Re: [chofjclist] The Sealed Portion - Neil Steede
- Could Carolyn, or anyone, give me any information on how I might contact
----- Original Message -----
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <restoration-l@...>
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 7:02 PM
Subject: [chofjclist] The Sealed Portion - Neil Steede
> (Thanks to Carolyn McEachern for typing this.)
> EXAMINATION OF THE BOOK TITLED "THE SEALED PORTION OF THE BOOK- THE
> OF JARED-VOL-1 AUTHORIZED EDITION"[No Author Given]
> [By Neil Steede, President, Early Sites Research society]
> c. August 2001. This article may be copied by anyone as long as it is
> totally and not cut or edited in any way. This means anyone may use this
> article in any publication.
> Recently the above-mentioned book , which we will refer to in this
> as " the sealed portion" , came upon the market. We understand that the
> background of this book is that it was supposedly given to the "Author"
> through the spiritual gifts offered by the Urim and Thummim. We
> that in Lamoni, Iowa, this person which remains unnamed, has a commune at
> which he is stationed. We do not know for a fact that the above is true.
> have gotten this by secondhand information. Be that as it may, we wish to
> examine the contents of this book and its manner of recite through the
> of an archaeologist which firmly believes in The Book of Mormon and thus,
> compare it to Book of Mormon archaeological evidences.
> We will have to enact several rules as a basis for this paper. These
> rules are enacted to keep the paper to a publishable length.
> Rule# 1- the Book of Mormon is a Historical Document. The debate on
> has been held in many books by itself: therefore, we are accepting the
> premise that The Book of Mormon is a historical document.
> Rule# 2- one can authenticate the historicity of The Book of Mormon
> through archaeology. This premise also has been debated in books by
> themselves. However, for this paper we will make the asumption that one
> prove The Book of Mormon through archaeological evidences.
> Rule #3- we will assume that the reader is familiar with The Book of
> Mormon content and , therefore , will make no direct references to The
> of Mormon itself. This is done for several reasons. The first reason is
> the paper begins to bog down as particular Book of Mormon references are
> given and that is because there are several different editions of the Book
> Mormon available. We know that different readers will probalby be using
> different versions of The Book of Mormon. Therefore since we have already
> assumed they are familiar with the text, we will assume that they can find
> the references referred to in the edition that they use.
> Rule#4- though we have very strong opinions concerning the content of
> the book, The Sealed Portion, , we will not particularly be discussing
> content. We will only refer to the content of the translation where it is
> meaningful to the archaeologial comparison.
> Our first question should concern the archaeological background of
> tablets themselves. There are 9 tablets used in the book, which were found
> archaeologically. These tablets have been found in the areas of Georgia
> though Kentucky and Tennessee. They belong to a culture known as the
> culture. This culture runs from approximately 1200 BC to 700 BC. This does
> fit with the Book of Mormon story of the Jaredites chronologically;
> the question that we will ask further along is about their location
> Nine of the 10 tablets have a historical background. That is to say,
> were excavated or found scientifically while the 10th tablet was not. The
> tablets are made of stone, while the 10th tablet appears to be made of
> Nine of the tablets can be found in museums within the United States. We
> of no background for the 10th tablet- the 10th tablet is the tablet called
> The Judgement Tablet. The Judgement Tablet is supposedly made up of the
> design patterns that are found on Cicada Backs( locust backs). The design
> their backs is what is apparently represented on this tablet. Before we go
> any further, we need to ask our 2nd. question and that is to do with the
> location of the finding of these tablets - Eastern United States, does it
> fit with the Book of Mormon geography .There are four basic arguments for
> where Book of Mormon geography lay. All of them count upon using an
> or a narrow neck of land as the centerpiece of the geography chosen. The
> first and oldest theory is the All American Theory.
> The All American Theory subscribes to the thought that everything
> the Hudson Bay to Tierra De Fuego in Chile is belonging to Book of Mormon
> lands. this theory accepts Panama as the Narrow Neck of Land. Today only
> about 2% of serious Book of Mormon scholars accept this theory.
> The 2nd. and 3rd theories are called the Meso-American Theory. The
> Meso-American Theory has two variants. Both accept the Isthmus of
> as being the Narrow Neck of Land being described in the Book of Mormon.
> However, one believes that the River Sidon described in the Book of Mormon
> the Usumacinta and the variant of this theory subscribes that the River
> is the Grijalva River. One of these two variants is accepted by 95% of all
> Book of Mormon scholars and archaelogists. The 4th. theory is The Great
> Area Theory. It places the Book of Mormon geography as having happened in
> Great Lakes area. Some of the land areas between the Great Lakes are
> considered to be the isthmus. Once again only 2 to 3 % of serious Book of
> Mormon scholars accept this theory. We will discuss the pros and cons of
> The problem with the first theory is that there are way too many
> and the land is too big to accommodate all of the stories told in the Book
> Mormon. Moreover it is very hard to align particular cultures or sites
> using this theory because of the great variety of sites available.
> the Meso-American Theory seems far more tenable in this sense. The
> variant accepts the Olmec civilization as being the Jaredites. The
> variant does not accept the Olmec Culture as being the Jaredite
> This difference in viewpoint is important and we will return to it
> eventually. The Great Lakes Area Theory has problems in distance and
> in directions. For example, we are told that the Jaredites lived northward
> The Narrow Neck of Land. If the Great Lakes area is the area of the Book
> Mormon then why are the Jaredite tablets (the Adena tablest ) found south
> southward of the Great Lakes? Second, if Moroni is believed to have run
> Northward from Hill Cumorah and from the Narrow Neck of land, why do we
> the plates that were hidden for Joseph Smith southward in New York? These
> same questions are why the Meso-American Theory is the most widely
> theory. For this paper we will assume that the Jaredite culture is the
> Olmec culture as accepted by the Usumacinta variant of the Meso-American
> Theory. We do this because the Grijalva variant does not have a
> explanantion for the identification of the Jaredite culture. This then
> us to the 4th. question.
> Now we need to look at script.
> The script of the 10 tablets in question must be split into two parts.
> The script of the 9 authenticated tablets is not a script technically. For
> that matter, neither is the script of the 10th. tablet. The script of the
> tablets can be categorized as symbols, whereas the script of the 10th.
> tablet might be categorized as abstract symbols. There are some
> to Olmec symbols. Particularly in the Water Tablet, as it is called , we
> a flower and a head with a jester cap. Though the flower is very similar
> an Olmec symbol the head with the jester's cap is not. Nevertheless, the
> with the jester's camp is similar enough to say that it could have
> from Olmec script. If this is true then it would not have been a secret
> script, for they are symbols that were widely used in the Olmec culture
> (particularly the flower- the 3 petal flower)
> These tables cannot be considered a script because they are too
> simplistic to actually be considered a script. A script is when there is
> symbol for each sound or syllable. This is not the case here. At the very
> best they should be considered hieroglyphs which would mean glyphs that
> stylized to represent a particular thought or complex of thoughts. We do
> have enough script here to be able to categorize this as hieroglyphic. We
> simply say they are symbols. The case of the 10th tablet defies
> along these lines. Though one can see the similarity between cicada's back
> and the style of the tablet, one has never seen anything like this before
> early American art. There we hesitate to call it a script; however, there
> are some other similarities that should be pointed out to give all
> credence to the validity of the claim that these symbols are readable.
> Two particular examples can be given of incidence where cultures have
> used- or situations have been given to use symbols to relay messages. The
> first and best known example is Teotihuacan. We do not know of a written
> script at Teotihuacan. However, the symbolism is very clear to most people
> who study it. We highly recommend a book called "Burning Water" by
> Sajosurne in the effort of anyone who wants to explore this reasoning.
> book is published by Shambilaw Press, Berkeley, California. Another
> which can be found in a similar situation would possibly be the symbols at
> the Kirtland Temple.
> The doorjambs at the Kirtland Temple show simplistic symbols which
> placed in order give simple messages. However we do not find anything like
> the Adena Tablets among those symbols or Teotihuacan symbols. In both
> Teotihaucan and Kirtland Temple the symbols are very singular and
> The best study on the Kirtand Temple symbols known is by Neil Steede in
> 1997 publication on that subject by MLK Publication, Box 4175 ,
> Independence, Mo. 64050.
> What makes the Adena Script quite different is that we have an
> and reverse of the same symbol on the same brick. Or better stated, we
> an obverse and a reverse on the same face of the stone, that is to say
> each symbol is shown one way an then flipped over and inscribed on the
> half of the tablet. This makes them very intriguing, but does not make
> Even if someone discovers a new script, which has never been seen
> it is relatively easy to find out if one is deciphering the script
> or not. A case in point would be Clyde Winters Translation of the
> Bricks. He claims that they are Mendan script from north Africa, but then
> when translating uses the same symbol to mean 15 to 20 different things.
> is not possible . The same symbols or partial symbols cannot mean a
> of things and still be a script. also, we cannot make any " horse sense"
> of the translations given.
> The translations are quite lenghty and while being diametrically
> to scriptures already known(this will be dealt with elsewhere by other
> authors) thus bringing up the question of their authenticity. We believe
> the immense amount of text obtained from each tablet is impossible.
> We would wish to use the word impossible carefully at theis point. We
> believe in miracles. We do believe that many things seemingly impossible
> possible. The author of the text we are discussing claims to have been
> in building a URIM AND THUMMIM. Therefore we have to consider that that
> possibly so. However, the same symbol is used to read many sentences. For
> example; on the Water Tablet we have a circle from which is obtained
> approximately 15 sentences of text. Many of the sentences are very much
> opposed to the previous sentences or later sentences obtained from the
> circle. It would seem therefore, that the text does not match the script
> claimed. Of course once one claims that the Holy Spirit has helped
> these things, then there is no recourse for scientific endeavor in trying
> understand the validity of this without being called faithless.
> It is our belief that the translations obtained for the Adena tablets
> now in the Book of the Secret writings of the Brother of Jared, to use a
> scientific term- malarkey. We believe that the whole thing is a sham. We
> believe that it is farcent to claim that the great amount of text that is
> written could have been received from such a small amount of "SCRIPT"
> is our opinion at this time, August 2001. Hopefully if these writings are
> valid we will receive some type of enlightenment to see their validity.
> will not hold our breath.
> About the author:
> Neil Steede is president of Early Sites Research Society West. As a member
> the SAA( Society of American Archaeologists) and the AIA(American
> of Anthropology), he is well recognized as one of the leaders in American
> archaeology. His journal, Pre-Columbians, has the 'dream team' of
> archaeology and is on the 'cutting edge' of archaelogical interpretation.
> the last two years, Neil has been featured in two major documentaries by
> Charlton Heston; one was Emmy nominated. He also starred in Jurassic Art.
> has produced and directed four other documentaries. He has authored and
> presented "ground breaking" papers throughout 1996 and 1997 at the 61st
> Conference in New Orleans, the Ancient American Conference in Utah, the
> Art Society conference in Colorado, and the Institute for Studies on
> Culture at Georgia University. A paper presented at the 3rd. International
> Maya Conference will be published this year. It was presented at the
> University of Quintana Roo. Numerous other publications written by Neil
> available through ESRS West. (glyph notes, Independence, Missouri:
> Pre-Columbian Studies Institute [ Jan./Feb. 1998] , 2; quoted by
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Messages may be viewed at the
> If you wish to be removed from the chofjclist,
> please notify Mirl Edwards at EarlyRR@...
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- His email is sidiggit@... or his phone is 1-816-254-4658.
He had a website but it is not coming up. www.diggit.org
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Jan, I will see what I can do for you to get in contact with him, it may take
me a few days, as I have no idea where to begin. Carolyn
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Great, thanks,, please delete my message Jan.. I read your email before
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Thanks Susie & Carolyn!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susie" <sooze1008@...>
Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [chofjclist] The Sealed Portion - Neil Steede
> His email is sidiggit@... or his phone is 1-816-254-4658.
> He had a website but it is not coming up. www.diggit.org