The Mayan Temple Ceremony And The Kirtland Egyptain Papers' Jah-Oh-Eh Earth Symbol

[DragonLancer]

http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/2015/02/mayan-temple-ceremony-earth-glyph-world.html

 

The BMAF has published LDS Archaeologist V. Garth Norman's article on the Mayan Temple Ceremony.  It just so happens that the glyph they use in the ceremony for "World Circle" representing the earth in its four quarters and the four cardinal directions happens to be Joseph Smith's KEP (Kirtland Egyptian Papers) character for Jah-Oh-Eh, or Earth, and the Egyptian Determinative called Niwt or Niwit, meaning "earth, locale, town" etc., as well as the archaic symbol for the Semitic Teth letter.

 

See my blog article on it, above.

 

Also, V. Garth Norman also included the youtube video for the ceremony that he participated in.

 

See also this article on my blog:

 

http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/2014/03/joseph-smiths-ja-oh-eh-earth.html

 

Ed Goble

Edited February 13, 2015 by DragonLancer

[Brant Gardner]

The BMAF has published LDS Archaeologist V. Garth Norman's article on the Mayan Temple Ceremony.  It just so happens that the glyph they use in the ceremony for "World Circle" representing the earth in its four quarters and the four cardinal directions happens to be Joseph Smith's KEP (Kirtland Egyptian Papers) character for Jah-Oh-Eh, or Earth, and the Egyptian Determinative called Niwt or Niwit, meaning "earth, locale, town" etc., as well as the archaic symbol for the Semitic Teth letter.

 

Also, V. Garth Norman also included the youtube video for the ceremony that he participated in.

 

See also this article on my blog:

 

http://egyptianalphabetandgrammar.blogspot.com/2014/03/joseph-smiths-ja-oh-eh-earth.html

 

Ed Goble

Personally, I do not recommend either the reconstruction of the  Maya temple ceremony or of the relationship to the Book of Abraham plates. Others may form their own opinions.

[canard78]

Personally, I do not recommend either the reconstruction of the Maya temple ceremony or of the relationship to the Book of Abraham plates. Others may form their own opinions.

Always a pleasure seeing your contribution.

Your willingness to (charitably) dismiss the unreliable makes your proposed evidence far more credible.

[DragonLancer]

Personally, I do not recommend either the reconstruction of the  Maya temple ceremony or of the relationship to the Book of Abraham plates. Others may form their own opinions.

 

The identification of this ceremony was made by a trained archaeologist, V. Garth Norman.  It is his material that I have pointed to.  As for my pointing out the connection to the Book of Abraham, unfortunately, you are out of your area of training and expertise to suggest that there is no relationship to the Book of Abraham plates.  You are a Mesoamerican scholar, not an Egyptian linguist.

[DragonLancer]

Always a pleasure seeing your contribution.

Your willingness to (charitably) dismiss the unreliable makes your proposed evidence far more credible.

 

There is nothing charitable about this.  

[USU78]

Always a pleasure seeing your contribution.

Your willingness to (charitably) dismiss the unreliable makes your proposed evidence far more credible.

 

Hey, I enjoy Goble's stuff.

[Brant Gardner]

The identification of this ceremony was made by a trained archaeologist, V. Garth Norman.  It is his material that I have pointed to.  As for my pointing out the connection to the Book of Abraham, unfortunately, you are out of your area of training and expertise to suggest that there is no relationship to the Book of Abraham plates.  You are a Mesoamerican scholar, not an Egyptian linguist.

I disagree with Norman. Anthropologists and archaeologists do that. A lot. As for the Book of Abraham, I didn't say much about them save that I doubt that any correlation between them and what Norman discusses is questionable. The Book of Abraham isn't my area of expertise, so I try not to say too much about it to expose my ignorance.

[DragonLancer]

I disagree with Norman. Anthropologists and archaeologists do that. A lot. As for the Book of Abraham, I didn't say much about them save that I doubt that any correlation between them and what Norman discusses is questionable. The Book of Abraham isn't my area of expertise, so I try not to say too much about it to expose my ignorance.

 

You are welcome to your opinion of course.  I just grow tired of categorical dismissals from everyone.  Call it a sore spot I've had from all these years of the same old song and dance from the establishment.  I do thank you for the charity you have shown in allowing me a blurb to give some explanation in the second review of my first book.

[DragonLancer]

I disagree with Norman. Anthropologists and archaeologists do that. A lot. As for the Book of Abraham, I didn't say much about them save that I doubt that any correlation between them and what Norman discusses is questionable. The Book of Abraham isn't my area of expertise, so I try not to say too much about it to expose my ignorance.

 

Another thing that I think is interesting about what you say.  You say that what he discusses is questionable.  What he presents on youtube and in his document is as good as anything Nibley has ever shown.  To the open-minded LDS person, everything he presents just jumps right out at you just as the similarities in any Egyptian or Masonic ceremony would.

 

Edit:  I've decided to be nicer here.  So I've just edited out what else I said.  I'll just let this go as a disagreement and I'll try to be nicer.  Sorry, I was falling into my old patterns.

Edited February 13, 2015 by DragonLancer

[Brant Gardner]

Another thing that I think is interesting about what you say.  You say that what he discusses is questionable.  What he presents on youtube and in his document is as good as anything Nibley has ever shown.  To the open-minded LDS person, everything he presents just jumps right out at you just as the similarities in any Egyptian or Masonic ceremony would.

 

Edit:  I've decided to be nicer here.  So I've just edited out what else I said.  I'll just let this go as a disagreement and I'll try to be nicer.  Sorry, I was falling into my old patterns.

My issue is assuming that what he recorded has anything to do with antiquity. You are looking at a modern "recreation" that takes from who knows what sources. We simply don't know what those ceremonies were like, and I suspect that there would be Maya who didn't recognize much of the one on film. However, that is also not my area of expertise so I'll defer to others who know the ethnography of Maya shamanism.

[DragonLancer]

My issue is assuming that what he recorded has anything to do with antiquity. You are looking at a modern "recreation" that takes from who knows what sources. We simply don't know what those ceremonies were like, and I suspect that there would be Maya who didn't recognize much of the one on film. However, that is also not my area of expertise so I'll defer to others who know the ethnography of Maya shamanism.

 

I have no doubt that Brother Norman is presenting exactly what was presented to him, and reporting on it faithfully.  I would not accuse him of falsification of a ceremony.

 

That leaves the actual Mayan spiritual authorities that performed the ceremony as the ones that would have to be scrutinized.  So, if I am to translate what I see here, what you are saying is, you want to scrutinize the individuals that performed the ceremony about how they got what they have, and the provenance.  I suspect you do not know that other Maya would not recognize their own ceremonies that their own people performed.  I think you are straining.  It is not enough for you that actual Maya are performing the ceremony.  Its as close as any ethnologist or anthropologist would ever get to authenticity of any ceremony from any society.  I guess before some individuals can accept this as authentic, we need to send a team down there to scrutinize the background of these guys to prove that their ceremony was not faked or somehow influenced by Mormonism or Masonry or something.  It just amazes me how you can't accept some things at face value, and I see this as a pattern in a lot of what I've seen from you.  Everything has to be scrutinized to the last minute detail for it to be acceptable to you.  That could be called due diligence in some cases.  In this one, I would say its just pure stubbornness.

Edited February 13, 2015 by DragonLancer

[Brant Gardner]

I have no doubt that Brother Norman is presenting exactly what was presented to him, and reporting on it faithfully.  I would not accuse him of falsification of a ceremony.

 

That leaves the actual Mayan spiritual authorities that performed the ceremony as the ones that would have to be scrutinized.  So, if I am to translate what I see here, what you are saying is, you want to scrutinize the individuals that performed the ceremony about how they got what they have, and the provenance. 

I agree that Garth reported what he saw. I doubt that the people performing the ceremony were replicating an ancient ceremony. I would need to know a lot more about the ethnography of Maya shamanism before I could tell you specifically what the differences are, but that really had the feel of a ceremony designed for outsiders rather than one authentic to the Maya. Your opinion will likely differ.

[DragonLancer]

I agree that Garth reported what he saw. I doubt that the people performing the ceremony were replicating an ancient ceremony. I would need to know a lot more about the ethnography of Maya shamanism before I could tell you specifically what the differences are, but that really had the feel of a ceremony designed for outsiders rather than one authentic to the Maya. Your opinion will likely differ.

 

It does.  You speak without evidence.  You are only speaking your mind.  Garth Norman has evidence, and has presented it.