Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [chofjclist] The Sealed Portion - Neil Steede

Expand Messages
  • Jan Griffith
    Could Carolyn, or anyone, give me any information on how I might contact Neil Steede? Thanks, Jan ... From: To: ;
    Message 1 of 6 , Sep 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Could Carolyn, or anyone, give me any information on how I might contact
      Neil Steede?

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <EarlyRR@...>
      To: <chofjclist@yahoogroups.com>; <restoration-l@...>
      Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 7:02 PM
      Subject: [chofjclist] The Sealed Portion - Neil Steede

      > (Thanks to Carolyn McEachern for typing this.)
      > [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 Rule# 1- the Book of Mormon is a Historical Document.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 premise that The Book of Mormon is a historical document.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
      > geographically.
      > 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
      > each.
      > 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
      > script.
      > 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.
      > Conclusion
      > 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/
    • Susie
      His email is sidiggit@aol.com 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
      Message 2 of 6 , Sep 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        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]
      • ourfarm@aol.com
        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
        Message 3 of 6 , Sep 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          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]
        • ourfarm@aol.com
          Great, thanks,, please delete my message Jan.. I read your email before checking another. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 6 , Sep 1, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Great, thanks,, please delete my message Jan.. I read your email before
            checking another.

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Jan Griffith
            Thanks Susie & Carolyn! ... From: Susie To: Sent: Sunday, September 01, 2002 10:01 AM Subject: Re:
            Message 5 of 6 , Sep 1, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Thanks Susie & Carolyn!

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Susie" <sooze1008@...>
              To: <chofjclist@yahoogroups.com>
              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
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.