females with broken shelves, and that was finding out that Joseph Smith's behavior towards women was far from what she had been taught in Church all her life.

Once she admitted to being NOM, she told me that one of the hardest things she ever did in Church was to prepare and teach the correlated lesson on the "ideal marriage" of Joseph and Emma Smith in Relief Society, once she knew what he had really done in terms of lying and cheating on his wife. Having been tasked as the messenger of this particlular correlated LDS misrepresentation, she understood first hand what "lying for the Lord" felt like, and she had had enough.

Sorry for the diversion, but as long as we are just waiting--.

[_Chap]

So, basically still no response to the OP from anyone likely to be recognized by LDS as 'one of ours' ....

The last time I am aware of that this came up the apologists did not do well, even on their own turf (the MADBoard). It would appear that this is just another (heavy) item that must be placed on the "shelf" where contrary evidence that cannot adequately be explained away is stored (in the hope that it will be adequately explained in the next life).

It would be interesting to know if this one has been a "shelf breaker" for anyone. I have seen it included on lists of "shelf" inventories, but never mentioned as the "shelf breaker" (the last item to go onto said shelf before it broke).

In the case of my dear wife, this one brought a tear to her eye when she learned about it as a TBM, but her shelf breaker was the same as it is for many females with broken shelves, and that was finding out that Joseph Smith's behavior towards women was far from what she had been taught in Church all her life.

Once she admitted to being NOM, she told me that one of the hardest things she ever did in Church was to prepare and teach the correlated lesson on the "ideal marriage" of Joseph and Emma Smith in Relief Society, once she knew what he had really done in terms of lying and cheating on his wife. Having been tasked as the messenger of this particlular correlated LDS misrepresentation, she understood first hand what "lying for the Lord" felt like, and she had had enough.

Sorry for the diversion, but as long as we are just waiting--.

I think your reference to those other discussions from the other forum can decently be reposted here in Celestial:

There have been several discussions of this topic on other boards such as the one found here:
http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/discussions/viewthread/19000/

There was also a highly entertaining discussion on the subject between Dr. Peterson and Jeff Ricks on the old MADB. Of course, since Jeff cleaned a few clocks on that thread, including Dr. Peterson's, the whole thread was deleted (not archived) when MADB finally gave up the ghost and decided to re-invent iself. Comment on this epic exchange can be seen here:
http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/discussions/viewthread/19098/

Turns out that this is the MADB thread on which Dr. Peterson made his now nearly famous headscratcher:

"I cheerfully admit, and routinely say, that Mormonism has not proven its claims. I don't think it's supposed to do so, either, and, accordingly, I reject your claim that it has failed to do so."

If you go to the thread on post-mo, please note the response to this quote from Dr. Peterson, such as, well:

Here's a headscratcher from Dan Peterson:

I have never before come across such a potentially damaging issue to which there has not even been an attempt at a serious response. That is why I am almost inclined to think I have missed something, and hence I think it is worth our while hanging about in Celestial, being polite and hoping that some mainstream LDS apologist will drop by to explain matters to us.

[Guest]

As long as we are waiting, and so that folks can get the backstory from the earlier thread, here is my earlier (slightly edited) post from PostMormon.org on the subject:

The case has been made that "Reformed Egyptian", as copied into the Anthon "Caracters" transcript by Joseph Smith, were comprised largely of a Latin shorthand known as Tironian Notes (notae Tironianae).

According to Arc (a long since banned MADB poster), among the Tironian notes, Gaelic, and Ogham code, all of the letters, signs and symbols in the Anthon transcript can be identified. And they have nothing to do with Egyptian (or Hebrew for that matter).

This seemed to catch the apologists, including DCP, completely off guard.

The graphic below was shown. The column on the left in the illustration below shows characters from the Anthon "Caracters" transcript, created by Joseph Smith and carried by Martin Harris to Prof. Anthon and Dr. Mitchell for their review.

The column on the right below shows corresponding Tironian note characters.

Arc proposes that Stephen Mack, who was known to have interest in, and access to, a manuscript or its facsimiles that was, at the time (before 1827), believed to be of Middle Eastern origin shared this information with his nephew, Joseph Smith, Jr.

Arc continues: Mack died in 1827 and so Joseph Smith probably felt safe in using the characters as his "Reformed Egyptian". Since nobody then in the US could translate the Tironian notes, and they were thought to be of Phoenician origin, it probably seemed like a good idea at the time.

In fact, since Smith would have logically assumed that Mitchell or Anthon may have seen the MS in question but were unable to translate it, and further assumed that they also believed it to be of Phoenician origin, it probably looked like a sure bet.

The manuscript in question was later shown to be written by Irish Catholic(s) in the 17th century making frequent use of Tironian notes. Other characters in the Anthon Transcript appear to be in a later shorthand known as Irish Ogham. Between Tironian notes and Ogham shorthand, all (or essentially all) of the non-Gaelic characters in the Anthon transcript can be identified.

In the end, however, the characters had nothing to do with Egyptian, or "reformed Egyptian" or Hebrew, or any other Semitic language. They are what they are (a Latin shorthand first developed in about the 3rd Century AD and used until the 17th). The idea that they were "reformed Egyptian" came most likely from Joseph Smith's fertile imagination.

Turns out that one Richard B. Stout apparently did the original research on this and makes a pretty good case. R.B Stout's work on this can be found here.

What was entertaining to me was to see the responses of the folks on MADB who were willing to respond to Arc. Especially telling (and in line with the other apologetics thread) was the response (of lack thereof) from DCP. DCP was on the thread like a coat of paint initially, but did not (has not yet) come back to refute or do his magic apologetics dance for Arc after it became clear that there was some research behind the assertions.

When considered along with the Book of Abraham, the Kinderhook Plates, and the Greek Paslter incidents, this perfectly plausible explanation for the origin of "reformed Egyptian" makes an even stronger case against the veracity of Joseph Smith and his revelations, (if any stronger case were needed).

[Guest]

As this message appeared to be the repetition of the terrestrian version, I had the wrong conclusion that the repetition could be allowed. Sorry.

[_Chap]

It would be a considerate gesture if Elysab could just post on Terrestrial, rather than repeating it all here every time.

Buffalo, Dr W. and I have come up here to Celestial for a very special reason -because we hope to entice a real mainstream LDS apologist to reveal the knock-me-down answer (they must surely have one) to the post originally made on Terrestrial about the strange resemblance between the Book of Mormon 'Caractors' and Tironian shorthand.

These apologists are shy creatures, and some of them won't say much in Terrestrial because folks might not talk to them respectful-like.

I really fear that Elysab will frighten them away with his big red letters and complicated diagrams. Then we shall never find out their secret ...

[_Corpsegrinder]

It would be interesting to know if this one has been a "shelf breaker" for anyone. I have seen it included on lists of "shelf" inventories, but never mentioned as the "shelf breaker" (the last item to go onto said shelf before it broke).

Shelf breaker...wonderful turn of phrase. Wish I'd thought of that.

[Guest]

-

[_DrW]

Bump for Dr. Peterson (recently returned from Yellowstone).

Since his valiant and no doubt game changing response to this issue was flushed in the MADB to MD&D transition, perhaps he would like provide a do-over for the record.