Vogel's new video response on Book of Mormon and Masonry

[dan vogel]

In this video, I will examine fifteen of the major arguments that the apologists have put forward in an attempt to overturn the anti-Masonic thesis. Along the way, I hope that my viewers will gain a deeper understanding of the Book of Mormon in its nineteenth-century setting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFLZkVwM5A8

[Philo Sofee]

Looking forward to watching this!!!

[tagriffy]

I hate to put your back against the wall, but is it your thesis that the Gadianton robbers are Masons or merely described using anti-Masonic rhetoric?

[Kishkumen]

I hate to put your back against the wall, but is it your thesis that the Gadianton robbers are Masons or merely described using anti-Masonic rhetoric?

That's the crucial question!

[tagriffy]

I think so for a couple reasons. It could help us split the difference, as it were. It could also be a key to interpreting the material. If Joseph saw the Gadianton robbers as Masons, that would suggest one line of interpretation. If Joseph was merely using anti-Masonic rhetoric to describe the Gadianton robbers, that would suggest not only another line of interpretation, but also some significant research possibilities. This could be a case where what is left out could be as significant as what is put in.

[Kishkumen]

I think so for a couple reasons. It could help us split the difference, as it were. It could also be a key to interpreting the material. If Joseph saw the Gadianton robbers as Masons, that would suggest one line of interpretation. If Joseph was merely using anti-Masonic rhetoric to describe the Gadianton robbers, that would suggest not only another line of interpretation, but also some significant research possibilities. This could be a case where what is left out could be as significant as what is put in.

I don't utterly oppose the idea that Joseph Smith thought the Gadianton robbers were Masons, but that is quite different from saying that everything about and associated with Masonry was assumed by him to be anathema. But, as a somewhat literary person with an advanced degree in Comp. Lit., I sincerely doubt the interpretation Gadianton robber=Freemason as being reductive.

[Kishkumen]

In this video, I will examine fifteen of the major arguments that the apologists have put forward in an attempt to overturn the anti-Masonic thesis. Along the way, I hope that my viewers will gain a deeper understanding of the Book of Mormon in its nineteenth-century setting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFLZkVwM5A8

Really wonderful video, Dan! Thanks for sharing this.

[tagriffy]

My tendency is also to see the equation as too reductive, though that didn't seem to bother Martin Harris. That was the problem I had with apologetic responses, which seemed to project that equation onto Dan and other proponents of the anti-Masonic thesis. I tend to see anti-Masonic rhetoric as a source which Joseph used to his own ends. But you are also correct that even if Joseph made that equation himself, it would not mean he saw everything about the Masons as anathema. In either case, knowing what he left out could be as important as what he put in.

[dan vogel]

I hate to put your back against the wall, but is it your thesis that the Gadianton robbers are Masons or merely described using anti-Masonic rhetoric?

It's difficult to know what Joseph Smith had in mind, but the Book of Mormon links the latter-day secret combinations with the ancient ones and describes them as unitary. The secrets were revealed to Cain by Satan and transmission came by the records or revelation. The Book of Mormon's Gaddiantons were described as ebbing and flowing depending on the wickedness or righteousness of the Nephites. Thus the Book of Mormon warns Jacksonian America not to let the secret combination get above them or it could prove the overthrow of the free government. So it's more than just rhetoric.

[Kishkumen]

It's difficult to know what Joseph Smith had in mind, but the Book of Mormon links the latter-day secret combinations with the ancient ones and describes them as unitary. The secrets were revealed to Cain by Satan and transmission came by the records or revelation. The Book of Mormon's Gaddiantons were described as ebbing and flowing depending on the wickedness or righteousness of the Nephites. Thus the Book of Mormon warns Jacksonian America not to let the secret combination get above them or it could prove the overthrow of the free government. So it's more than just rhetoric.

Indeed, definitely more than rhetoric, but is Joseph at this point so spot on in his typological ancient parallels as to say, "Hey, there were evil Masons in ancient America, so beware!"? On the one hand, I can totally imagine that being the case, but it would actually only work well if he had a pretty good understanding of Masonic legend and took it literally as history, as many Masons in the past actually did.

My thinking goes like this:

Secret combinations are first brought here by the Jaredites, who received the oaths from prior generations whose knowledge traces back to Cain.

15 And it came to pass that thus they did agree with Akish. And Akish did administer unto them the oaths which were given by them of old who also sought power, which had been handed down even from Cain, who was a murderer from the beginning.

This provides an alternative history for the origins of Freemasonry that would seem to contradict the most well known Masonic legends about Solomon and Hiram Abif. But, if we look at George Oliver's Antiquities of Freemasonry, we see the following:

When men became numerous upon the earth, the evil spirit of darkness was very busily engaged in the corruption of their morals; and succeeded in working up the malevolent passions in the heart of Cain, until he apostatized from Masonry, and slew his brother Abel.

It is possible to infer from Oliver that Cain was the possessor of an apostate form of Masonry, and that would help us understand why Smith was locating the origins of secret combinations in the story of Cain.

It follows from this, however, that an apostate form of Masonry would originate from a pure Masonry. For Oliver, Masonry always existed. Cain apostatized from this Masonry, and thus a bad Masonry was born, which Joseph Smith, following the lead of Oliver, cast as the secret combinations that come from Cain. This shows, however, that the origin of secret combinations in Mormonism is built upon the presupposition of an earlier form of good Masonry.

The principles of speculative Masonry, which had been communicated to Adam in Paradise, were never forsaken, even after having tasted of the bitter fruit of the forbidden tree; and as his progeny increased, he communicated to them the divine precepts and injunctions which were enfolded in that pure and sublime science.