Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Seer's Tongue: The Symbolic or Pictographic Usage of Written Language


This thread is an interesting one, where this person commenting in another thread hit upon something that sounded similar to what I am coming to understand about the nature of pictographic systems of writing and the possibility that the Book of Abraham recension we presently have came to us as pictographic usage of the Sensen Papyrus.

He stated:

The Adamic language is the basis of what I am trying to help you see.
It isn't some other language. Adamic is able to be translated into all the spoken languages.
Adamic is the method of symbol decipherment that gets you all the way to the fully decoded tangible reality of what holy writ is actually saying.
The whole key and mother-lode to deciphering the Adamic language is to apply Genesis 2:4 to the creation account.
These are the generations (people)...
It's all about people.
I'm not entirely comfortable in calling this the "Adamic Language" yet.  But perhaps a pictographic and symbolic usage of symbols is the basis of whatever the Adamic written language was, and perhaps this is a manifestation of the principles similar to it in the scriptures as well as in the Sensen Papyrus, etc.

And as I stated in previous posts, it would take someone like a Seer to see it, if they are not familiar with the context a pictographic document is being used in.  Similarly, a symbol in the scriptures such as the "beast" of Revelation, or 666 as an example, could be used in this fashion.  It paints a picture in words, and if one shows a picture of a beast with 666 or something, it becomes a pictographic representation of what is described in the Revelation text.  The Revelation text is descriptive in such a way that it is describing something like a Facsimile of the Book of Abraham.  The figures in it that are described to us in the text are as abstract as the Egyptian figures in the Book of Abraham Facsimiles and in the Sensen Text, and only become interpreted correctly by knowing the mind of the author.  I started the thread in question, and called it "Adamic as an Exegesis of Symbolic Communication."  Then, he responded:
The title of this thread is a concise way of putting it.
The way I put it is the Adamic Tongue is the Seer's Tongue.
I'll take some time and study your links and respond accordingly. (Emphasis added.)
I like the term "Seer's Tongue."  It is very descriptive of this "sealed," "spiritual," or "symbolic" way of doing things.  Anyhow, this commenter went on to say, commenting on one of the articles that I pointed to on this blog:
. . . there was much in this article that I really liked and none of it bothered me.
It does seem to be approaching what I conceive of the Adamic language to be, which is a very condensed system of symbols that, when deciphered in the correct and intended context, yield a precise, accurate and reliable communication. The grand key is to know the correct and intended context and the manner in which to apply it . . .
Another way it can be looked at is you can call this particular rendering that is available underneath these symbols to be what all of the books of holy writ refer to as a "sealed portion". Any book of holy writ involving this symbolic dialectic is sealing something so that only the intended audience actually gets the full meaning. What I find particularly interesting is the one book of holy writ that mentions this the most is the Qur'an. When I read the Qur'an it reads to me in an entirely different manner than it does to people of the Islamic faith. This is actually a highly underappreciated piece of literature.
Once this proper background context becomes the setting and the symbols are deciphered properly... BOOM! A whole new narrative emerges. Then, what you have in your possession is the means to calibrate the value and purity of what people are teaching. You would then be able to judge, for example, if someone really was an apostle, prophet, seer and revelator. Those who do not consciously understand the Seer's Tongue gain utterance in the language by the Holy Ghost, so they will speak that language reliably without really knowing it. So, people who aren't seer's in a literal sense can still speak the sealed tongue. But, if they don't at least have the Holy Ghost giving them their utterance, then you can be sure they will quickly run afoul and their utterance will be non-decipherable. In this manner, religious frauds will in due time be exposed when the people in general have this knowledge.
This is because if holy writ is taken in a context other than what it was intended, it becomes quirky, awkward and subject to a lot of false interpretations. Which, of course, perfectly describes what people have been doing with holy writ for as long as it has been available to the masses. And, this has also become common place even among the LDS faith. Joseph Smith was never befuddled by holy writ and it never seemed quirky or easily given to false interpretation to him, because he truly was a seer.
So I like this term, Seer's Tongue.  Someone can become a seer (with a small S) without being a Seer (with a captial S), i.e. someone with the calling of Prophet, Seer and Revelator.  Someone that is a regular member of the Church can get revelation of the Holy Ghost on the usage of symbols in these contexts and the systems that are used to conceal that information within it.

Now, to be clear, so there is no misunderstanding about my personal claims.  I claim no revelation on this blog that leads me to my conclusions.  I claim what I have here to be as a result of research.  If I have actually come to correct conclusions, I claim no revelation on it.  I only claim research, and that the conclusions of that research has shown what it has shown.  Furthermore, I am giving the credit to this "jwharton" person on the LDS Freedom forum for coming up with or coining the term "Seer's Tongue."  I like the term, and perhaps I may continue to use it.  And I wanted to document that I am giving him credit for that term.  He is not sure if he coined the term, but I'll give him credit until I find out that someone else may have coined it.