DiscussMormonism.com

I am somewhat in between thinking Limnors idea of fictional invention as translation of ideas or current events as method potentially revealing valid useful explanation of texts on the one hand or on the other hand being too easy inviting overextension. It could be both of course.

Perhaps Exodus is best seen as a translation of events of Babylonian captivity and return to Isreal. There are differences so no direct translation. Perhaps clusters of real events remotely remembered are translated into a single story of the creation of Isreal by a loose process of translation.

There were real events that moved change from previous costal centered Caanenite civilization to upland Isrealite civilization. Is there a view of translation people may have held that would lead them to expect translation of current events to reveal sacred history. ( the ancient fragments of knowledge of Isreals birth)

Huck - could you please expand on what you mean when you say “overextension?” I’d like to better understand your thinking.

As to the Exodus example - several authors have already done so:

Jan Assmann, Moses the Egyptian (1997) and Cultural Memory and Early Civilization (2011). He argues that the Exodus story encodes “mnemohistory”: the creative remembrance of later trauma (like the Babylonian exile) reframed as the primal act of liberation.

Thomas L. Thompson, The Mythic Past (1999) sees Exodus as a national foundation myth formed from post-exilic reflections on identity and restoration.

William G. Dever, Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? (2003) emphasizes that the Exodus narrative likely reflects folk memories of multiple local movements, recast during nation-building.

Niels Peter Lemche, The Israelites in History and Tradition (1998) interprets Exodus as an ideological reconstruction of Israel’s origins from the perspective of the Persian-period community.

Other authors see the Old Testament as a translation of experience into revelation:

Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (1978) and Theology of the Old Testament (1997) portrays Exodus as a poetic re-performance of liberation, continually re-translated for new crises.

Jon D. Levenson, Sinai and Zion (1985) argues that biblical authors mythologized recent history to create a living memory of covenant renewal.

Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (1973) describes Exodus as the transformation of older Near Eastern mythic motifs (divine warrior, chaos and order) into Israel’s historical frame.

So, the method and thinking isn’t exactly new - I’ve just never seen it applied to the Book of Mormon.

Limnor, overextension? Beyond prophies of himself one would wonder why the present would be allowed to appear in a tale of the past. A simple answer would be human relations observed would be inspiration for creating interesting tales. Further finding meaning in present events would suggest their use as models for stories in the past. One might think increating afictional past the present might be an unconscious model. I find these as likely to be found in the Book of Mormon while you may be suggesting a more extensive intentional use of Joseph Smith own personal history. I am puzzled as to why Joseph would do that. You seem to suggest a very intentional purpose in encoding the present in a tale of the past.

It is entirely possible you wish to fallow links as far as you can find them just to see what might be shown. Perhaps the purpose or purposes will become clearer as your analysis becomes more complete.

I am just registering interest in what you are doing. I am not involved enough in the details of the Book of Mormon to be of any help.

I have had a longer interest in the Old Testament. Interesting reading list you present. I have read some of Deaver and Brueggemann I realize a general view that circumstance of Babylon and return inspire or shape the Exodus story is standard understanding. I think you are touching on ideas more specific on how that connection may have been originally created. Or perhaps I hoped a comparison to Exodus should assist clarification of purpose

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 17, 2025 11:17 pm

I find these as likely to be found in the Book of Mormon while you may be suggesting a more extensive intentional use of Joseph Smith own personal history. I am puzzled as to why Joseph would do that. You seem to suggest a very intentional purpose in encoding the present in a tale of the past.

Because there were serious crimes involved.

They even accuse and counter-accuse each other in the book.

Below is “Mosiah” writing to “Ammoron”:

Alma 54:5 Behold, Ammoron, I have written unto you somewhat concerning this war which ye have waged against my people, or rather which thy brother hath waged against them, and which ye are still determined to carry on after his death.

Alma 54:16 I am Ammoron, the king of the Lamanites; I am the brother of Amalickiah whom ye have murdered. Behold, I will avenge his blood upon you, yea, and I will come upon you with my armies for I fear not your threatenings.

This is an (let’s say allegorical) exchange of letters between Rigdon and Joseph as they struggle for leadership, reflected within the book, with Joseph eventually usurping Rigdon, who was supposed to be the prophet, priest, and king - or prophet, revelator, and seer if you prefer.

I’m saying the book is an encoded confessional that seals the group together through blood.

I’ll never be able to prove it, because the evidence is only found within the book.

It’s also why I’ll never write a book. Reflecting the book as an allegory is a better approach.

And here:

Helaman 9:25 And now behold, I will show unto you another sign, and see if ye will in this thing seek to destroy me.

26 Behold I say unto you: Go to the house of Seantum, who is the brother of Seezoram, and say unto him—

27 Has Nephi, the pretended prophet, who doth prophesy so much evil concerning this people, agreed with thee, in the which ye have murdered Seezoram, who is your brother?

28 And behold, he shall say unto you, Nay.

29 And ye shall say unto him: Have ye murdered your brother?

30 And he shall stand with fear, and wist not what to say. And behold, he shall deny unto you; and he shall make as if he were astonished; nevertheless, he shall declare unto you that he is innocent.

I think poor old Seantum, whoever he is, got framed:

Helaman 9:31 But behold, ye shall examine him, and ye shall find blood upon the skirts of his cloak.

32 And when ye have seen this, ye shall say: From whence cometh this blood? Do we not know that it is the blood of your brother?

33 And then shall he tremble, and shall look pale, even as if death had come upon him.

34 And then shall ye say: Because of this fear and this paleness which has come upon your face, behold, we know that thou art guilty.

I think Seantum was Oliver. To be clear. Allegorically of course.

Last bit:

Read Nephi 4 again and notice this:

Nephi 4:23 And I spake unto him as if it had been Laban.

Laban’s servant, later identified as Zoram, didn’t recognize that Nephi wasn’t Laban. They sounded alike, Nephi put on Laban’s clothes and passed himself as Laban.

If Nephi’s storyline mirrors Joseph’s as many have recognized, then what happened here?

Just as an aside, allegorically, Zoram is Sidney Rigdon.