Original copy of the characters of the "golden plates"

[FFH]

This is an original document showing some of the characters that the "golden plates" were written in, which later was translated into what we know as the Book of Mormon.

http://www.utlm.org/images/anthontranscript.jpg

 

[SPLogan]

Third row from the top, third character from the left- "PC mouse"

 

[FFH]

Third row from the top, third character from the left- "PC mouse"

That is funny, I was just looking at the characters myself. Maybe we can decipher it.

 

[FFH]

Fourth row down and three characters in is the symbol "chi" which is used in the simplified version of Japanese. This simplified version of Japanese writing is called "hirigana". I am sure that the Japanese and Chinese borrowed many of their symbols or characters from the Egyptians.

 

[Popeyesays]

That is funny, I was just looking at the characters myself. Maybe we can decipher it.

Well, one cannot tell if the symbols are text, or merely an alphabet. I do not think even a Cray super computer could crack it linguistically.
I have my own opinions on the texts of the Book of Mormon, which are neither here nor there.
The only thing about the BOM that really bothers me is that the first several pages are taken up with affidavits of individuals who attest to seeing the plates at some point.
I look at the Torah, the Gospels, the Qur'an, the Kitab`i Iqan, the Vedas, and Avestas, and never see any such witness testimony. The words of the Prophet are left to validate themselves, no human is required to attest to their veracity or origin.

Regards,
Scott

 

[FFH]

Third row from the top, third character from the left- "PC mouse"

Looks like they were computer literate. I always thought they were as intelligent or smarter than todays society.

 

[Katzpur]

Well, one cannot tell if the symbols are text, or merely an alphabet. I do not think even a Cray super computer could crack it linguistically.
I have my own opinions on the texts of the Book of Mormon, which are neither here nor there.
The only thing about the BOM that really bothers me is that the first several pages are taken up with affidavits of individuals who attest to seeing the plates at some point.
I look at the Torah, the Gospels, the Qur'an, the Kitab`i Iqan, the Vedas, and Avestas, and never see any such witness testimony. The words of the Prophet are left to validate themselves, no human is required to attest to their veracity or origin.

Regards,
Scott

Sounds like a catch-22 to me. If there were no witnesses, somebody finds fault with that. And if there were witnesses, somebody else is bothered by that. Can't win.

 

[FFH]

Fifth row down and first character is a simplified character that the Japanese would use to write a foreign word. The symbol, which is missing only one line above the top connecting the two vertical lines would be an exact representation of the symbol "ta". The Japanese would use this and other similar simplified characters to write a word like television or baseball which was not a part of their original culture. This writing is called "katakana".

This could be more evidence of a so-called shorthand or simplified Egyptian with other languages mixed in. The Japanese and Chinese clearly borrowed this from the Egyptians.

 

[FFH]

First row and in position 6 is the symbol for "shi" written in hirigana, which is simplified Japanese that can be learned in a short period of time. Not hard to master at all. More evidence that this may be shorthand or simplified Egytian which would have been relatively easy to learn.

 

[FFH]

First row and first letter is a katakana "sa". The second row down and eighth character from the left is also a "sa". You can see this symbol a few more times. Second row down and fifth positon from the right and forth row down and nine from the left. It gets samlller and harder to distinguish from there.

 

[Jaymes]

Fifth row down and first character is also a simplified character that the Japanese would use to write a foreign word. They would use this and other similar simplified characters to write a word like television or baseball which was not a part of their original culture. This writing is called "katakana".

More evidence of a so-called shorthand or simplified Egyptian with other languages mixed in. The Japanese clearly borrowed this from the Egyptians.

Wait, what? How on earth could the Japanese have borrowed hiragana or katakana from the Egyptians when hiragana was taken from Chinese characters and created 800 years after the fall of Ancient Egypt? And katakana was created 3 centuries after hiragana!

I call 'grasping at straws.'

 

[FFH]

Nephi could read and write Egyptian.

1 Nephi 1: 1-2

1- I, NEPHI, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father, and having seen many afflictions in the course of my days, nevertheless, having been highly favored of the Lord in all my days, yea, having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days.

2- Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.

Nephi was taught by his father, Lehi, to read and write Egyptian and his descendents could do the same.

Mosiah 1: 4

"For it were not possible that our father, Lehi, could have remembered all these things, to have taught them to his children, except it were for the help of these plates, for he having been taught in the language of the Egyptians therefore he could read these engravings, and teach them to his children, that thereby they could teach them to their children, and so fulfilling the commandments of God, even down to this present tiem."

 

[FFH]

Wait, what? How on earth could the Japanese have borrowed hiragana or katakana from the Egyptians when hiragana was taken from Chinese characters and created 800 years after the fall of Ancient Egypt? And katakana was created 3 centuries after hiragana!.'

I am well aware that the Chinese and Japanese share most of the same characters. You can give credit to the Chinese for creating the symbols. I am cool with that. I see Chinese and Japanese as brothers and sisters of a common origin. For the sake of this arguement i will say that the original asian society must have borrowed their characters from the Egyptian language and modified it into a complex set of symbols that the Chinese and Japanese share today. It is very possible that the Chinese and Japanese have borrowed the style of writing, in symbols, from the Egyptians.

 

[Muri]

Hiragana and katakana are NOT shorthand Japanese. Hiragana is used mostly for particles and suffixes, words without kanji, and for words you don't know the kanji for. But shorthand? Not so much. Also, while they technically are simplified kanji, saying that will probably get one confused with the simplified Chinese characters in use in mainland China. As a student of both languages it took me a second to realize what you meant by "simplified Japanese characters."

I'm not seeing any syllabic Japanese though.

 

[Jaymes]

For the sake of this arguement we will say that it is very possible that the Chinese and Japanese have borrowed the style of writing, in symbols, from the Egyptians.

No. The Chinese were writing with symbols around 1200 BC. Give me solid proof that the Egyptians and Chinese got together and discussed how to write before then, and then I'll consider your argument on the way to becoming valid.

Egyptian heiroglyphs are mostly alphabetic, which Chinese is logographic. They're not even similar at the core of things... how could one be borrowed from another?

 

[FFH]

Hiragana and katakana are NOT shorthand Japanese. Hiragana is used mostly for particles and suffixes, words without kanji, and for words you don't know the kanji for. But shorthand? Not so much. Also, while they technically are simplified kanji, saying that will probably get one confused with the simplified Chinese characters in use in mainland China. As a student of both languages it took me a second to realize what you meant by "simplified Japanese characters."

I'm not seeing any syllabic Japanese though.

Again for the sake of this arguement I will not call it shorthand. I will call it simplified Japanese. I should know I lived in Japan for nearly two years and had to read and write in these simplified symbols, and also had to recognize other more complicated symbols, in order to get around. Shorthand, simplified it's the same to me. You are right though I should not call it shorthand.

 

[FFH]

No. The Chinese were writing with symbols around 1200 BC. Give me solid proof that the Egyptians and Chinese got together and discussed how to write before then, and then I'll consider your argument on the way to becoming valid.

Egyptian heiroglyphs are mostly alphabetic, which Chinese is logographic. They're not even similar at the core of things... how could one be borrowed from another?

Hirigana and katagana mostly consist of one or more consonants and a vowels and form a single syllable or sound. For example "ki" or "chi". I have picked out several of the same symbols that we used in Japan, as missionaries, on this Egytian text. Supposedly it is simplified or shorthand version of Egyptian. Therefore there must be a more complicated version of Egyptian used to write whole words, just like there is in Japanese and Chinese. A simplified version for spelling out words, and also used with verbs along side of kanji, and a complex version for writing out whole words or kanji. The Egyptians had both. Symbols or heiroglyphs could represent a whole word. Do you dispute this? I am surprised that you would.

 

[FFH]

All I am saying is that some of the symbols in this simplified Egyptian text are exactly the same as Japanese hirigana and katakana, and the style of writing and characters are the same, or similar, as Chinesese and Japanese. The Chinese must have known and borrowed ideas from the Egyptians otherwise I would not see the same characters depicted exactly as they appear in hirigana and katakana, which is shared with the Chinese who supposedly birthed this style of writing.

There is no disputing the fact that some of these characters are exactly the same as Japanese hirigana and katakana. No one can prove me wrong on this matter.

 

[Jaymes]

Hirigana and katagana mostly consist of one or more consonants and a vowels and form a single syllable or sound. For example "ki" or "chi".

They're syllabic, yes.

I have picked out several of the same symbols that we used in Japan, as missionaries, on this Egytian text.

Could you point them out? I'm sure Maesi could help us out in identifying them tomorrow if she comes online, she's studied Japanese for several years.

Supposedly it is simplified or shorthand version of Egyptian.

I'm ignorant of most of Egyptian language. Most of what I've read says that it had a syllabic writing system with a few pictographs... Could you point me to a source on heiroglyphs that says they're not mostly syllabic/alphabetic?

Therefore there must be a more complicated version of Egyptian used to write whole words, just like there is in Japanese and Chinese.

This is an assumption. Just because there is one, there doesn't have to be another. Chinese existed for more than a thousand years without a simplified form of writing... that's why writing was considered the art of nobles. Just like English doesn't and hasn't had a more complicated way of writing... we're purely alphabetic.

But hey, we're alphabetic! There must be another more complicated version of English somewhere.

A simplified version for spelling out words, and also used with verbs along side of kanji, and a complex version for writing out whole words or kanji. The Egyptians had both. Symbols or heiroglyphs could represent a whole word. Do you dispute this? I am surprised that you would.

We have that, too. @. Look, I spelled at! #. And number! All with one symbol. There must be a more complicated form, right?

 

[FFH]

Could you point them out? I'm sure Maesi could help us out in identifying them tomorrow if she comes online

I have already pointed out at five seperate characters. I don't need Maesi to point them out for me. She will only validate what I have posted. Look at my earlier posts. I have identified 5 characters and have given the exact position of them on the text. Maesi will point them out as well for you and confirm what I have said to be true.