Where did the Book of Mormon Take Place?

[Zosimus]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

So only him?

As Weebles mentioned, it is also in the A1 volume of the History of the Church, which was partly dictated and edited by Joseph Smith. The George A. Smith account published later is almost word-for-word, so the History of the Church version must have been taken from his journal? There is an insertion in the paragraph that attributes the account to Joseph Smith, suggesting the editors (if not Joseph himself) intended the account to be first person:

After reading the full entry, I am surprised that the camp was not making an effort to fool the attendees into thinking they were a camp full of liberal freethinkers. They served sacrament to all attendees, and it was only Joseph's speech that was not related to a Christian topic like baptism or free grace or restorationism. It was Joseph who decided the topic and the speaker, so I wonder why Joseph chose to speak on liberal freethinking, when he could have given himself any topic he wanted.

Makes me think either, 1. he was very comfortable with the topic, or 2. he wanted to communicate ideas that resembled liberal freethinking. I suppose there are other options, but those two seem most logical to me

[webbles]

2 hours ago, Zosimus said:

As Weebles mentioned, it is also in the A1 volume of the History of the Church, which was partly dictated and edited by Joseph Smith. The George A. Smith account published later is almost word-for-word, so the History of the Church version must have been taken from his journal? There is an insertion in the paragraph that attributes the account to Joseph Smith, suggesting the editors (if not Joseph himself) intended the account to be first person:

Per Joseph Smith Papers, the History of the Church was written in first person even when the original source wasn't in first person.  I know this has caused some confusion previously where we thought Joseph did something himself and then when we finally found the original source, it wasn't Joseph who did it.

Also, per Joseph Smith Papers (who is quoting Brigham Young), only the first 42 pages were read and revised by Joseph.  So this page would have been done after his death.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/intro/introduction-to-history-1838-1856-manuscript-history-of-the-church

Quote

According to Brigham Young, JS read and revised only forty-two pages of text before his death.6 Afterwards, Young, Heber C. Kimball, George A. Smith, and others carried on the task of reviewing and approving the work of the historians.

 

[Zosimus]

6 minutes ago, webbles said:

Per Joseph Smith Papers, the History of the Church was written in first person even when the original source wasn't in first person.  I know this has caused some confusion previously where we thought Joseph did something himself and then when we finally found the original source, it wasn't Joseph who did it.

Also, per Joseph Smith Papers (who is quoting Brigham Young), only the first 42 pages were read and revised by Joseph.  So this page would have been done after his death.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/intro/introduction-to-history-1838-1856-manuscript-history-of-the-church

Yes, the George A. Smith journal is nearly word-for-word, so it must come from there, with the [as I was called] insertion added later. The question would be when did the editors gain access to George A. Smith's journal? He was only 16 during Zion's Camp, and it seems he is writing much of it from memory after the fact.

[webbles]

10 hours ago, the narrator said:

It's simple. Either Lucy was wrong or she was lying. Besides Lucy also reporting an even younger Joseph saying: "But I will take my Bible and go out into the woods and learn more in two hours than you could if you were to go to meeting two years," it is VERY clear that by the time he was speaking the Book of Mormon he could seamlessly interweave passages from all over the Bible into he sermons and writings. 

Now, it could be the case that Lucy was only saying that Joseph had never read the Bible from beginning to end, and that may very well be true, though unlikely. It is far more likely that she, like Emma, was concerned with defending Joseph's legacy and deliberately overplayed the idea of Joseph being the village idiot.

The Collesville letters are authored by both John Whitmer and Joseph Smith.  That article just assumes that it is all Joseph Smith but what if it was mostly John Whitmer?  We have other letters from Joseph Smith, do they show the ability to "seamlessly interweave passages"?

[webbles]

22 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

Yes, the George A. Smith journal is nearly word-for-word, so it must come from there, with the [as I was called] insertion added later. The question would be when did the editors gain access to George A. Smith's journal? He was only 16 during Zion's Camp, and it seems he is writing much of it from memory after the fact.

George A Smith was involved in the creation of the History of the Church.  He did a lot of the authoring and editing post 1850s.  So, he easily could have used his own journals or his own memory.

Edited to add: This is the A-1 book which was finished before leaving Nauvoo.  So that would be before George A Smith was heavily involved.  I wonder if the George A Smith's journal entry is actually quoting the History vs the History quoting him?

Edited April 28 by webbles

[Zosimus]

8 minutes ago, webbles said:

I wonder if the George A Smith's journal entry is actually quoting the History vs the History quoting him?

That was my first thought, but George's journal has far more detail, such as: 

"When the spies first began to question us, it was observed that they picked out the greenest looking fellows in the Camp to quiz. As I was only 16, very large of my age, my eyes weak and naturally deficient of sight, wore a pair of striped bed-tick pantaloons, which were worn off on the inside, nearly up to my knees on account of my interfering as I walked, my straw hat having been smashed by accidentally sitting on it in the tent, Joseph invited me to throw myself in a position to answer such questions; and on passing through the towns I generally fell somewhat in the rear cutting a sorry figure which naturally singled me out — on the principle that children and fools always tell the truth. In this way I had many amusing conversations with inquisitive strangers. I tried to treat them with kindness and urbanity, but presume very few of them gained much information by talking with me."

And if History isn't sourcing the account from GAS, then I don't know where else it would be coming from

[webbles]

1 minute ago, Zosimus said:

That was my first thought, but George's journal has far more detail, such as: 

"When the spies first began to question us, it was observed that they picked out the greenest looking fellows in the Camp to quiz. As I was only 16, very large of my age, my eyes weak and naturally deficient of sight, wore a pair of striped bed-tick pantaloons, which were worn off on the inside, nearly up to my knees on account of my interfering as I walked, my straw hat having been smashed by accidentally sitting on it in the tent, Joseph invited me to throw myself in a position to answer such questions; and on passing through the towns I generally fell somewhat in the rear cutting a sorry figure which naturally singled me out — on the principle that children and fools always tell the truth. In this way I had many amusing conversations with inquisitive strangers. I tried to treat them with kindness and urbanity, but presume very few of them gained much information by talking with me."

And if History isn't sourcing the account from GAS, then I don't know where else it would be coming from

I found Heber C. Kimball's journal of the same day and it is really similar to what is in the History.  It is printed 1845 so it is after the A-1 book is done and it is possible that he is copying from what is in the History  https://archive.org/details/TimesAndSeasons18391846/page/n1763/mode/2up

Quote

 On Sunday, June 1st, we had preaching all doy, and many of theinhobitants of the town came out to hear. Brother John Carter preached in the morning. By this time the inhabitants began to flock down in companies to hear preaching, as they understood we were professors of religion and hod had a meeting in the morning. Brother Joseph then proposed that some of the brethren should set forth different portions of the gospel in theii discourses, as held by the religious world. He called upon brother Joaeph Young to preach upon the principles of free salvation. He then called upon brother Brigham Young to speak* who set forth baptism as essential to salvation. He wai followed by broiber Orson Hyde who proved by the scriptures that baptism was for the remission of sins. He next called upon brother Lyman Johnson, who spoke at some length upon the necessity of men being upright in their w&lk } and keeping the Sabbath day holy. He then called upon brother Orson Pratt who delivered an excellent discourse on the principles of the final restoration of all things. The services of the day were concluded by a powerful exhortation from Eleazer Miller. Hie voree was said to be heard a milo and a half.

Interestingly, it doesn't mention Joseph Smith preaching anything.

[Zosimus]

11 hours ago, the narrator said:

And besides books, Joseph had access to newspapers that republished stories from across the country and were a wealth of information.

WW Phelps was an editor of one in nearby Canandaiga. Phelps has a lot of telling phraseology that gives away his learning. He certainly had access to books, journals and editorials from all over the country, and Europe. Phelps read the Book of Mormon just 3 days after it was published and a year later was called to "to head printing and publishing for the Church"

I think we often overlook that much of the unique theology in Mormonism was developed after 1830, when Joseph was swimming in theological, philosophical and political conversations, and lots of print

Edited April 28 by Zosimus

[the narrator]

11 hours ago, webbles said:

We have other letters from Joseph Smith, do they show the ability to "seamlessly interweave passages"?

I have not looked into them, nor have the skills to easily recognize them like Nick Frederick does. However, we have a whole slew of revelations from Joseph that do that same and which, according to Grant Underwood and other JSPP editors, Joseph definitely had a role in the language.

This is all really besides the point, though. The seamless integration of biblical passages in Joseph's letters, revelations, and the Bible are all similar and mirror the same in the revivals sermons that Joseph was attending and apparently paying close attention to. Furthermore, the BofM directly quotes published sermons from Joseph's time. That is indisputable. That does not preclude it from being a translation, but it does demand that the English language translation originate in the 19th century. And a simple application of Occam's Razor points to Joseph being the one quoting KJV passages in each.

[webbles]

3 hours ago, the narrator said:

I have not looked into them, nor have the skills to easily recognize them like Nick Frederick does. However, we have a whole slew of revelations from Joseph that do that same and which, according to Grant Underwood and other JSPP editors, Joseph definitely had a role in the language.

This is all really besides the point, though. The seamless integration of biblical passages in Joseph's letters, revelations, and the Bible are all similar and mirror the same in the revivals sermons that Joseph was attending and apparently paying close attention to. Furthermore, the BofM directly quotes published sermons from Joseph's time. That is indisputable. That does not preclude it from being a translation, but it does demand that the English language translation originate in the 19th century. And a simple application of Occam's Razor points to Joseph being the one quoting KJV passages in each.

I haven't heard about the Book of Mormon quoting published sermons.  Do you have a link to the paper?

[the narrator]

48 minutes ago, webbles said:

I haven't heard about the Book of Mormon quoting published sermons.  Do you have a link to the paper?

A few years back I was looking up passages that Tad Callister, in his awful BofM apologetics book, claimed were evidence of its historicity, and I found these.

(this one is especially interesting, given that it both shares a similar theme as Moroni's final words and is also used as closing remarks

 

These are just a few I found when looking up the quotes Callister provided as evidence of ancient historicity. I am certain more and longer ones could probably be found.

Edited April 28 by the narrator

[webbles]

3 minutes ago, the narrator said:

A few years back I was looking up passages that Tad Callister, in his awful BofM apologetics book, claimed were evidence of its historicity, and I found these.

(this one is especially interesting, given that it both shares a similar theme as Moroni's final words and is also used as closing remarks

 

These are just a few I found when looking up the quotes Callister provided as evidence of ancient historicity. I am certain more and longer ones could probably be found.

Which sermon is this?

[the narrator]

5 minutes ago, webbles said:

Which sermon is this?

It is in a collection of writings by John Wesley, and so I assume he coined it.

[the narrator]

27 minutes ago, the narrator said:

It is in a collection of writings by John Wesley, and so I assume he coined it.

Also, I'm not 100% certain, but I believe that Jonathon Edwards coined the phrase "plan of salvation" or at least popularized it

[Zosimus]

1 hour ago, the narrator said:

I assume he coined it.

Also variations found in a sermon by Jonathan Edwards in 1736, and then published within America

MEN NATURALLY GOD'S ENEMIES. AUGUST, 1736. SERMON, VII.

"A natural man is as full of enmity against God."

[the narrator]

3 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

Also variations found in a sermon by Jonathan Edwards in 1736, and then published within America

MEN NATURALLY GOD'S ENEMIES. AUGUST, 1736. SERMON, VII.

"A natural man is as full of enmity against God."

Nice find

[Zosimus]

57 minutes ago, the narrator said:

Also, I'm not 100% certain, but I believe that Jonathon Edwards coined the phrase "plan of salvation" or at least popularized it

Very funny, after you posted this I also looked up "plan of salvation" in Google Books and one of the same books that came up for my search on "natural man is an enemy to God" popped up again. Both phrases are in one text:

Human nature in its four-fold state by Rev. Boston (1735)

Plan of salvation is in there three times, and it looks like Wesley lifts his passage from Boston almost verbatim

Boston: "Every natural Man is an Enemy to God, as he is revealed in his Word. An infinitely holy, just, powerful, and true Being, is not the God whom he loves, but the God whom he loaths. In effect, Men naturally are Haters of God..."

Wesley: "Every natural man is an enemy to God, as he is revealed in his word, — to an infinitely holy, just, powerful, and true Being. In effect, men are naturally 'haters of God'..."

[the narrator]

4 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

Very funny, after you posted this I also looked up "plan of salvation" in Google Books and one of the same books that came up for my search on "natural man is an enemy to God" popped up again. Both phrases are in one text:

Human nature in its four-fold state by Rev. Boston (1735)

Plan of salvation is in there three times, and it looks like Wesley lifts his passage from Boston almost verbatim

Boston: "Every natural Man is an Enemy to God, as he is revealed in his Word. An infinitely holy, just, powerful, and true Being, is not the God whom he loves, but the God whom he loaths. In effect, Men naturally are Haters of God..."

Wesley: "Every natural man is an enemy to God, as he is revealed in his word, — to an infinitely holy, just, powerful, and true Being. In effect, men are naturally 'haters of God'..."

Yeah, it seems lifting from each other was a common aspect of sermon culture.

[Zosimus]

3 minutes ago, the narrator said:

Yeah, it seems lifting from each other was a common aspect of sermon culture.

Boston's sermons with both phrases had been republished in New York in 1811 by Evert Duyckinck, who coincidentally also published Anthon's Classical Dictionary, which IMO was another source for Book of Mormon narrative elements
 

[webbles]

32 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

Also variations found in a sermon by Jonathan Edwards in 1736, and then published within America

MEN NATURALLY GOD'S ENEMIES. AUGUST, 1736. SERMON, VII.

"A natural man is as full of enmity against God."

I wonder how much older is a phrase like that?  Because it is basically a merger of two KJV phrases from Pauline epistles:

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Romans 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

 

[Zosimus]

On 4/29/2026 at 4:46 AM, webbles said:

I wonder how much older is a phrase like that?  Because it is basically a merger of two KJV phrases from Pauline epistles:

If King Benjamin was the first to formulate it, then he wouldn't have done it by merging 1 Corinthians and Romans. The simpler explanation is that Rev Boston did the merging, Edwards borrowed from him a year later, and then Joseph wrote it into Mosiah 3:19.

[webbles]

5 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

If King Benjamin was the first to formulate it, then he wouldn't have done it by merging 1 Corinthians and Romans. The simpler explanation is that Rev Boston did the merging, Edwards borrowed from him a year later, and then Joseph wrote it into Mosiah 3:19.

Oh, I doubt King Benjamin formulated it.  He wouldn't be speaking in English.  As for how it was translated into English, if we are talking about the EModE issue (which is what I was thinking of), then it could be someone at least a 100 years before Joseph since Boston formulated the English phrase.

[the narrator]

13 hours ago, webbles said:

if we are talking about the EModE issue

Nobody should talk about that because it's stupid--easily one of the worst apologetic arguments made.

[Steve J]

16 hours ago, Zosimus said:

If King Benjamin was the first to formulate it, then he wouldn't have done it by merging 1 Corinthians and Romans. The simpler explanation is that Rev Boston did the merging, Edwards borrowed from him a year later, and then Joseph wrote it into Mosiah 3:19.

I doubt Boston was the first to use that phrase - my guess it and similar variants had been used for years. 

[webbles]

2 hours ago, the narrator said:

Nobody should talk about that because it's stupid--easily one of the worst apologetic arguments made.

I've actually been testing the EModE out with claude.  It is a lot more surprising than I expected.  I thought it would be easy to refute and show that Joseph could do it, but claude is convincing me otherwise.  It is really weird to argue with claude and tell it that Joseph had to have been the author and then have claude point out multiple ways that he couldn't have done it, all using EModE data.  I don't think it is stupid anymore.  I don't know what to make of it, but it can't be easily refuted.