As for Sampson's dubious assumption that "Joseph Smith with 'Urim and Thummim' looked at the Book of Breatings[sen-sen] and saw the Book of Abraham encoded there" (p. 70), one would have thought that the critics had demonstrated the impossibility of that idea long ago.
This is the problem with Joe Sampson. He is trying to extract meaning from a verse numbering/marking system. I'm trying to show why symbols in the numbering system were chosen, and how there are associations between number/character and verse. All I'm doing is to demonstrate that these associations were clever. I'm not trying to show how the numbering system translates to the text. Do you see the difference between what I'm doing and what Joe Sampson was doing?
So, when I say that it is an ancient cipher, this is what I mean, that there is an ancient relationship between verse numbers/letters and content. I am not saying that the verse numbers/letters contain content. I'm saying that they creatively marked their verses with things in the Egyptian Alphabet that had associations with content in the verses/sections of text.
So, when I say that the Book of the Dead was the Book of Joseph, I mean that symbols from the the Book in the papyrus of Ani, for example, were creatively used for verse/section markers in the Book of Joseph. The order the alphabet/characters were used to mark text were used in the order they are in in the papyrus. The same with the Sensen Papyrus, when it was used to mark verse sections in the Book of Abraham. You can't extract the text from it. You need an external document or key to show you content and context. This is what I mean when I say "external content dependency."
The ancient acrostics in the Book of Psalms marks sections of text with Hebrew letters like verse numberings but that doesn't tell me the content. Yes, there is an association between a letter and the verse that it marks or enumerates, but that doesn't mean it contains the content of the verse/section. And it is clever how the ancient prophets used those acrostics.
Similarly, it is evident from the KEP that Joseph Smith never claimed that the Sensen Papyrus contained text from the Book of Abraham, but that it was used as an ancient marking/numbering system for sections of text, and he was trying to show people that. He wasn't claiming that the text could be extracted from it. He was showing associations between that content and the characters, and why it was clever for someone to use it for a marking/numbering system. And so, my work on this blog is not to show how the Book of Abraham text is extracted from these characters. My work is to show the underlying relationships between section markers/numbers and text, and how clever people chose these verse/section markers/numberings to mark/enumerate the text for various reasons. I'm not saying that the markers/numberings translate to the text. There is a big difference there.