Galileo in the Book of Mormon Part 3

[JarMan]

Previously I've shown Galilean thought in the design of the Jaredite barges, the heliocentric description of the universe, and Alma's faith experiment. There are further indications of scientific thought by Galileo and his contemporaries in the design and operation of the Liahona. In the late 1630's a Jesuit priest named Francis Line invented a so-called magnetic clock in an effort to vindicate Galileo who was under house arrest. It was a glass ball resting on a base in which a small sphere was suspended in liquid. The inner sphere rotated slowly, doing a complete revolution in 24 hours, and a pointer in the ball pointed at the revolving sphere to indicate the hour of the day. The explanation for its operation was that a magnetic field from the sun was causing the inner sphere to rotate. This was the same power, according to Line, that caused the earth to rotate. The only problem was that it was all a hoax. There was actually a water clock held in a compartment below the base that turned a magnet causing the suspended ball to turn. A similar clock was re-produced by another Jesuit priest named Athanasius Kircher which is shown below. He had a fish as a pointer and the inner sphere was made of copper or bronze.

When Galileo heard about the clock he guessed the trick behind it, even claiming to have made one himself. Finally in 1641 Kircher revealed the trick in a publication which showed the water clock beneath.

There are a couple of obvious parallels to the Liahona. First is the round shape and second is the use of a pointer inside the ball. This brings up some questions about the ball described in the Book of Mormon. 1 Nephi 16:10 describes "a round ball of curious workmanship; and it was of fine brass. And within the ball were two spindles; and the one pointed the way whither we should go into the wilderness." One question I've always had about this description is how spindles could move or even be visible inside a ball of brass. Is it possible that the word was supposed to be "glass" instead of "brass"? Perhaps it was misheard by the scribe. A glass ball filled with a liquid with two spindles would be quite similar to the magnetic clock. Imagine one spindle running axially through the ball from the south pole to the north pole with the second spindle attached at the midpoint and protruding outward. As the axial spindle rotated the pointer spindle would point the way to go.

Now the other function of the Liahona was providing written instructions from time to time. Curiously, the words would appear and then later be gone. To our 21st Century minds this is no big deal. We are used to screens on which words appear and disappear. But to an ancient mind, words normally appeared in ink or in engravings--in other words--permanently. So appearing and disappearing words would have been quite a novel idea. However, another invention which appeared around the same time could explain the inspiration behind this. The aforementioned Kircher published a book in 1645 describing a primitive projection device called a stenographic mirror. Words or images painted on a concave mirror could be projected onto a surface with a source of light.

A similar invention was produced by a Dutch inventor named Cornelis Drebbel in the early 1620's. The point is that the idea of a projected image was just coming into existence. An image or writing could be made to show up and then disappear, surely a novel idea at the time. 

So we have some inventions that occur at precisely the time I've proposed for the production of the Book of Mormon and in precisely the right location that could easily have provided the inspiration behind the Liahona. When you combine this with the other Galilean thought I've identified it makes a pretty good case that the science of the Book of Mormon closely corresponds to the science of Europe in the first half of the 17th Century.

[Robert F. Smith]

12 minutes ago, JarMan said:

............................................

There are a couple of obvious parallels to the Liahona. First is the round shape and second is the use of a pointer inside the ball. This brings up some questions about the ball described in the Book of Mormon. 1 Nephi 16:10 describes "a round ball of curious workmanship; and it was of fine brass. And within the ball were two spindles; and the one pointed the way whither we should go into the wilderness." One question I've always had about this description is how spindles could move or even be visible inside a ball of brass. Is it possible that the word was supposed to be "glass" instead of "brass"? Perhaps it was misheard by the scribe. A glass ball filled with a liquid with two spindles would be quite similar to the magnetic clock. Imagine one spindle running axially through the ball from the south pole to the north pole with the second spindle attached at the midpoint and protruding outward. As the axial spindle rotated the pointer spindle would point the way to go.

Yes, one magnetic spindle pointing north, the second to set the azimuth, essential to land navigation.  Brass was used because it was non-magnetic, and the spindles would be set in the top of the ball, without any glass needed.  See my “Lodestone and Liahona,” FARMS Update March 1984, reprinted in John W. Welch, ed., Reexploring the Book of Mormon: The F.A.R.M.S. Updates (Provo: FARMS/SLC: Deseret Book, 1992), 44-46.  Online at http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=71&chapid=778 .

The etymology of Liahona is likely based on the Hebrew participal ḥone "tenting, camping," a word commonly used in Exodus as the Israelites moved from one encampment to another.  It is cognate with the Egyptian word hn “tent.”  The entire word might be *li-Yah-ḥone "Encamping-for-Yah."

On the other hand, Egyptologist Val Sederholm suggests that it could be read as Egyptian “Re steers, navigates” (Rˁ-hona perhaps from the active participle of Egyptian hnj, “to steer with rudders”; esp. of the solar bark), with the double-rudders commonly used on ships at that time.   http://valsederholm.blogspot.com/search/label/Book of Abraham--Names

12 minutes ago, JarMan said:

Now the other function of the Liahona was providing written instructions from time to time. Curiously, the words would appear and then later be gone. ............................ But to an ancient mind, words normally appeared in ink or in engravings--in other words--permanently. So appearing and disappearing words would have been quite a novel idea.

Iin his medieval Parzival, Wolfram von Eschenbach portrayed the Holy Grail (Sangreal) as a green stone or “super jewel” upon which writing could appear (H. Mustard & C. Passage, trans., Parzival: A Romance of the Middle Ages [1961], xv,xli-xlv).   The late Joseph Campbell also commented that the angelically delivered Grail would have a revelation appear on it from time to time (Campbell, seminar lecture, 10 Apr 1983, Kansas City, MO; Campbell, Masks of God, IV: Creative Mythology [1970], 429-430,570).

12 minutes ago, JarMan said:

However, another invention which appeared around the same time could explain the inspiration behind this. The aforementioned Kircher published a book in 1645 describing a primitive projection device called a stenographic mirror. Words or images painted on a concave mirror could be projected onto a surface with a source of light........................................

The technical name of that was camera obscura, well-known in the Renaissance.

12 minutes ago, JarMan said:

A similar invention was produced by a Dutch inventor named Cornelis Drebbel in the early 1620's. The point is that the idea of a projected image was just coming into existence. An image or writing could be made to show up and then disappear, surely a novel idea at the time. 

So we have some inventions that occur at precisely the time I've proposed for the production of the Book of Mormon and in precisely the right location that could easily have provided the inspiration behind the Liahona. When you combine this with the other Galilean thought I've identified it makes a pretty good case that the science of the Book of Mormon closely corresponds to the science of Europe in the first half of the 17th Century.

Perhaps, but don't make the  mistake of overselling the idea with words like "precisely," "closely," "easily," etc.

[JarMan]

41 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, one magnetic spindle pointing north, the second to set the azimuth, essential to land navigation.  Brass was used because it was non-magnetic, and the spindles would be set in the top of the ball, without any glass needed.  See my “Lodestone and Liahona,” FARMS Update March 1984, reprinted in John W. Welch, ed., Reexploring the Book of Mormon: The F.A.R.M.S. Updates (Provo: FARMS/SLC: Deseret Book, 1992), 44-46.  Online at http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=71&chapid=778 .

The etymology of Liahona is likely based on the Hebrew participal ḥone "tenting, camping," a word commonly used in Exodus as the Israelites moved from one encampment to another.  It is cognate with the Egyptian word hn “tent.”  The entire word might be *li-Yah-ḥone "Encamping-for-Yah."

On the other hand, Egyptologist Val Sederholm suggests that it could be read as Egyptian “Re steers, navigates” (Rˁ-hona perhaps from the active participle of Egyptian hnj, “to steer with rudders”; esp. of the solar bark), with the double-rudders commonly used on ships at that time.   http://valsederholm.blogspot.com/search/label/Book of Abraham--Names

Iin his medieval Parzival, Wolfram von Eschenbach portrayed the Holy Grail (Sangreal) as a green stone or “super jewel” upon which writing could appear (H. Mustard & C. Passage, trans., Parzival: A Romance of the Middle Ages [1961], xv,xli-xlv).   The late Joseph Campbell also commented that the angelically delivered Grail would have a revelation appear on it from time to time (Campbell, seminar lecture, 10 Apr 1983, Kansas City, MO; Campbell, Masks of God, IV: Creative Mythology [1970], 429-430,570).

The technical name of that was camera obscura, well-known in the Renaissance.

Perhaps, but don't make the  mistake of overselling the idea with words like "precisely," "closely," "easily," etc.

What does it mean that spindles can be set in the top of the ball? If we take the text literally we have a brass globe with two spindles inside the globe. How are these spindles even visible? We either need gaps in the ball’s surface so we can see inside or we need a ball that’s flat or concave on the top to hold our compass spindles. But neither of these precisely fits the description. Maybe you are envisioning a different design. A glass orb allows us to see inside of it. 

Another issue is the second spindle. Your proposed second spindle seems superfluous. There’s no need to point to magnetic north or any direction, for that matter. Simply follow the pointer. The sun and stars will indicate the direction of travel. My proposed design provides a useful purpose for the non-pointer spindle. It rotates and allows the pointer spindle to point in any direction.

Plus we have the word “spindle” to deal with. The most common use of the word indicates something round and slender and associated with axial rotation. Your compass design has no axial rotation at all from either spindle. 

We also have some ambiguity in the text that I think my design resolves. 1 Nephi 16:28 mentions “pointers” and Alma 37:40 indicates the “spindles should point the way they should go”. The problem is that 1 Nephi 16:10 clearly tells us that only one spindle pointed the way to go. So how is it that these other two verses seem to be telling us that both point the way to go? My answer is that they work together to point the way, the one rotating axially and the other, attached to it, doing the actual pointing. With a compass design the ambiguity is unresolved. 

[Robert F. Smith]

10 hours ago, JarMan said:

What does it mean that spindles can be set in the top of the ball? If we take the text literally we have a brass globe with two spindles inside the globe. How are these spindles even visible? We either need gaps in the ball’s surface so we can see inside or we need a ball that’s flat or concave on the top to hold our compass spindles. But neither of these precisely fits the description. Maybe you are envisioning a different design. A glass orb allows us to see inside of it. 

Another issue is the second spindle. Your proposed second spindle seems superfluous. There’s no need to point to magnetic north or any direction, for that matter. Simply follow the pointer. The sun and stars will indicate the direction of travel. My proposed design provides a useful purpose for the non-pointer spindle. It rotates and allows the pointer spindle to point in any direction.

Plus we have the word “spindle” to deal with. The most common use of the word indicates something round and slender and associated with axial rotation. Your compass design has no axial rotation at all from either spindle. 

We also have some ambiguity in the text that I think my design resolves. 1 Nephi 16:28 mentions “pointers” and Alma 37:40 indicates the “spindles should point the way they should go”. The problem is that 1 Nephi 16:10 clearly tells us that only one spindle pointed the way to go. So how is it that these other two verses seem to be telling us that both point the way to go? My answer is that they work together to point the way, the one rotating axially and the other, attached to it, doing the actual pointing. With a compass design the ambiguity is unresolved. 

If you don't have much experience with a magnetic compass in land navigation, that may make it difficult for you to envision the normal use of a magnetic pointer and the setting of the azimuth pointer.  That is how compasses are normally used.  Moreover, one does not need glass to see the spindles, if there is an open recess at the top of the brass globe.  You are coming up with unnecessary impediments to understanding.  We ought to read the text in light of what we already know.  Brass naval compasses come in a wide variety of shapes:

So also of designs for the Liahona:

   

 

[clarkgoble]

It's worth listening to Don Bradly's recent interview at LDS Perspectives. He discusses evidence for descriptions of the Liahona that were on the lost pages.  In particular the function of the second spindle. It upends several theories. His book isn't out yet but listening to his brief discussion is very interesting. Quoting Bradly:

 

Quote

A close associate of Martin Harris actually gave a description of the Liahona that explains the function of the second spindle. He says if you were to look at the surface of the Liahona, around the edges you had characters or pictures or something that indicated different things such as food, water, other types of provisions, and so on. According to him, the function of the second spindle was that the second spindle showed you what the first spindle was pointing you to.

[...]

If the Liahona was now pointing you not to the promised land, but where to go for wild game, so you can eat – and you don’t want to take the whole clan, the whole family, and have them go up in the mountains to look for game – the Liahona actually tells you it’s not pointing the way to the promised land. It’s pointing to food so that the hunters can go and get food.

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by clarkgoble

[JarMan]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

If you don't have much experience with a magnetic compass in land navigation, that may make it difficult for you to envision the normal use of a magnetic pointer and the setting of the azimuth pointer.  That is how compasses are normally used.  Moreover, one does not need glass to see the spindles, if there is an open recess at the top of the brass globe.  You are coming up with unnecessary impediments to understanding.  We ought to read the text in light of what we already know.  Brass naval compasses come in a wide variety of shape

I’m pretty sure I got this merit badge. 😉The second pointer is not necessary. Even a magnetic compass typically only has one. But this isn’t a magnetic compass anyway. The spindle simply points the way to go. A magnetic component to this device is unnecessary.

And I think we need to understand what a spindle is and does. It spins—but not radially. It spins axially. Your design has two clock arms, not two spindles. Nor do I think most of the proposed designs you showed qualify as a ball in the truest sense. I am not coming up with unnecessary impediments. I am simply reading the text for what it says. You are suggesting a ball that is not really a ball and spindles that are not really spindles (one of which provides no useful functionality).

[JarMan]

6 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

It's worth listening to Don Bradly's recent interview at LDS Perspectives. He discusses evidence for descriptions of the Liahona that were on the lost pages.  In particular the function of the second spindle. It upends several theories. His book isn't out yet but listening to his brief discussion is very interesting. Quoting Bradly:

 

 

Your description is actually very helpful and I think I have a design that meets all the criteria including this new information. My design has two spindles whose lengths are essentially the diameter of the inside of the ball. They are attached at their midpoints forming a cross. Each spindle can spin on its axis independently. This allows one of the spindles to point the direction to go while allowing the other spindle to point at the thing they are headed toward. And importantly, these are spindles in the true sense of the word as well as being pointers. But I think it has to be a glass ball instead of a brass ball. This is the only stretch I am making on the text. However, I believe it fits all other descriptions given. 

Edited February 21, 2018 by JarMan

[Robert F. Smith]

7 minutes ago, JarMan said:

I’m pretty sure I got this merit badge. 😉The second pointer is not necessary. Even a magnetic compass typically only has one. But this isn’t a magnetic compass anyway. The spindle simply points the way to go. A magnetic component to this device is unnecessary.

And I think we need to understand what a spindle is and does. It spins—but not radially. It spins axially. Your design has two clock arms, not two spindles. Nor do I think most of the proposed designs you showed qualify as a ball in the truest sense. I am not coming up with unnecessary impediments. I am simply reading the text for what it says. You are suggesting a ball that is not really a ball and spindles that are not really spindles (one of which provides no useful functionality).

False.  The designs suggested are not "my designs" (as you continue to claim), but they are reasonable options, based on the actual descriptions in the text.  In the English language, a ball or globe does not have to be completely and perfectly globular, without any openings.  That is not the way we use our language, and you are setting up false and rigid requirements.

A magnetic compass would have befuddled Lehi and Nephi, and they could only follow instructions on how to use it.  For them, it would be operated by the "power of God," which is the best fall-back position to take in such circumstances (just as Joseph used that same phrase to explain how he translated the BofM, even though we know a great many details besides).  You are missing the point and ignoring the law of parsimony in rejecting even the possibility that the two pointers were (1) magnetic, and (2) azimuth setting.  Naturally, the spindles may have had very different functions, and I am open to legitimate suggestions, but you are not making any so far as I can tell.

[Rajah Manchou]

52 minutes ago, JarMan said:

I am simply reading the text for what it says. 

Robert provided some examples of how pointers/spindles could be visible in a brass ball (yes those are ball shaped). So there would be no reason to assume that the text should say glass.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[JarMan]

 

50 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

False.  The designs suggested are not "my designs" (as you continue to claim), but they are reasonable options, based on the actual descriptions in the text.

When I talk about “your” design I am specifically referring to the characteristics mentioned in the article you wrote and provided a link to. I hardly think it’s out of line to attribute what you wrote to you.

50 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

In the English language, a ball or globe does not have to be completely and perfectly globular, without any openings.  That is not the way we use our language, and you are setting up false and rigid requirements.

I am not suggesting the Liahona cannot conceivably be ball-like rather than a perfect sphere. I am suggesting that an actual ball fits the text better than a ball-like object.

57 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

A magnetic compass would have befuddled Lehi and Nephi, and they could only follow instructions on how to use it.  For them, it would be operated by the "power of God," which is the best fall-back position to take in such circumstances (just as Joseph used that same phrase to explain how he translated the BofM, even though we know a great many details besides).  You are missing the point and ignoring the law of parsimony in rejecting even the possibility that the two pointers were (1) magnetic, and (2) azimuth setting.

It’s true that in modern navigation or surveying (something I have some practical experience doing) you need a basis of bearing and then an offset angle (or azimuth) in order to correctly describe a new bearing. If I were surveying a property boundary I would describe each segment of the polygon with an offset angle, be it from true north or some other bearing. If I were navigating with a map I would find the correct bearing I should be heading by looking at the map and using a protractor or other device to determine my intended azimuth. Then I would set this offset on my compass after correcting for the magnetic declination. In both the surveying and navigation example I would need a “spindle” or other type of pointer to indicate my basis of bearing. The azimuth would be set by me, the operator of the device, based on visual confirmation of property markers in the surveying example or the calculated angle in the navigation example. Thus I would be able to advance in the direction indicated either to measure a distance or to proceed on a route. This new direction is thus totally determined by my actions and calculations. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the operator would then set the second spindle at the required offset and then travel in that direction as in using a magnetic compass. This would work as long as you had some marker for your first spindle and it was allowed to spin freely so that it always could be allowed to point at magnetic north. The problem I see is that this is not what is being described in the text. I do not see any indication the operator is required to manipulate the device. It seems to work autonomously. And when it refuses to work it seems to do that autonomously, as well. But, as before, I am not rejecting the idea outright. I am simply showing that a different design harmonizes better with the text. 

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Naturally, the spindles may have had very different functions, and I am open to legitimate suggestions, but you are not making any so far as I can tell.

The suggestion I am making is that the spindles are actual spindles, not clock hands. That is, they both rotate axially.

In short I’m saying that when the text says ball it most likely means ball. When it says spindles it most likely means spindles. When it says “if they had faith to believe that God could cause that those spindles should point the way they should go” it most likely means God points the spindles without human manipulation. Combined, I don’t think it’s unfair to say the Liahona was most likely not a magnetic compass. 

[JarMan]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Robert provided some examples of how pointers/spindles could be visible in a brass ball (yes those are ball shaped). So there would be no reason to assume that the text should say glass.

Spindle is the key word. A spindle is round and spins around its axis like a top. Compass pointers are not spindles. For one, they’re likely to be flat. And they rotate radially. Once you make a spindle a spindle it changes the game.

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

Spindle is the key word. A spindle is round and spins around its axis like a top. Compass pointers are not spindles. For one, they’re likely to be flat. And they rotate radially. Once you make a spindle a spindle it changes the game.

I agree Kircher's invention could mimic some of the functions of a liahona, but you would first have to shrink it down to fit in a human hand, and replace the fish pointer with two spindles and make it out of brass instead of glass. So my guess is no.

Still trying to figure out how we changed the topic from Kircher's translation of a manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi to discussion of a massive fish clock. Before we tackle the liahona, can anyone explain the Nephi thing?

[The Nehor]

Well, I would challenge your Dutch authorship theory but my theory that it was written by an immortal Atlantean in a Tibetan monastery who had previously traveled the Western Hemisphere in the time of the Nephites after her island nation was destroyed by a disaster around 1500 BC is still being fleshed out. Stay tuned!!!!!

[Rajah Manchou]

56 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Well, I would challenge your Dutch authorship theory but my theory that it was written by an immortal Atlantean in a Tibetan monastery who had previously traveled the Western Hemisphere in the time of the Nephites after her island nation was destroyed by a disaster around 1500 BC is still being fleshed out. Stay tuned!!!!!

You may be on to something. William Hyde (non-member) said of Joseph Smith Sr:

"I had at all times the highest regard for him. He used to see me night after night and speak to me of former inhabitants of this continent, how a large portion of the earth now covered by the Pacific Ocean was once occupied by land, etc. Many of the things he told me seemed absurd in those days, but have since been proven to be correct, and I have seen with my own eyes in Wisconsin and other parts of this country, at excavations, a verification of the wonderful things he used to tell me, and while his knowledge of these things seemed marvelous to me at that time, now that this knowledge is proven to be correct, it is incomprehensible to me how he could have obtained it. He was indeed a marvelous man." 

But I would think that the Atlantean/Tibetan masters stuff came from later iterations of the Lost Tribes in the Great Tartary (Tibet) theories as imagined by theosophists such as Blavatsky, Le Plongeon and Churchward. 

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, JarMan said:

Spindle is the key word. A spindle is round and spins around its axis like a top. Compass pointers are not spindles. For one, they’re likely to be flat. And they rotate radially. Once you make a spindle a spindle it changes the game.

Perhaps you could explain how a spindle spins around its axis like a top within the Liahona ball.  I merely have in mind the ornate appearance of a pointer which is spindle-shaped, like so:

It need not be flat.  After all, "curious workmanship" (1 Ne 16:10) means "clever, skilfull," in 1828 American English.  To the men, those pointers had the look of spindles.  They certainly weren't spinning wool with them. We have one instance of "spindle" in the KJV, at Proverbs 31:19 “She puts her hands to the distaff, kîšôr [“director, distaff” = KJV "spindle"], And her hands hold the spindle.”  [palek “spindle-whorl"].  A word from the same root as kîšôr occurs in Ecclesiastes 10:10, "direct," perhaps suggesting that we take a closer look at the "director" in Mosiah 1:16, Alma 37:38,45, but "directors" at D&C 17:1.

So what is your theory on the function of the two spindles?

[Rajah Manchou]

11 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

It's worth listening to Don Bradly's recent interview at LDS Perspectives. He discusses evidence for descriptions of the Liahona that were on the lost pages.  In particular the function of the second spindle. It upends several theories. His book isn't out yet but listening to his brief discussion is very interesting. 

Guessing that comes from Fayette Lapham's interview with Joseph Smith Sr.. Its worth reading in full, especially the part about the 'gold ball' and where it led the Lehites:

"He said it was the record of a certain number of Jews, who, at the time of crossing the Red Sea, left the main body and went away by themselves; finally became a rich and prosperous nation; and, in the course of time, became so wicked that the Lord determined to destroy them from off the face of the earth. But there was one virtuous man among them, whom the Lord warned in a dream to take his family and depart, which he accordingly did; and, after traveling three days, he remembered that he had left some papers, in the office where he had been an officer, which he thought would be of use to him in his journeyings. He sent his son back to the city to get them; and when his son arrived in the city, it was night, and he found the citizens had been having a great feast, and were all drunk. When he went to the office to get his father's papers he was told that the chief clerk was not in, and he must find [him] before he could have the papers. He then went into the street in search of him; but every body being drunk, he could get but little information of his whereabouts, but, after searching a long time, he found him lying in the street, dead drunk, clothed in his official habiliments, his sword having a gold hilt and chain, lying by his side—and this is the same that was found with the gold plates. Finding that he could do nothing with him in that situation, he drew the sword, cut off the officer's head, cast off this own outer garments, and, assuming those of the officer, returned to the office where the papers were readily obtained, with which he returned to where his father was waiting for him. The family then moved on, for several days, when they were directed to stop and get materials to make brass plates upon which to keep a record of their journey; also to erect a tabernacle, wherein they could go and inquire whenever they became bewildered or at a loss what to do. After all things were ready, they started on their journey, in earnest; a gold ball went before them, having two pointers, one pointing steadily the way they should go, the other the way to where they could get provisions and other necessaries. After traveling many days, they came to a mountain, from which they were directed to get gold plates to keep their records upon, and to transfer to them those already on the brass plates. Finishing these, they resumed their journey; and, after traveling many days, came to a wide water, where they were directed to build a vessel. When this was completed, they set sail, still directed by the gold ball. After sailing a long time, they came to land, went on shore, and thence they traveled through boundless forests, until, at length, they came to a country where there were a great many lakes; which country had once been settled by a very large race of men, who were very rich, having a great deal of money. From some unknown cause, this nation had become extinct; "but that money," said Smith, "is here, now, every dollar of it." When they, the Jews, first beheld this country, they sent out spies to see what manner of country it was, who reported that the country appeared to have been settled by a very large race of men, and had been, to all appearances, a very rich agricultural and manufacturing nation. They also found something of which they did not know the use, but when they went into the tabernacle, a voice said, "What have you got in your hand, there?" They replied that they did not know, but had come to inquire; when the voice said, "Put it on your face, and put your face in a skin, and you will see what it is." They did so, and could see everything of the past, present, and future; and it was the same spectacles that Joseph found with the gold plates.

The gold ball stopped here and ceased to direct them any further; the family took possession of the country; their descendants became a great nation; among them were prophets who foretold the coming of Christ, and said that, as a sign of his coming, there would be three days in which there would be no night, for the light of day would continue during three days. In process of time the sign appeared as foretold by the prophets; and when Christ left Jerusalem he came to this nation; and, finding them much more perfect and harmonious in their religious views than the Jews were at Jerusalem, he was more particular in giving them instructions as to baptism, and said they must go down into the water, and be put under the water, and come up out of the water. But, after this, they became corrupt and wicked; enmity and discord prevailed among them, to such an extent, that they could no longer dwell together; hence they divided up into tribes, were scattered over the face of the earth, and their descendants are the American Indians."

[clarkgoble]

8 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Guessing that comes from Fayette Lapham's interview with Joseph Smith Sr.. Its worth reading in full, especially the part about the 'gold ball' and where it led the Lehites:

No it comes from a friend of Martin Harris. He does elsewhere mention Lepham's interview though. Since it was an interview with Bradley they don't give footnotes but I'm sure it'll be covered in depth in his book that's supposed to be out this year.

[Rajah Manchou]

14 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

No it comes from a friend of Martin Harris. He does elsewhere mention Lepham's interview though. Since it was an interview with Bradley they don't give footnotes but I'm sure it'll be covered in depth in his book that's supposed to be out this year.

Just listened to the full podcast. That was good @DonBradley. Thanks for sharing.

It is interesting that Lapham's account also described one pointer indicating the direction they should go and another pointing "where they could get provisions and other necessaries". This seems to confirm that the earliest accounts of the liahona told by Joseph Smith Sr. and Martin Harris had the same unique information.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[clarkgoble]

9 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

You may be on to something. William Hyde (non-member) said of Joseph Smith Sr:

"I had at all times the highest regard for him. He used to see me night after night and speak to me of former inhabitants of this continent, how a large portion of the earth now covered by the Pacific Ocean was once occupied by land, etc. Many of the things he told me seemed absurd in those days, but have since been proven to be correct, and I have seen with my own eyes in Wisconsin and other parts of this country, at excavations, a verification of the wonderful things he used to tell me, and while his knowledge of these things seemed marvelous to me at that time, now that this knowledge is proven to be correct, it is incomprehensible to me how he could have obtained it. He was indeed a marvelous man." 

That's interesting and I'd not seen that quote before. It appears to be talking more about the move from the Rodinia supercontinent or possibly Columbia or one of the other supercontinent periods. (At least that's how I'd read it) It's worth noting his apparent believe that life in some sense has been going for around 2.5 billion years. While that likely came from numerology tied to the 1 day = 1000 years, I've always found it interesting how close that date is to the typical origin of eukaryotes. (More or less cells with nucleus and mitochondria) The oldest fossils (a fungus) are 2.2 billion years although there's indirect evidence that some type of very early eukaryote by have been around 2.7 billion years due to molecules in rocks of that strata. Typically dates are given from 1.6 billion - 2.7 billion years.

Edited February 21, 2018 by clarkgoble

[cdowis]

On 2/20/2018 at 2:00 AM, JarMan said:

Another issue is the second spindle. Your proposed second spindle seems superfluous. There’s no need to point to magnetic north or any direction, for that matter. Simply follow the pointer. The sun and stars will indicate the direction of travel. My proposed design provides a useful purpose for the non-pointer spindle. It rotates and allows the pointer spindle to point in any direction.

It has also been suggested that the second spindle is an indicator of whether the Liahona is working  (yes/no), according to their faith.

The driving force is faith, not magnetism.

Edited February 21, 2018 by cdowis

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Just listened to the full podcast. That was good @DonBradley. Thanks for sharing.

It is interesting that Lapham's account also described one pointer indicating the direction they should go and another pointing "where they could get provisions and other necessaries". This seems to confirm that the earliest accounts of the liahona told by Joseph Smith Sr. and Martin Harris had the same unique information.

Well except they contradict. In the account of Martin Harris' friend there are icons on the ball and the second spindle points at one of those to indicate what the meaning of the first spindle is. (It's "mode" in user interface language) In the Smith Sr. account the first spindle points the direction of travel and the second spindle points the direction of supplies like food. It's easy to imagine how Smith might confuse things though. It makes sense though that you'd need multiple modes rather than just two.

Edited February 21, 2018 by clarkgoble

[Robert F. Smith]

We must first of all understand the function of  

Quote

the “miraculous directors which were given to Lehi while in the wilderness, on the borders of the Red Sea” (Doctrine and Covenants 17:1).  These “directors” apparently refer to the “spindles” which “pointed the way” that Lehi’s family should travel through the wilderness (1 Nephi 16:10).  According to the prophet Alma, this was “the thing which our fathers call a ball, or director—or our fathers called it Liahona, which is, being interpreted, a compass; and the Lord prepared it” (Alma 37:38).[1]

---

[1] Book of Mormon Central, “Why Were the Three Witnesses Shown the Liahona? (Alma 37:38),” KnoWhy #405, February 6, 2018, online at https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/sites/default/files/knowhy-pdf/2018/why_were_the_three_witnesses_shown_the_liahona.pdf .

 

Edited February 21, 2018 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

................................ The oldest fossils (a fungus) are 2.2 billion years although there's indirect evidence that some type of very early eukaryote by have been around 2.7 billion years due to molecules in rocks of that strata. Typically dates are given from 1.6 billion - 2.7 billion years.

Actually the latest info is that it was possibly as early as 3.5 billion years ago.  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/12/171218151815.htm .

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

You may be on to something. William Hyde (non-member) said of Joseph Smith Sr:

"I had at all times the highest regard for him. He used to see me night after night and speak to me of former inhabitants of this continent, how a large portion of the earth now covered by the Pacific Ocean was once occupied by land, etc. Many of the things he told me seemed absurd in those days, but have since been proven to be correct, and I have seen with my own eyes in Wisconsin and other parts of this country, at excavations, a verification of the wonderful things he used to tell me, and while his knowledge of these things seemed marvelous to me at that time, now that this knowledge is proven to be correct, it is incomprehensible to me how he could have obtained it. He was indeed a marvelous man." 

But I would think that the Atlantean/Tibetan masters stuff came from later iterations of the Lost Tribes in the Great Tartary (Tibet) theories as imagined by theosophists such as Blavatsky, Le Plongeon and Churchward. 

Poe’s Law strikes again.

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Actually the latest info is that it was possibly as early as 3.5 billion years ago.  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/12/171218151815.htm .

Eukaryotes are different from life though.They're a class of complex life. Although that link to pushing the Archaea back that far was fascinating. So there were already bacteria and so forth prior. But life in the sense of complexity arose somewhere between 2.7 and 1.6 billion years depending upon what criteria you take as defining sufficient complexity. Eukaryotes (of which we're a type) are more similar in some ways to the archaea in your link than bacteria. But while both archaea and bacteria can have some surprising complexity (especially in bio-films) what eukaryotes enables are just a whole different level. Although true complex animals don't arise until around 600 million years. Unfortunately due to the their structural nature they don't tend to leave a lot of fossils so it's possible that very simple multicellular life arose earlier. The oldest possible multicellular life is Grypania which was originally dated to 2.1 billion years but was pushed back to 1.7 billion. But there are debates about whether it is actually a eukaryote.

I just raised this because I'm not sure Joseph's "life going on in this system" necessarily is life the way a biologist means it. We call bacteria alive, but honestly it seems more a chemical process the way a virus is - even though few call a virus alive (or a self-assembling protein for that matter). If we're going to call life, life I think it's useful to consider a certain level of complexity such as organelles like the mitochondria (more or less a subcell in a communal relationship that eventually shipped most of its DNA off to the nucleus). I just find it fascinating that arises right at the very time Joseph talks about (admittedly 3rd hand and attributed to the papyri of Abraham).

Edited February 21, 2018 by clarkgoble
Sorry don't know why the formatting is so screwed up