Galileo in the Book of Mormon Part 3

[Robert F. Smith]

On 2/19/2018 at 9:27 PM, JarMan said:

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

You might also want to consider how Grotius could create/invent a book with the stylometry of diverse ancient authors, which is at the same time tied inextricably to the early 17th century.

Book of Mormon Central, “Is It Possible That a Single Author Wrote the Book of Mormon? (2 Nephi 27:13),” KnoWhy # 399, January 16, 2018, online at https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/is-it-possible-that-a-single-author-wrote-the-book-of-mormon .

[Rajah Manchou]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Poe’s Law strikes again.

Let me try that again. You may be on to something.

Edited February 22, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

8 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

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.

Those ideas were 80 years later. Discussion about Atlantis would have been more common in the 1830s.

[JarMan]

19 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

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?

Start with a glass ball. Inside the ball one spindle stretches from the south pole to the north pole through the center. This spindle spins on its axis. The second spindle is horizontal at the equator and stretches from east to west through the center. It also spins on its axis. The two spindles are connected at the center of the globe forming right angles. Now if we spin the the N/S spindle the E/W spindle rotates in a horizontal plane and becomes a pointer. If we spin the E/W spindle the N/S spindle rotates in a vertical plane and becomes a pointer. Thus they are described both as spindles (1 Nephi 16:28, Alma 37:40) and as pointers (1 Nephi 16:10,28; Alma 37:40,44). One of the spindles points the direction of travel. The second spinner points to an emblem on the surface of the ball indicating what the other spindle is pointing at.

[JarMan]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You might also want to consider how Grotius could create/invent a book with the stylometry of diverse ancient authors, which is at the same time tied inextricably to the early 17th century.

Book of Mormon Central, “Is It Possible That a Single Author Wrote the Book of Mormon? (2 Nephi 27:13),” KnoWhy # 399, January 16, 2018, online at https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/is-it-possible-that-a-single-author-wrote-the-book-of-mormon .

This is an interesting but very limited study. I would be interested in a stylometric analysis of 17th Century authors, particularly Grotius, as compared to the Book of Mormon. Grotius would have presumably been influenced by the literature he was familiar with which was much different than the 19th Century English authors in the study. He was very interested in ancient Greek literature and translated several Greek plays into Latin. He was well-read in a slew of other ancient sources and I imagine he would have been familiar with contemporary European authors, as well.

[JarMan]

21 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

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.

There's more similarity between Kircher's invention and my proposed design than you might think. First of all, we have a glass ball with rotating object(s) suspended inside for both. The exact size really isn't that important since the design is scalable. Inside Kircher's "clock" we have a ball rotating in a horizontal plane with an indicator (in the form of a fish) pointing to numbers on the ball. In my Liahona design we have a spindle inside rotating in the horizontal plane. This spindle is the pointer (but it is definitely not a fish). The other Liahona spindle points to objects on the surface of the ball (similar to how Kircher's pointer points to numbers on an inner ball). In Kircher's clock a mystical force (thought to emanate from the sun) turned the objects inside the ball. The objects inside the Liahona are also rotated by an external, mystical force. It's not hard to see how Kircher's device could have spurred the creation of the Liahona as I have proposed it.

[JarMan]

22 hours 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!!!!!

Speaking of wild Book of Mormon theories, I've heard it suggested on this very forum that the Book of Mormon was written by some ancient, white Indians on gold plates in Egyptian characters and hidden in a hill for 1,400 years only to have the ghost of one of these Indians appear to a 17 year old treasure hunter to reveal its secrets. Crazy stuff, I know.

[Rajah Manchou]

8 minutes ago, JarMan said:

Speaking of wild Book of Mormon theories, I've heard it suggested on this very forum that the Book of Mormon was written by some ancient, white Indians on gold plates in Egyptian characters and hidden in a hill for 1,400 years only to have the ghost of one of these Indians appear to a 17 year old treasure hunter to reveal its secrets. Crazy stuff, I know.

You may be on to something.
But it was a resurrected immortal, not a ghost.
Big difference.

[Rajah Manchou]

32 minutes ago, JarMan said:

It's not hard to see how Kircher's device could have spurred the creation of the Liahona as I have proposed it.

I suppose so, just feels like you are reaching over stronger evidence (Kircher translating a manuscript written by Nephi) to pull out arguments that aren't going to be convincing without stronger evidence.

[The Nehor]

32 minutes ago, JarMan said:

Speaking of wild Book of Mormon theories, I've heard it suggested on this very forum that the Book of Mormon was written by some ancient, white Indians on gold plates in Egyptian characters and hidden in a hill for 1,400 years only to have the ghost of one of these Indians appear to a 17 year old treasure hunter to reveal its secrets. Crazy stuff, I know.

Yes, which is what the book says and so did the guy who found and translated it.

4 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Let me try that again. You may be on to something.

Yes, that is how I violated Poe's Law.  

[Rajah Manchou]

29 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, which is what the book says and so did the guy who found and translated it.

"Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody (the book and the guy who found and translated it) in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.

29 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, that is how I violated Poe's Law.  

Ah, now I understand.

Edited February 22, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[JarMan]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I suppose so, just feels like you are reaching over stronger evidence (Kircher translating a manuscript written by Nephi) to pull out arguments that aren't going to be convincing without stronger evidence.

Help me connect the dots. I’m not sure what you are proposing.

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

Help me connect the dots. I’m not sure what you are proposing.

Kircher found a manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi which he spent a good deal of his life translating. Kircher also believed that Egyptian-Israelite culture, perhaps resembling that of his Nephi, spread to the Indies (Asia and America) in two transmissions: (1) earlier transmission via Noah's children, and (2) a later transmission in the 6th century BC. This lines up with Arabic histories and geographies that tell of grandsons of Noah migrating east around the time of the tower, to an island called Rahma and/or Comoro. Kircher would have been familiar with these texts.

If we are indeed looking for a 17th century translator of a history of the descendants of an Egyptian Jew named Nephi who migrates to a land called Ramah and/or Cumorah in the 6th century BC, Kircher is an interesting possibility.
 

Edited February 22, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Robert F. Smith]

12 hours ago, JarMan said:

Start with a glass ball. Inside the ball one spindle stretches from the south pole to the north pole through the center. This spindle spins on its axis. The second spindle is horizontal at the equator and stretches from east to west through the center. It also spins on its axis. The two spindles are connected at the center of the globe forming right angles. Now if we spin the the N/S spindle the E/W spindle rotates in a horizontal plane and becomes a pointer. If we spin the E/W spindle the N/S spindle rotates in a vertical plane and becomes a pointer. Thus they are described both as spindles (1 Nephi 16:28, Alma 37:40) and as pointers (1 Nephi 16:10,28; Alma 37:40,44). One of the spindles points the direction of travel. The second spinner points to an emblem on the surface of the ball indicating what the other spindle is pointing at.

Very interesting.  Thanks for clarifying.  Next step is to present us with a drawing of it from several perspectives.

[clarkgoble]

10 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Kircher found a manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi which he spent a good deal of his life translating. Kircher also believed that Egyptian-Israelite culture, perhaps resembling that of his Nephi, spread to the Indies (Asia and America) in two transmissions: (1) earlier transmission via Noah's children, and (2) a later transmission in the 6th century BC. This lines up with Arabic histories and geographies that tell of grandsons of Noah migrating east around the time of the tower, to an island called Rahma and/or Comoro. Kircher would have been familiar with these texts.

Don't most historians think he made up most of this? Also most of what he was writing was just standard renaissance era theurgical platonism/hermeticism. You can even see that when he equates Enoch with Hermes.

[JarMan]

12 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Kircher found a manuscript written by an Egyptian Jew named Nephi which he spent a good deal of his life translating. Kircher also believed that Egyptian-Israelite culture, perhaps resembling that of his Nephi, spread to the Indies (Asia and America) in two transmissions: (1) earlier transmission via Noah's children, and (2) a later transmission in the 6th century BC. This lines up with Arabic histories and geographies that tell of grandsons of Noah migrating east around the time of the tower, to an island called Rahma and/or Comoro. Kircher would have been familiar with these texts.

If we are indeed looking for a 17th century translator of a history of the descendants of an Egyptian Jew named Nephi who migrates to a land called Ramah and/or Cumorah in the 6th century BC, Kircher is an interesting possibility.
 

I think there are some very interesting connections with Kircher. One you haven't mentioned is that he believed Egyptian hieroglyphs portrayed a lot of information very compactly. And we see that the Nephites used Reformed Egyptian to write on the plates since it was much more compact and they had limited space. I think we can make a case that he influenced the writing in a similar way to how Galileo did. But there are some obvious problems with Kircher as an author. He was a Jesuit priest and there are several ideas in the Book of Mormon that are fairly "anti-Catholic": 1) infant baptism is an abomination, 2) great and abominable church, 3) burning of heretics (mostly, but not exclusively, related to the Catholic church). I haven't researched his theology but I'm imagining he didn't take an Arminian view of theology being that he was a German Catholic. I'm also not sure his view of government and war but I'm guessing that even if we find writings on these subjects they won't directly correspond to what we find in the Book of Mormon. But I'll keep an open mind until I have a chance to examine his specific beliefs in more detail.

[JarMan]

16 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, which is what the book says and so did the guy who found and translated it.

The bible, I think, is less about what "really" happened and more about an "agenda" that certain people in history were trying to push. This is essentially the explanation that many historians give as well. I don't see the Book of Mormon being much different in this respect. I realize this conflicts with the orthodox understanding about both books. But many orthodox views on religion--Mormonism included--have long since ceased to be believable to me. In this respect I suspect the only difference between you and me is merely a matter of degree.

[Rajah Manchou]

6 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Don't most historians think he made up most of this? Also most of what he was writing was just standard renaissance era theurgical platonism/hermeticism. You can even see that when he equates Enoch with Hermes.

Not all historians. I believe there's an emerging argument that the material does come from fragments of an authentic source. Jason Colavito has done a few blog posts on the subject:

Are the Fragments of Abenephius the Remains of a Lost Jewish Account of Egypt?
(read the first comment on that blog post, I found that one interesting in light of our discussion)

My sense is that Kircher had an authentic Jewish manuscript, and the name Nephi was in there somewhere. But even if he did make the character Nephi up, it does show he was willing, like many other Jesuits at the time, to take the accomodatio approach and just make stuff up to win converts and support.

In either case, the personal name Nephi only appears in two places in literature: Kircher's Oedpius Aegyptiacus and the Book of Mormon. In both cases, Nephi is an Egyptian Jew with a knowledge of encoded Egyptian script. I tend to think this is non-random.

Yes, it is standard renaissance era material. But Kircher extrapolated some interesting things from his research, including a belief that there were two transmissions of Egyptian religion into the Indies, at two time periods corresponding with the migrations in the Book of Mormon. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Rajah Manchou]

3 hours ago, JarMan said:

But there are some obvious problems with Kircher as an author. He was a Jesuit priest and there are several ideas in the Book of Mormon that are fairly "anti-Catholic": 1) infant baptism is an abomination, 2) great and abominable church, 3) burning of heretics (mostly, but not exclusively, related to the Catholic church). I haven't researched his theology but I'm imagining he didn't take an Arminian view of theology being that he was a German Catholic. I'm also not sure his view of government and war but I'm guessing that even if we find writings on these subjects they won't directly correspond to what we find in the Book of Mormon. But I'll keep an open mind until I have a chance to examine his specific beliefs in more detail.

Jesuits were infamous for taking nearly any position on an issue, and 'accommodating' it into 'lost scriptures' that might serve a greater good. There was a Jesuit missionary, and friend of Kircher, in southern India who spent years doing exactly that. 

It is also possible that Kircher just made up the Nephi manuscript in an attempt to convince people that the Egyptian religion and Catholicism had the same ancient source, and that the mystery was encoded in Egyptian, Chinese and Mesoamerican hieroglyphs, that only Nephi could unlock for us.

I'm still not convinced the Book of Mormon is the product of a 17th century author, so I'm not too concerned about making Kircher's or Grotius' beliefs match the text. But it is worth mentioning that the reasons Kircher gave for not publishing his Nephi manuscript were: (1) it contained things that he felt should not be published, and (2) there would be negative consequences if he did.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[JarMan]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Jesuits were infamous for taking nearly any position on an issue, and 'accommodating' it into 'lost scriptures' that might serve a greater good. There was a Jesuit missionary, and friend of Kircher, in southern India who spent years doing exactly that. 

It is also possible that Kircher just made up the Nephi manuscript in an attempt to convince people that the Egyptian religion and Catholicism had the same ancient source, and that the mystery was encoded in Egyptian, Chinese and Mesoamerican hieroglyphs, that only Nephi could unlock for us.

I'm still not convinced the Book of Mormon is the product of a 17th century author, so I'm not too concerned about making Kircher's or Grotius' beliefs match the text. But it is worth mentioning that the reasons Kircher gave for not publishing his Nephi manuscript were: (1) it contained things that he felt should not be published, and (2) there would be negative consequences if he did.

The crux of my argument is that the Book of Mormon matches Grotius' beliefs. So to me it matters quite a bit.

[JarMan]

12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Very interesting.  Thanks for clarifying.  Next step is to present us with a drawing of it from several perspectives.

This isn't too fancy but at least it shows the basics.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JarMan said:

This isn't too fancy but at least it shows the basics.

Since the spindles intersect, how can they both independently spin on their axis?  I am not seeing it; in my mind's eye, one has to pass through the center, thus cutting the other in two.  Trying to imagine how the 'outer' spindle's two parts are linked so the can spin as one and not seeing it.

Or are they locked together and only one moves through a circle at a time?

Edited February 23, 2018 by Calm

[JarMan]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Since the spindles intersect, how can they both independently spin on their axis?  I am not seeing it; in my mind's eye, one has to pass through the center, thus cutting the other in two.  Trying to imagine how the 'outer' spindle's two parts are linked so the can spin as one and not seeing it.

They are locked together at the center. The N/S spindle rotates on its axis causing the E/W spindle to point in the right direction. Once it is done rotating and the ball is oriented in the right direction the E/W spindle will spin on its axis and the N/S spindle will point at the particular icon on the ball (not shown) indicating what the other spindle is pointing at. Not sure if this diagram is better or not.

Edited February 23, 2018 by JarMan

[Calm]

3 hours ago, JarMan said:

They are locked together at the center. The N/S spindle rotates on its axis causing the E/W spindle to point in the right direction. Once it is done rotating and the ball is oriented in the right direction the E/W spindle will spin on its axis and the N/S spindle will point at the particular icon on the ball (not shown) indicating what the other spindle is pointing at. Not sure if this diagram is better or not.

Any chance you could make a working model?  I am wondering how it indicates both direction and item in that direction at the same time.  Or maybe that might be solved by always having it indicate the item first so one only has to have one circle of instructions.  Then one rotates the ball so the direction spindle is parallel to the horizon and then the "compass spindle" aligns with the direction.

Does that make sense?  I already took my spacer drug so what makes sense to me doesn't always translate to reality by this time, lol.

-----

In order to lock a spindle in position to turn on its axis, a pin would have to be inserted in both ends.  The axis for the instructions would always be intersecting with the orb at the same place, so just two holes for pins to spin for the instructions would be needed.  Once the instruction spindle has locked on to the icon, there could be holes in each of the icons on the instruction circle.  Once spindle points to the correct spindle, the pins lock it in place (using the icon diametrically opposite the chosen icon in tandem with the chosen icon), and then the direction spindle spins.  

Edited February 23, 2018 by Calm

[JarMan]

7 hours ago, Calm said:

Any chance you could make a working model?  I am wondering how it indicates both direction and item in that direction at the same time.  Or maybe that might be solved by always having it indicate the item first so one only has to have one circle of instructions.  Then one rotates the ball so the direction spindle is parallel to the horizon and then the "compass spindle" aligns with the direction.

Does that make sense?  I already took my spacer drug so what makes sense to me doesn't always translate to reality by this time, lol.

-----

In order to lock a spindle in position to turn on its axis, a pin would have to be inserted in both ends.  The axis for the instructions would always be intersecting with the orb at the same place, so just two holes for pins to spin for the instructions would be needed.  Once the instruction spindle has locked on to the icon, there could be holes in each of the icons on the instruction circle.  Once spindle points to the correct spindle, the pins lock it in place (using the icon diametrically opposite the chosen icon in tandem with the chosen icon), and then the direction spindle spins.  

The ball is filled with a fluid so that the spindles are suspended and can rotate freely. This is similar to the magnetic clock where the ball inside is suspended at the center. (This was accomplished by filling the ball with mineral oil and water. The ball was heavier than the mineral oil at the top and lighter than the water at the bottom so it stayed suspended at the interface. The hidden magnet below kept the ball from drifting laterally.) In my design the spindles are essentially as long as the inside of the ball so there is no way they can drift in any direction. (This could also allow it to operate without any fluid inside.) The only possible movement is rotation around the axis of either spindle. 

Here’s what the operation looks like in practice. The user holds the ball or sets it on a base. The markings on the ball help the user know which side is up. The N/S spindle turns on its axis causing the E/W spindle to rotate radially in a horizontal plane so that it points the direction of travel. At this point the user has to make one adjustment so that the plane of rotation of the N/S spindle lines up with the symbols on the surface. The adjustment is to twist the ball in either an east or west direction until you have alignment. The spindles inside are suspended and will not turn while the ball is being adjusted. This is similar to the operation of a magnetic compass where if you rotate the compass the needle stays pointing at magnetic north. Once this adjustment has been made the E/W spindle will turn on its axis causing the N/S spindle to rotate in a vertical plane until it is pointing to a symbol on the surface of the ball. In order for the ball to reset to its initial position the N/S spindle simply has to rotate to the vertical. 

This was a long explanation but the actual operation is quite simple. Just hold the ball upright and give it a single twist at the right time and voila. You now know which direction to head and what you’re headed for.