DiscussMormonism.com

I don’t know if anyone has used AI to map out the ideas of Vogel, Marquadt, Walters and others.

I’ve mapped out a reimagining of the book using AI to aid with describing what I see as foundational ideas, starting with Ether and the Book of Zeniff.

From there, the story of the sons of Mosiah, who I see as Rigdon/Mosiah, as the intended “interpreter” are spread beginning with Mosiah and through Alma, Helaman and etc before returning to a Rigdon source text at 3 Nephi, Mosiah. The sons of Mosiah saw an angel - or, translated, Parley P Pratt, Joseph, Hyrum, and Oliver claimed they saw an angel - and wrote down the responses from people they talked to over time.

After Alvin died, Joseph went on a journey to find the original sources, reflected in Mosiah and Alma. I see Parley P Pratt as the Alma figure and go between from Rigdon to Alvin, originally, and then Joseph. There seem to be multiple characters assigned to single individuals.

Joseph hacked out the original 116 pages that had been produced by Rigdon and pointing to him as the interpreter. I think the 116 pages were “lost on purpose” so Joseph could usurp and insert himself.

Please see the AI thread for an AI-aided codex/confessional allegory, rewritten and reimagined.

Not even a nibble.

Ok now I’m embarrassed but I’m glad I put it out there. It is my answer to the fellow that asked me about the origins all those years ago.

Ultimately it’s been a waste of time trying to figure it out. An interesting hobby but no more.

The evidence points to Joseph (alone or with others) drawing on material from around them.

When Bunyan composed his stories in the late seventeenth century, he did so by cobbling together narrative elements, concepts and ideas from multiple biblical and literary sources (along with his vivid imagination and events from his own life). His characteristic patchwork of old and new story elements resulted in recognizable narrative patterns that act as “fingerprints” in the text, identifying Bunyan’s unique alterations to the scriptural and secular tales he recombined.

Several of Bunyan’s distinctive narrative patterns repeatedly appear in the Book of Mormon. One of the most prominent examples is the template that forms the narrative foundation for both the story of Faithful, a Christian martyr in Pilgrim’s Progress, and the story of the Prophet Abinadi in the Book of Mormon.

The witnesses, upon whom certain apologists so heavily rely, are simply those people planted in the crowd by the snake oil salesman, or the plants in the crowd picked out by the magician. When you consider those witnesses were all family and close friends of Smith…well, it’s obvious to those who have eyes to see.

I think it's important to reiterate now and then that conservative, traditional, "true-believing" Mormonism really doesn't have any chance at all of being true. The Book of Mormon absolutely does not hold up to scrutiny, let alone the Book of Abraham, and the behaviours of the early Mormon Prophets completely rule out any possibility that they might have been guided by any God worth the name. So picking apart Mormon apologetics is just a game. There is no chance at all that the apologists can really tip any needles. They're trying to shift pebbles on scales that are weighed down with anvils.

Yet on the other hand I don't think it's smart or wise to write off all of unique Mormon culture as nothing but nonsense. It came from an interesting time and place, when modernity was just about to take off. Even just as a hoax, it was unusually successful. And a lot of sincere people have managed to invest it with meaning.

Life is too short for everyone to learn everything that could be worth learning, so if anyone wants to just forget all about Mormonism and focus on other things, that might well be a wise triage. Investing some time and effort in trying to figure out Mormonism isn't silly, however. It doesn't have to be the Only True and Living Church in order to be worthy of study.

Physics Guy wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 26, 2025 8:08 am

I think it's important to reiterate now and then that conservative, traditional, "true-believing" Mormonism really doesn't have any chance at all of being true. The Book of Mormon absolutely does not hold up to scrutiny, let alone the Book of Abraham, and the behaviours of the early Mormon Prophets completely rule out any possibility that they might have been guided by any God worth the name. So picking apart Mormon apologetics is just a game. There is no chance at all that the apologists can really tip any needles. They're trying to shift pebbles on scales that are weighed down with anvils.

Yet on the other hand I don't think it's smart or wise to write off all of unique Mormon culture as nothing but nonsense. It came from an interesting time and place, when modernity was just about to take off. Even just as a hoax, it was unusually successful. And a lot of sincere people have managed to invest it with meaning.

Life is too short for everyone to learn everything that could be worth learning, so if anyone wants to just forget all about Mormonism and focus on other things, that might well be a wise triage. Investing some time and effort in trying to figure out Mormonism isn't silly, however. It doesn't have to be the Only True and Living Church in order to be worthy of study.

My thought is that it became successful as a new cultural community, in a time and place where community was essential for survival. The Amish are another good example of a group of people carving out a new community with a new culture in a frontier setting. I think it’s why the Church is currently being successful in Africa, and why it was successful in other “new” territories. Communities are safe spaces and humans are pack animals. Where the SLC LDS causes itself problems is in its arrogant self positioning as the only Church with the whole truth, the only people that have a Prophet that speaks to God etc. and in its specificity in portraying that it knows more about the afterlife than anyone else. And of course, its current licking and choosing of playing politics. Money corrupts, and the Church is no exception.

It has sacrificed its culture for power and pomposity.

Physics Guy wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 26, 2025 8:08 am

I think it's important to reiterate now and then that conservative, traditional, "true-believing" Mormonism really doesn't have any chance at all of being true. The Book of Mormon absolutely does not hold up to scrutiny, let alone the Book of Abraham, and the behaviours of the early Mormon Prophets completely rule out any possibility that they might have been guided by any God worth the name. So picking apart Mormon apologetics is just a game. There is no chance at all that the apologists can really tip any needles. They're trying to shift pebbles on scales that are weighed down with anvils.

Yet on the other hand I don't think it's smart or wise to write off all of unique Mormon culture as nothing but nonsense. It came from an interesting time and place, when modernity was just about to take off. Even just as a hoax, it was unusually successful. And a lot of sincere people have managed to invest it with meaning.

Life is too short for everyone to learn everything that could be worth learning, so if anyone wants to just forget all about Mormonism and focus on other things, that might well be a wise triage. Investing some time and effort in trying to figure out Mormonism isn't silly, however. It doesn't have to be the Only True and Living Church in order to be worthy of study.

One does need to keep in mind that you are speaking as an outsider, never having experienced life as an active member having had spiritual experiences either through ordinances or temple blessings or answers to prayers offered up to ask God if the LDS Church is true. I'm not saying that, believe it or not, to be critical. I'm just stating a fact. And the fact is, there ARE reasons to both believe (valid reasons) and reasons to disbelieve (also valid) ...so faith in the Restoration ultimately involves a REAL choice.

I don't think there are too many things within the realms of the supernatural that are 100% decipherable and/or obviously TRUE. Any adherent of any religion has to determine whether or not their faith community is where God wants them to be. If I remember, you are a practicing Christian. I would also assume that you believe strongly that you are where God wants you and your family to be. And that may well be. I think choice plays a big part on where we end up.

And we might end up somewhere else along the way!

Regards,
MG

I Have Questions wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 26, 2025 7:34 am

The evidence points to Joseph (alone or with others) drawing on material from around them.

When Bunyan composed his stories in the late seventeenth century, he did so by cobbling together narrative elements, concepts and ideas from multiple biblical and literary sources (along with his vivid imagination and events from his own life). His characteristic patchwork of old and new story elements resulted in recognizable narrative patterns that act as “fingerprints” in the text, identifying Bunyan’s unique alterations to the scriptural and secular tales he recombined.

Several of Bunyan’s distinctive narrative patterns repeatedly appear in the Book of Mormon. One of the most prominent examples is the template that forms the narrative foundation for both the story of Faithful, a Christian martyr in Pilgrim’s Progress, and the story of the Prophet Abinadi in the Book of Mormon.

The witnesses, upon whom certain apologists so heavily rely, are simply those people planted in the crowd by the snake oil salesman, or the plants in the crowd picked out by the magician. When you consider those witnesses were all family and close friends of Smith…well, it’s obvious to those who have eyes to see.

Yes I understand. I just like the challenge of piecing it all together. Or I did. But there really isn’t anyone in my real life that cares about the challenge. In fact I don’t even share with people that I post here.

But, examples like this keep bringing me back: If Mormon and Nephi are Joseph then who is Moroni? I recently learned that Parley P Pratt’s code name from the Kirtland Revelation Book is Alam. That’s too close to Alma for me to ignore.

Physics Guy wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 26, 2025 8:08 am

Investing some time and effort in trying to figure out Mormonism isn't silly

Thank you for this

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 26, 2025 6:32 pm

life as an active member having had spiritual experiences either through ordinances or temple blessings or answers to prayers offered up to ask God if the LDS Church is true. I'm not saying that, believe it or not, to be critical. I'm just stating a fact. And the fact is, there ARE reasons to both believe (valid reasons) and reasons to disbelieve (also valid) ...so faith in the Restoration ultimately involves a REAL choice.

Thank you for this.

I don’t understand why you’d think it would be critical of others to tell them they don’t have the same temple experiences.

Those things that are sacred to you are considered, well, weird, to the world outside yours. Not trying to insult. It’s just that knowing that those rituals are part of the system are actually a deterrent to me, especially when added to the other oddities that scream “cult.” I mean why the secrecy? That makes little sense to me. I’d think if the “truth” of those rituals were so you’d want to shout it from the rooftops.

What are the valid reasons to believe? Does it hinge on Joseph? The Book of Mormon? The sense of community?

If the foundation has cracks why would you believe it? I just don’t understand it. When Nelson or whoever put the rock in the hat to demonstrate the translation process wasn’t that a bit startling for a believer? It would be for me.

All that writ, my interest has less to do with why anyone believes and more in solving the puzzle of Book of Mormon origins. The rest has only a passing interest to me.

Limnor wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 26, 2025 10:46 pm

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 26, 2025 6:32 pm

life as an active member having had spiritual experiences either through ordinances or temple blessings or answers to prayers offered up to ask God if the LDS Church is true. I'm not saying that, believe it or not, to be critical. I'm just stating a fact. And the fact is, there ARE reasons to both believe (valid reasons) and reasons to disbelieve (also valid) ...so faith in the Restoration ultimately involves a REAL choice.

Thank you for this.

I don’t understand why you’d think it would be critical of others to tell them they don’t have the same temple experiences.

Those things that are sacred to you are considered, well, weird, to the world outside yours. Not trying to insult. It’s just that knowing that those rituals are part of the system are actually a deterrent to me, especially when added to the other oddities that scream “cult.” I mean why the secrecy? That makes little sense to me. I’d think if the “truth” of those rituals were so you’d want to shout it from the rooftops.

What are the valid reasons to believe? Does it hinge on Joseph? The Book of Mormon? The sense of community?

If the foundation has cracks why would you believe it? I just don’t understand it. When Nelson or whoever put the rock in the hat to demonstrate the translation process wasn’t that a bit startling for a believer? It would be for me.

All that writ, my interest has less to do with why anyone believes and more in solving the puzzle of Book of Mormon origins. The rest has only a passing interest to me.

I appreciate your candor and honesty. I don’t think I can really do justice to trying to answer your concerns in one post on a message board. Yes, there are some things that seem “odd”. I went through a long period of “the dark night of the soul”. Years ago now. Honestly, I think I’ve seen just about everything. Do I have an answer for everything? No, I do not. I do, without going into all the reasons why, believe in Christianity and its message. Jesus being the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh. That God(s) orchestrated the creation/building of this world that we inhabit. That there is purpose and meaning that goes beyond the here and now. That we can continue to progress and become more like God the Father. I could go on. Essentially, for me, the CofJCofLDS actually makes sense in its overall theology.

Let me suggest one thing when it comes to the Book of Mormon. I’ve spent a good amount of time looking into its origins and translation. At the end of the day a testimony (witness of the Spirit) will not be solely dependent on all the in’s and outs of translation/origin investigations. It will be found between the covers of the book itself. Think of it this way, if the Book of Mormon is a second witness of Christ and His divinity the witness of this being so/true can only be found through the witness of the Holy Ghost while immersing oneself IN the book with a prayer in your heart wanting to know if what it says is actually true…anachronisms and all.

I wish you well in your own search for that which has REAL meaning and Truth. It can only be found individually, NOT online or on a message board.

Regards,
MG