Smoot on Youtube

[_Doctor Scratch]

Symmachus:

Yes, that's right--I remember reading that from Gee some time back, and being appalled by what he was saying. This whole thing--Smoot's activities, Gee's attitudes towards his field, etc.--are all bound up in this oddball constellation of views on authority, believability, etc., that the Mopologists subscribe to. *Most* of the Mopologists are not even best known for the actual work they did in their fields. Is Hamblin better known as a historian, or a Mopologist? What about Midgley? The intro for DCP on "Sic et Non" says he "made his name defending the Mormon faith." So if Smoot follows this pattern, it is basically just so that he's got the window dressing to support/cover for his actual interests, which, as I've said--and as far as I've observed--are more strictly Mopologetic in nature.

[_consiglieri]

Do the two other guys not know their garments are showing at the neckline of their t-shirts?

[_moksha]

It's just a small deal, right? That's why the church never talked about it. It's a normal way to translate Egyptian into English.

I get it now.

Most likely Jean-François Champollion used a quartz necklace when he translated the Rosetta Stone. Likewise, Edward FitzGerald perhaps relied on a lodestone when he translated the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyám. A more intriguing question is whether they perfected their stone usage by placing it in a hat for better visibility. It could be that hat usage was Joseph's original contribution to mineral translation mechanics.

[_Symmachus]

I can hear the scribe saying 'Damn! I just immortalised those guys and forgot to mention my own name. Doh!!

Well, yes with that glorious pun ( rn m r n rm.t) one would think there should be an "I Paanchi, having been born of goodly parents" sort of colophon.

But Chap, please remember that this is a fragmentary papyrus—we don't have the entire thing! No doubt the missing portions contained the name of the scribe who wrote this. The front side of the papyrus contains monotheistic hymns, and so it may even have been part of a longer scroll containing quotations from the Book of Abraham. This was probably written by Moses (or one of his relatives who, as we know, were close to the Egyptian court) when he was young.

[_Shulem]

But Chap, please remember that this is a fragmentary papyrus—we don't have the entire thing! No doubt the missing portions contained the name of the scribe who wrote this.

LDS Apologists can't use the missing hieroglyph theory for Facsimile No. 3. Science/modern Egyptology have proven that Joseph Smith didn't know what he was talking about and couldn't read Egyptian. The spirit of Mormon revelation is that of lies and deception, compliments of a conman. So, Smoot and his boyfriends can stick that in their pipe and smoke it.

Fig. 5. Shulem, one of the king’s principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand.

[_cinepro]

Which one is Ian and which one is Kwaku?

[_Kishkumen]

That Gee quote is utterly gobsmacking.

[_Gadianton]

Yes, that's right--I remember reading that from Gee some time back, and being appalled by what he was saying.

I totally missed this and it's mind blowing. Am I reading it correctly? Seems like it's saying that the only use of the ancient world to modern man is to equip him with lost knowledge of the black arts. A Mormon, who is already initiated into the world of the occult, has a special background for finding the most powerful magical ideas from history. On the one hand, FARMS was an apologetics outlet, but it also apparently functioned as a cable similar to the Order of the Golden Dawn.

[_grindael]

Smoot just released this video on Nahom... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOPFob0cjfw&app=desktop

According to Smoot, this is overwhelming evidence for the Book of Mormon.

From Jerusalem to Nahom... (1800 miles?)

They did take their tents and cross the river "Laman" (They obviously named this river), then they travel FOUR DAYS, "nearly a south, southeast direction" to a place called "Shazer". This was in the "wilderness", so was this a name they also made up?

They keep to the borders of the Red Sea and travel for "many days", killing food "by the way". They pitch their tents for "a space of time". Nephi then breaks his "steel bow". Nephi makes a wooden bow. Nephi then goes to the "top of the mountain" to slay food as directed by their compass.

They then travel for the "space of many days" again, on "nearly the same course".

Ismael dies and is "buried in the place which was called Nahom". Four days to "Shazer", then "many days", "a space of time", and "many days". They could get no food along the way, only what they killed?

Then he says that they traveled eastward to Bountiful, and the Book of Mormon says this,

And it came to pass that we did again take our journey in the wilderness; and we did travel nearly eastward, from that time forth. And we did travel and wade through much affliction in the wilderness; and our women did bear children in the wilderness. And so great were the blessings of the Lord upon us, that while we did live upon the raw meat in the wilderness, our women did give plenty of suck for their children, and were strong, yea, even like unto the men; and they began to bear their journeyings without murmurings. And thus we see that the commandments of God must be fulfilled. And if it so be that the children of men keep the commandments of God, he doth nourish them, and strengthen them, and provide means whereby they can accomplish the thing which he hath commanded them; wherefore, he did provide means for us while we did sojourn in the wilderness. And we did sojourn for the space of many years, yea, even eight years in the wilderness. And we did come to the land which we called Bountiful, because of its much fruit, and also, wild honey; and all these things were prepared of the Lord, that we might not perish.--And we beheld the Sea, which we called Irreantum, which being interpreted, is, many waters.

It took them eight years to get from Nahom to Bountiful???? It's like 700 miles. While it seems to have taken no time at all to get from Jerusalem to Nahom which was about 1800 miles. And notice that THEY name it "Bountiful".

On a map from 1794 available in Joseph's day, I found this,



Notice the mountains make two X's on the map...



Was Jo having a bit of fun with the map?

Hyrum Smith attended Dartmouth College. His uncle, was John Smith.

"On 30 August 1779, the Trustees voted to appoint John Smith the second Librarian"

Smith had been graduated from the College in the Class of 1773. He was a tutor in the College from 1774 to 1778 and professor of Latin, Greek, and Oriental languages from 1778 until his death in 1809. He was also a minister of the College Church and kept a bookstore in Hanover. His tenure as Librarian is one of Dartmouth's longest, but his importance to College history lies less in his role as Librarian than in his part in a College church controversy that was the beginning of John Wheelock's conflict with the College Trustees.http://www.dartmouth.edu/~library/digit ... ir=classic

Kent Brown tries to claim that there were no books at Dartmouth that had any of these maps. He says the reason why is,

John Horsley translated d’Anville’s volumes, publishing them in 1814 as Compendium of Ancient Geography. The maps that appeared with this rendition are the most complete and are based on d’Anville’s maps. Another translation of d’Anville’s French work was Robert Mayo’s An Epitome of Ancient Geography, which first appeared in 1818. The map of Arabia is much simpler than that which accompanied Horsley’s translation. But neither of these English translations reached the Dartmouth library before Joseph Smith’s family moved from the area. Likewise, d’Anville’s map that notes the tribal area of Nehem was never part of the collections of either the Dartmouth library or John Pratt’s library while Joseph Smith lived in these areas.

He then notes,

See notes 41 and 43 for the dates. One of the important dimensions of both Niebuhr’s map and d’Anville’s map of Arabia is that they each note the existence of an area called Nehhm or Nehem in the general region that “the place which was called Nahom” would have lain (1 Nephi 16:34). Information about d’Anville’s works comes from A Catalogue of the Books in the Library of Dartmouth College, Published by Order of the Trustees, November 1825 (Concord, N.H.: Hough, 1825). Importantly, during April 2001, I searched the John Hay Library of Brown University as a further test. The results were similar to those at the library of Dartmouth College. The earliest contemporary work acquired by the Brown Library was a multivolume copy of Gibbon’s History published in 1781. It came to the library before 1793. But it was incomplete and is missing the important chapter 50 wherein Gibbon deals with Arabia. The Brown Library did not acquire Niebuhr’s work in English until 1854. Further, it acquired d’Anville’s geographical study in Horsley’s English translation only in 1846. The earliest acquisition of a classical source in English was that of Pliny’s Natural History in 1793. The Brown Library acquired none of the other classical sources that discuss Arabia before 1846 when it came into possession of a translation of the Periplus of the Erythrean Sea.

Yet there was a problem at Dartmouth before 1825:

The Trustees, in their meeting of August 1815, by a vote of 8 to 2 removed Wheelock from the presidency, appointed the Reverend Francis Brown in his place, and issued a refutation of the charges in Wheelock's tract. College, town, and the entire state took sides, making their arguments in local newspapers; party politics played a role. In June 1816, the state legislature passed “An act to amend, enlarge and improve the corporation of Dartmouth College.” The law changed the name of the institution to Dartmouth University and added nine trustees to the board, making a total of twenty–one; John Wheelock was the University president. The College Trustees refused to comply with the law, and the battle was joined.

For several years, the two separate institutions existed on Hanover Plain, in a strange mixture of amiability and conflict. The University had a separate, very small, faculty and its own president, William Allen, who had succeeded his father–in–law, John Wheelock, upon Wheelock's death in 1817. Both College and University held classes in adjacent or possibly even in the same buildings. A committee of three of Hanover's leading citizens were appointed by the University trustees to take possession of the College's Chapel and Library. College President Brown at first refused to surrender the key to the Chapel as Shurtleff had refused to give up the Library key, but the University committee occupied both. Brown found another room to use as a chapel, but the College Library was effectively closed until the legal conflict was resolved several years later. The students did not consider the lack of access to the Library a great loss, as for many years they had made greater use of the Society libraries.

In February 1817 the College Trustees initiated a lawsuit, referred to the Superior Court of the State of New Hampshire, against William Woodward, with the object of recovering the Trustees' minutes, the College charter and seal, and other items. Woodward had been in possession of these documents when he was Treasurer and Secretary of the College, and kept them when, as a supporter of Wheelock, he became a trustee and treasurer of the University. On 6 November 1817, the court decided in favor of the University.
Anticipating the decision and believing their libraries in jeopardy under University control, Society members had begun packing books and moving them to student rooms for safekeeping. Rufus Choate, Class of 1819, later a distinguished jurist, was librarian of the Social Friends, and had rented a separate room in the house where he was boarding to keep the Socials' books. On 11 November 1817, Professors James Dean and Nathaniel Carter, of the University, rounded up a “crowd of village roughs" and attempted to take possession of the Society library rooms; while the books may have been private property, the rooms were deemed the property of the University and thus subject to seizure. The Social Friends' library door was demolished—according to one newspaper report, by an ax. The United Fraternity, meeting in a nearby room, overheard the ruckus and came to the Socials' defense. The assembled students greatly outnumbered the professors and detained them in the rooms until the remaining books could be taken away to safety. Then the invaders, except for the professors, were marched out of the building through a gauntlet of menacing defenders, armed with “sticks of cord–wood.” The professors, each accompanied by four students, were escorted home, apparently with some degree of civility; the students were determined not to “be charged with insult or discourtesy.” At least one of the professors was grateful enough for the safe passage to tip his hat and thank his escort. Nine students were arrested “for trespass and false imprisonment” and brought before a Justice of the Peace; one of the nine brought a countercharge of riot against Dean and Carter.[24] Both groups appeared before a grand jury, which declined to issue any indictments, deciding that in comparison with the greater issues facing the institution, the library incident was “considered of little consequence.” The “riot” or “fracas” was nonetheless featured in many local newspaper accounts, and doubtless was viewed by the townspeople with the same mixture of amusement, pride, and disgust that was evoked by the protest movements of the twentieth century. ...

After so many years of chaos, the College Library, no different from the College as a whole, was in need of serious attention. That portion of student fees meant for the Library had had to be used for more pressing needs, and many volumes had been lost or defaced. http://www.dartmouth.edu/~library/digital/collections/books/ocm51588830/ocm51588830.html?mswitch-redir=classic

Brown seems to think that every book would have been there in 1825. There are earlier records but he doesn't mention searching them. Hyrum attended Darthmouth about 1811 on. What books could he have borrowed or taken home?

[_DoubtingThomas]

Was Jo having a bit of fun with the map?

Maybe, but I see no need for a map. Math and Patternicity can explain just as well without the need of a god or a map. Jake quotes Jenkins here viewtopic.php?f=1&t=39297&p=915998