In the early 1800's, it was commonly believed that each Egyptian character represented whole paragraphs of thoughts and texts. It wasn't until after Joseph Smith had started translating the Book of Mormon that European scholars learned from the Rosetta Stone that Egyptian was actually a phonetic language where each character represents a specific sound. If the writers of the Book of Mormon really knew how to write in Egyptian characters and in Hebrew, they would have known that Egyptian would not have actually saved space.
"And if our plates would have been sufficiently large, we should have written in Hebrew...and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no imperfection in our record."
Why did the writers of the Book of Mormon use Egyptian when it was not only just as lengthy as Hebrew, but also harder for them to communicate with?
Also, there is no evidence of any sort of "reformed Egyptian" anywhere on the American continent, and no non-mormon scholar even recognizes its existence.
Why isn't there any evidence in ancient America of an Egyptian-based language?
Language is difficult and names for things change over time. I am not will to do the research or make a full argument based in faith for this but I would be happy to have a conversation.
ReplyDelete