Converts to Limnor's Book of Mormon Origins?

[Limnor]

Wait I’ve got it: it’s Frameplonét. Scaffolding you can only see if you step back from it— Frameplate Monet.

I used “Frameplonét” in a sentence today at work.

Nothing lol

Disappointing

[Limnor]

Joseph made acknowledgment of the role others’ played an instrument of authority—anywhere else it would be called blackmail.

Alma 1: Oliver vs Joseph Smith and Universalism

The first example of blackmail following the death of Alvin occurs in Alma 1.

To continue the allegorical reading, Alma 1 can be seen as a struggle for power and influence inside the early group, specifically reflecting the subjugation of Joseph Smith Sr.’s Universalist beliefs and their influence on Joseph Smith Jr as the claimant to the title seer and prophet.

You’ll recall according to this model, Alvin is the brother of Jared, the original collaborator with Rigdon. He was the first custodian of both vision (“what he sees”) and tradition (“what has been handed to him by Rigdon”).

In the allegorical retelling, Alvin, as Abinadi, confronted his family over the law of Moses and his understanding of what that implied, placing him directly at odds with a family steeped in esotericism—Freemasonry, universalist theology, and ritualized secrecy. Alvin’s death is the originating event that binds the conspirators together.

Martin Harris becomes Limhi, the accidental conservator of Alvin’s record. Martin Harris/Limhi tells us the prophet—Abinadi/Alvin—has been slain. Oliver Cowdery, as Alma, is the insider who fled—like Alma leaving King Noah’s court. He knows what happened. And when he returns, his first task is to confront Nehor, the universalist flatterer who killed Gideon.

In this reading, Gideon is another reflection of Alvin—the truth-teller slain because he challenged the institution.

Note the similarity:

Mosiah 13 11 And now I read unto you the remainder of the commandments of God, for I perceive that they are not written in your hearts; I perceive that ye have studied and taught iniquity the most part of your lives.

Alma 1 9 Now, because Gideon withstood him with the words of God he was wroth with Gideon, and drew his sword and began to smite him. Now Gideon being stricken with many years, therefore he was not able to withstand his blows, therefore he was slain by the sword.

So, when Alma condemns universalism in Alma 1, it is not random, it is Oliver’s coded denunciation of the ideological world that killed Alvin, disguised within the story.

Alma 1 2 And it came to pass that in the first year of the reign of Alma in the judgment-seat, there was a man brought before him to be judged, a man who was large, and was noted for his much strength.

Even a brief reading of the book reveals a recurring character who is a “large and mighty man.” This is usually Joseph within my interpretation, though Parley P Pratt as Ammon was also described as a large man.

Alma 1 becomes a veiled confession. The “Order of Nehor” is not a historical sect but an inversion—a literary stand-in for the universalist/esoteric coalition that overpowered Alvin.

Nehor, the preacher who teaches that “all mankind should be saved at the last day,” is remarkably similar to the form of American Universalism that Joseph Smith Sr embraced in Vermont—guaranteed redemption, no eternal punishment, and a message that might reflect what people want to hear back to them.

The Book of Mormon casts this theology as “priestcraft,” a flattery that leads people astray.

In the book, Nehor (allegorically Joseph Smith Jr) is brought before Oliver/Alma and accused:

Alma 1 10 And the man who slew him was taken by the people of the church, and was brought before Alma, to be judged according to the crimes which he had committed.

11 And it came to pass that he stood before Alma and pled for himself with much boldness.

12 But Alma said unto him: Behold, this is the first time that priestcraft has been introduced among this people. And behold, thou art not only guilty of priestcraft, but hast endeavored to enforce it by the sword; and were priestcraft to be enforced among this people it would prove their entire destruction.

13 And thou hast shed the blood of a righteous man, yea, a man who has done much good among this people; and were we to spare thee his blood would come upon us for vengeance.

In the book, Nehor confesses and suffers an ignominious death:

Alma 1 15 And it came to pass that they took him; and his name was Nehor; and they carried him upon the top of the hill Manti, and there he was caused, or rather did acknowledge, between the heavens and the earth, that what he had taught to the people was contrary to the word of God; and there he suffered an ignominious death.

In the allegory, Joseph is not put to death, but his teaching about Universalism is condemned through a form of blackmail.

However, this didn’t stop the “priestcraft,” as Joseph simply learned to “pretend” to fall in line with Oliver/Alma.

Alma1 17 Nevertheless, they durst not lie, if it were known, for fear of the law, for liars were punished; therefore they pretended to preach according to their belief; and now the law could have no power on any man for his belief.

[Limnor]

It's possible that I've missed it, but I don't remember seeing, in this topic, any discussion of the failed attempt to sell the copyright of the Book of Mormon in 1830 in Canada. How does this fit with your ideas about the origins and coded content of the book, Limnor? Is it relevant at all?

That attempt and the later explanation of its failure exposed a concept that I think has been troublesome to some folks:

... the following revelation came through the stone: ‘Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil.’

An Address to All Believers in Christ

The idea that Mormon god's prophet could not always reliably distinguish his own ideas from those of his god, or, for that matter, from Satan, is troubling. [Note: reminder about how Joseph did not directly identify the personages he saw in the First Vision - could they have been emissaries of Satan?]

Some may also find the introduction, once again, of "the stone" to be troubling.

Limnor: if you prefer any discussion arising from these ideas to be taken out of this thread, please say so and I'll start another topic.

Malkie if you want to start a new thread on the things Whitmer said in his address, I’d be glad to provide additional thoughts about the Melchizedek priesthood and the devil as correlated to things Alma/Amulek said from within the book.

I guess I could do it in this thread but it probably deserves its own dedicated thread.

[Kishkumen]

I am happy Limnor is here to share his interesting ideas and add variety to a set of discussions that can get stale at times.

I can't see that Limnor wants converts.

[Limnor]

I am happy Limnor is here to share his interesting ideas and add variety to a set of discussions that can get stale at times.

I can't see that Limnor wants converts.

Thanks, Kish. That’s exactly where I’m coming from. I’m not trying to make converts to anything, I’m trying to understand the Book of Mormon better by talking about it openly, including the allegorical and confessional “hints” I see in it.

[Kishkumen]

Thanks, Kish. That’s exactly where I’m coming from. I’m not trying to make converts to anything, I’m trying to understand the Book of Mormon better by talking about it openly, including the allegorical and confessional “hints” I see in it.

This kind of work needs to be done! That is why it is good you are doing it. Study of the Book of Mormon for devotional purposes alone is actually not a good thing for the book. It will be taken more seriously by people outside of the LDS tent when scholarly discussion of it begins to flourish. There is much more to be done in this vein.

[Limnor]

This kind of work needs to be done! That is why it is good you are doing it. Study of the Book of Mormon for devotional purposes alone is actually not a good thing for the book. It will be taken more seriously by people outside of the LDS tent when scholarly discussion of it begins to flourish. There is much more to be done in this vein.

Kish, I really appreciate that. If my odd little allegorical/confessional angle contributes even a sliver to better understanding, then great. I’m just interested in following the evidence where it leads.

[I Have Questions]

Kyler Rasmussen in a short summary of Noel Hudson’s longer piece, has inadvertently drawn a parallel that Limnor may find of interest.

In this article, Noel Hudson advances the commonly proposed idea—that (as phrased by Noel Reynolds) “Nephi carefully structured his writings to convince his own and later generations that the Lord had selected him over his elder brothers to be Lehi’s political and spiritual successor.”

The parallel is obvious, that Joseph Smith produced the Book of Mormon himself to advance his own position against older siblings and others.

[Limnor]

Kyler Rasmussen in a short summary of Noel Hudson’s longer piece, has inadvertently drawn a parallel that Limnor may find of interest.

In this article, Noel Hudson advances the commonly proposed idea—that (as phrased by Noel Reynolds) “Nephi carefully structured his writings to convince his own and later generations that the Lord had selected him over his elder brothers to be Lehi’s political and spiritual successor.”

The parallel is obvious, that Joseph Smith produced the Book of Mormon himself to advance his own position against older siblings and others.

Thank you IHQ. Joseph doesn’t even seem to have been particularly subtle about inserting himself into the book. Shulem and Metcalfe (and others) have pointed out the similarities between Joseph and Mormon. There is also a passage in 2 Nephi 3 where Joseph of Egypt is quoted as prophesying a future “choice seer” whose name would be Joseph and who would be named after his father. That might be the most clumsy, if straightforward, reference.

He doesn’t just do this in the Book of Mormon either. In the JST he inserts a very similar prophecy of a seer named Joseph, after the name of his father.

I guess Joseph thought he needed two witnesses or something.

My take has been if he did that with himself, he could have done it with others, and it’s been fun looking for hints of his companions in the book as well. I’ve extended the point about Nephi/Joseph advancing his position above his brothers to others within his group—Oliver and Rigdon, to be specific.

[Limnor]

I think the story of Joseph usurping Oliver is seen in Ether chapter 8.

After Alvin’s death, the group lost its original leader, and authority and succession were contested. Oliver Cowdery, cast in my view in the record as Alma, initially withdrew, but returned—as described in Mosiah.

Joseph, however, sought to become the leader. In Ether 8 we see how he did so, and the means and partners who helped him to usurp Oliver.

My reading casts Emma Smith as the daughter of Jared—the one who understands how power has shifted and wants authority to return to Joseph.

She tempts Akish—seen by me as Joseph Knight—who threatens Omer/Oliver’s life to force him out of the way.

In this interpretation, Ether 8 becomes the veiled account of how Oliver’s leadership was overthrown without killing the witness—leaving Joseph to emerge as leader, while the cost is pushed onto darker figures and sworn secrecy.