Joseph Smith's Schooling/Vocabulary to produce The Book of Mormon

Bernard Gui · November 28, 2024

On 11/25/2024 at 1:31 PM, Zosimus said:

Howe, Hurlbut and Cole were trying to demonstrate that the Book of Mormon was full of absurdities and contradictions. The Buchanan account would have been evidence that the Book of Mormon was historically accurate. Why would they draw attention to any data that went against their efforts?

They were trying to explain how Joseph could write such a book.

On 11/25/2024 at 1:31 PM, Zosimus said:

Do you doubt that the Buchanan account of Israelites with brass plates fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC was not known in the Hanover-Turnbridge area in the 1810s-1820s?

It doesn't matter if the Buchanan account was or was not known in that area. What matters is if Joseph knew about it. That can't be proved.

On 11/25/2024 at 1:31 PM, Zosimus said:

What exactly in the Book of Mormon was beyond the capabilities of Joseph Smith in 1829?

Well, for starters, writing the book.

Would you please provide a list of all the sources you think Joseph cribbed from?

Edited November 28, 2024 by Bernard Gui

Zosimus · November 28, 2024

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

It doesn't matter if the Buchanan account was or was not known in that area. What matters is if Joseph knew about it. That can't be proved.

That's right, it can't be proved that Joseph Smith was aware of the Star in the East. But it can be proved that Buchanan's sermon was widely discussed in the 1810s and 1820s and The Star in the East was the reason for the formation of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions.

Elijah Lyman of Brookfield Vermont (15-20 miles from the Turnbridge Smiths) was one of the leading figures of the ABCFM. He taught Alfred Finney, one of the first missionaries to preach to the American Indians in the wilderness west of the Mississippi. (source) Elijah Lyman was the father-in-law of John Smith, Joseph Smith Sr's brother. Clarissa (Lyman) Smith was later one of the first to read the Book of Mormon on the Asael Smith side of the family. She converted with John Smith.

Its highly unlikely that Elijah Lyman did not know the Star in the East, since he taught ABCFM missionaries, and received donations from the ABCFM. Joseph Smith's Aunt Clarissa was also a student alongside ABCFM missionary Albert Finney, and would have known the account as well.

So we have two accounts of Israelites from the Tribe of Manasseh fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC with brass plates. Either they have independent origins, or the Book of Mormon account is dependent on Buchanan's sermon. I find the later to be more plausible.

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

Well, for starters, writing the book.

I consider the Book of Mormon to be the most sophisticated American religious text. I'd love to finally find confidence in the conclusion that it is a historical record of Lehites. But if I'm being honest with myself, I don't find anything in the book that would have been impossible for an author like Joseph Smith in 1829.

What exactly in the book was impossible for an author in 1829?

Quote

Would you please provide a list of all the sources you think Joseph cribbed from?

I believe much of the historical background for the Book of Mormon came through conversations with people like Luther Bradish, and others who were familiar with the ideas, lectures and publications of Samuel Mitchill and Charles Anthon. I also believe the Smiths were familiar with the works of Rafinesque, who had passed through Palmyra in 1826.

These texts were also an influence:

KJV, including the apocryphal works of Esdras etc.
Writings of Voltaire - Joseph Smith Sr. frequently declared that the writings of Voltaire were the best Bible
Works of Claudius Buchanan - popular account of Israelites fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC with histories on brass plates
Charles Anthon - Classical Dictionary: Containing a copious account of all the proper names mentioned in ancient authors with the value of coins, weights, and measures, used among the Greeks and Romans

Edited November 28, 2024 by Zosimus

webbles · November 29, 2024

6 hours ago, Zosimus said:

So we have two accounts of Israelites from the Tribe of Manasseh fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC with brass plates. Either they have independent origins, or the Book of Mormon account is dependent on Buchanan's sermon. I find the later to be more plausible.

Where in the Star in the East does it describe an account of Israelites from the Tribe of Manasseh fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC with brass plates?

Zosimus · November 30, 2024

On 11/28/2024 at 5:52 PM, webbles said:

Where in the Star in the East does it describe an account of Israelites from the Tribe of Manasseh fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC with brass plates?

There was a compilation of Buchanan's writings and sermons called The Works of Claudius Buchanan containing his writings and sermons, including The Star in the East. There were at least eight editions published in America before 1813 (i'm still tracking down any others) by at least three different publishers, one in Boston, one in Albany and another in New York City. The 6th Boston edition contains an interesting introduction summarizing the value of Buchanan's writings to the ABCFM. It also opens with an endorsement confirming the importance of this work for American missionaries in the 1810s:

"But much as we have been interested by these sermons, (the Eras of Light and Light of the World) we have felt a still livelier sense excited by the account which follows them, of the Author's Christian Researches in Asia. We should be afraid of appearing extravagant to our readers were we to say all that we think respecting the importance of this work. But we wish them to judge for themselves whether we exceed the bounds of moderation, when we rate its value above that of any other work connected with our Oriental Empire which we have yet seen."

For clarification, the discussion wrt brass plates becomes confusing as Buchanan mentions several different sets of plates throughout his sermons and various accounts of the Cochin Christians and Jews. There were plates of brass (copper in some accounts) within the Jewish communities that Buchanan knew of through the writings of Hamilton and Maurice, these were the plates recording the history of the journey of a group from the Tribe of Manasseh. I've linked to the Maurice account earlier. This is from the Hamilton account:

"The Dutch have here a small Fort, which retains the Name of Cranganore. It lies about a league up the river from the sea. In times of old it bore the name of a kingdom, and was a republic of Jews; who were once so numerous, that they could reckon about 80,000 Families, but, at present, are reduced to 4,000. They have a synagogue at Cochin, not far from the King's Palace, about 2 Miles from the city, in which are carefully kept their records, engraven on copper-plates in Hebrew characters; and when any of the characters decay, they are new cut, so that they can show their own history from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar to this present time. Myn Heer Van Reede before mentioned, about the year 1695, had an abstract of their history translated from the Hebrew into low Dutch. They declare themselves to be of the Tribe of Manasseh, a part whereof was, by order of that haughty conqueror Nebuchadnezzar, carried to the easternmost province of his large empire, which, it seems, reached as far as Cape Comorin, which journey 20,000 of them travelled in three years from their setting out of Babylon. When they arrived in the Malabar country, they found the Inhabitants very civil and hospitable to strangers, giving them liberty of conscience in religious matters, and the free use of reason and industry in economy. There they increased, both in numbers and riches, till in process of time, either by policy or wealth, or both, they came to purchase the little Kingdom of Cranganore." (source)

These brass/copper plates mentioned in the accounts of Reede, Maurice and Hamilton were the plates that Buchanan was hoping to discover among the Jews of Cochin. He finally did find them and determined that they were legal deeds and land grants instead of histories. He also found Christian tablets of brass held by the Syrian Christians in Cochin. Buchanan wasn't able to translate these plates, so he had them copied and returned with the etchings to London. He also discusses brass plates that functioned as plaques in the churches of the Dutch mission. All his various accounts of metal plates get confused in the different commentaries. Through all this, one thing is certain. Americans in the 1820s were well aware that the ancient Israelites and Christians of Asia were inscribing what Buchanan believed to be Babylonian (Chaldean/Assyrian cuneiform), Palmyrene Hebrew/Aramiac and other unidentified scripts on metal plates. Here's what Buchanan said about the Syrian Christian plates:

"The Christian Tablets are six in number. They are composed of a mixed metal. The engraving on the largest plate is thirteen inches long by about four broad. They are closely written four of them on both sides of the plate, making in all eleven pages. On the plate reputed to be the oldest, there is writing perspicuously engraved in nail-headed or triangular headed letters resembling the Persepolitan or Babylonish. On the same plate there is writing in another character, which is supposed to have no affinity with any existing character in Hindostan. The grant on this appears to be witnessed by four Jews of rank, whose names are distinctly engraved in an old Hebrew character resembling the alphabet called the Palmyrene, and to each name is prefixed the title of 'Magan,' or Chief, as the Jews translated it. It may be doubted, whether there exist in the world many documents of so great length which are of equal antiquity, and in such faultless preservation, as the Christian Tablets of Malabar."

Edited November 30, 2024 by Zosimus

webbles · December 1, 2024

8 hours ago, Zosimus said:

There was a compilation of Buchanan's writings and sermons called The Works of Claudius Buchanan containing his writings and sermons, including The Star in the East. There were at least eight editions published in America before 1813 (i'm still tracking down any others) by at least three different publishers, one in Boston, one in Albany and another in New York City. The 6th Boston edition contains an interesting introduction summarizing the value of Buchanan's writings to the ABCFM. It also opens with an endorsement confirming the importance of this work for American missionaries in the 1810s:

"But much as we have been interested by these sermons, (the Eras of Light and Light of the World) we have felt a still livelier sense excited by the account which follows them, of the Author's Christian Researches in Asia. We should be afraid of appearing extravagant to our readers were we to say all that we think respecting the importance of this work. But we wish them to judge for themselves whether we exceed the bounds of moderation, when we rate its value above that of any other work connected with our Oriental Empire which we have yet seen."

For clarification, the discussion wrt brass plates becomes confusing as Buchanan mentions several different sets of plates throughout his sermons and various accounts of the Cochin Christians and Jews. There were plates of brass (copper in some accounts) within the Jewish communities that Buchanan knew of through the writings of Hamilton and Maurice, these were the plates recording the history of the journey of a group from the Tribe of Manasseh. I've linked to the Maurice account earlier. This is from the Hamilton account:

"The Dutch have here a small Fort, which retains the Name of Cranganore. It lies about a league up the river from the sea. In times of old it bore the name of a kingdom, and was a republic of Jews; who were once so numerous, that they could reckon about 80,000 Families, but, at present, are reduced to 4,000. They have a synagogue at Cochin, not far from the King's Palace, about 2 Miles from the city, in which are carefully kept their records, engraven on copper-plates in Hebrew characters; and when any of the characters decay, they are new cut, so that they can show their own history from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar to this present time. Myn Heer Van Reede before mentioned, about the year 1695, had an abstract of their history translated from the Hebrew into low Dutch. They declare themselves to be of the Tribe of Manasseh, a part whereof was, by order of that haughty conqueror Nebuchadnezzar, carried to the easternmost province of his large empire, which, it seems, reached as far as Cape Comorin, which journey 20,000 of them travelled in three years from their setting out of Babylon. When they arrived in the Malabar country, they found the Inhabitants very civil and hospitable to strangers, giving them liberty of conscience in religious matters, and the free use of reason and industry in economy. There they increased, both in numbers and riches, till in process of time, either by policy or wealth, or both, they came to purchase the little Kingdom of Cranganore." (source)

These brass/copper plates mentioned in the accounts of Reede, Maurice and Hamilton were the plates that Buchanan was hoping to discover among the Jews of Cochin. He finally did find them and determined that they were legal deeds and land grants instead of histories. He also found Christian tablets of brass held by the Syrian Christians in Cochin. Buchanan wasn't able to translate these plates, so he had them copied and returned with the etchings to London. He also discusses brass plates that functioned as plaques in the churches of the Dutch mission. All his various accounts of metal plates get confused in the different commentaries. Through all this, one thing is certain. Americans in the 1820s were well aware that the ancient Israelites and Christians of Asia were inscribing what Buchanan believed to be Babylonian (Chaldean/Assyrian cuneiform), Palmyrene Hebrew/Aramiac and other unidentified scripts on metal plates. Here's what Buchanan said about the Syrian Christian plates:

"The Christian Tablets are six in number. They are composed of a mixed metal. The engraving on the largest plate is thirteen inches long by about four broad. They are closely written four of them on both sides of the plate, making in all eleven pages. On the plate reputed to be the oldest, there is writing perspicuously engraved in nail-headed or triangular headed letters resembling the Persepolitan or Babylonish. On the same plate there is writing in another character, which is supposed to have no affinity with any existing character in Hindostan. The grant on this appears to be witnessed by four Jews of rank, whose names are distinctly engraved in an old Hebrew character resembling the alphabet called the Palmyrene, and to each name is prefixed the title of 'Magan,' or Chief, as the Jews translated it. It may be doubted, whether there exist in the world many documents of so great length which are of equal antiquity, and in such faultless preservation, as the Christian Tablets of Malabar."

That doesn't look like Buchanan's writings include the brass plates from a tribe of Manessah. If I understand you, you are saying that Buchanan knew about it (from Maurice and Hamilton). But this information wasn't passed on by Buchanan. So it wasn't part of Buchanan's well known writings. Are you also saying that Maurice and Hamilton were well known?

Bernard Gui · December 3, 2024

On 11/28/2024 at 1:49 PM, Zosimus said:

That's right, it can't be proved that Joseph Smith was aware of the Star in the East. But it can be proved that Buchanan's sermon was widely discussed in the 1810s and 1820s and The Star in the East was the reason for the formation of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions.

Elijah Lyman of Brookfield Vermont (15-20 miles from the Turnbridge Smiths) was one of the leading figures of the ABCFM. He taught Alfred Finney, one of the first missionaries to preach to the American Indians in the wilderness west of the Mississippi. (source) Elijah Lyman was the father-in-law of John Smith, Joseph Smith Sr's brother. Clarissa (Lyman) Smith was later one of the first to read the Book of Mormon on the Asael Smith side of the family. She converted with John Smith.

Its highly unlikely that Elijah Lyman did not know the Star in the East, since he taught ABCFM missionaries, and received donations from the ABCFM. Joseph Smith's Aunt Clarissa was also a student alongside ABCFM missionary Albert Finney, and would have known the account as well.

So we have two accounts of Israelites from the Tribe of Manasseh fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC with brass plates. Either they have independent origins, or the Book of Mormon account is dependent on Buchanan's sermon. I find the later to be more plausible.

I want to make sure I understand this most plausible explanation for the Book of Mormon...

1. During the 1810s and 20s, Buchanan's sermon containing the account of Cochin/Jews exiled in 600 BC/brass plates was a frequent object of discussion in New England and especially in Palmyra NY.

2. Lyman and Finney (key members of ABCFM which was founded because of wide-spread interest in Buchanan's sermons) shared this information with their relatives/student John and Clarissa Smith.

3. John and Clarissa Smith (who later converted to the Mormon Church after reading the Book of Mormon) shared it with the Joseph Smith Sr. family in their frequent intellectual family discussions.

4. Joseph Smith obtained this knowledge (which served as the catalyst for his creation of the Book of Mormon):

A. from Joseph Smith Sr who heard it from John and Clarissa Smith,

B. from John and Clarissa Smith directly,

C. while participating in or hearing it in excited discussions on the streets of Palmyra,

D. by reading it himself in nearby libraries, or

E. by some combination of the above.

Inspired by this narrative, Joseph then conceived of the idea to create a massive history of another group of Manassehites who fled Jerusalem in 600BC carrying their scriptures on brass plates, and kept their chronicles engraved on golden plates that were buried to be discovered and translated centuries later.

On 11/28/2024 at 1:49 PM, Zosimus said:

I consider the Book of Mormon to be the most sophisticated American religious text.

I agree with this assessment.

On 11/28/2024 at 1:49 PM, Zosimus said:

I'd love to finally find confidence in the conclusion that it is a historical record of Lehites. But if I'm being honest with myself, I don't find anything in the book that would have been impossible for an author like Joseph Smith in 1829. What exactly in the book was impossible for an author in 1829?

Everything in the book was impossible for Joseph because he was absolutely not a typical author in 1829. He showed no previous bent for literary achievement that could explain the fact that he could write the most sophisticated American religious text. That author would have been older and better educated like Spalding or E. Smith who were in their later years and were ordained ministers and college graduates. No other authors in 1829 wrote their one and only magnum opus without some sort of advanced education, literary experience, and financial means. Do you have any other particular author in mind?

On 11/28/2024 at 1:49 PM, Zosimus said:

I believe much of the historical background for the Book of Mormon came through conversations with people like Luther Bradish, and others who were familiar with the ideas, lectures and publications of Samuel Mitchill and Charles Anthon. I also believe the Smiths were familiar with the works of Rafinesque, who had passed through Palmyra in 1826.

These texts were also an influence:

KJV, including the apocryphal works of Esdras etc.

Writings of Voltaire - Joseph Smith Sr. frequently declared that the writings of Voltaire were the best Bible

Works of Claudius Buchanan - popular account of Israelites fleeing Jerusalem in 600 BC with histories on brass plates

Charles Anthon - Classical Dictionary: Containing a copious account of all the proper names mentioned in ancient authors with the value of coins, weights, and measures, used among the Greeks and Romans

To be clear, Joseph was familiar with:

1. the words and thoughts of Luther Bradish, Samuel Mitchill, and Charles Anthon,

2. the works on Native Americans by Rafinesque (who passed through Palmyra in 1826),

3. the King James Bible and the apocrypha,

4. Buchanan's works about his studies in the Far East

5. and Charles Anthon's Classical Dictionary.

----1. How would Joseph know of their works? Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Martin Harris was familiar with the academic words and thoughts of Mitchill, Anton, and especially his friend Bradish? But how did this familiarity make its way into the translation? To protect their reputations, those men would have denounced the Book of Mormon as plagiarism once it was published.

----2. Rafinesque passed through Palmyra in 1826 so the Smiths became familiar with his thoughts on Native Americans? His major study on Native Americans, The American Nations, was not published until 1836, but perhaps he gave lectures or spoke with the folks in Palmyra and the Smiths as he passed through.

----3. Familiar with the Bible, but by all accounts he was not a student of the scriptures at this time.

----4. I just slogged my way through "The Star in the East: A Sermon Preached in the Parish Church of St. James, Bristol, Feb 26, 1809.". As I read, I highlighted your quote above and several others regarding scroll, plates, and the Ten Tribes. I find very little to support your claims. I have to hand it to the scholars who were able to sit through it. However, I did find this obscure reference which we can add to "Comorin" and our list of Joseph's sources, this one from “the Byzantine writers”....in a post-publication letter to Buchanan from a friend...

Quote

In Samarchand, the city of Tamerlane, there are 50,000 Jews under the presidency of Rabbi Obadiah: and in the mountains and cities of Nisbor, there are four tribes of Israel resident, viz. Dan, Zabulon, Asher, and Naphtali." It is remarkable that the people of Zagathai should be constantly called Ephthalites and Nephihali[t]es by the Byzantine writers, who alone had any information concerning them.

----5. Anthon's Classical Dictionary is massive and impenetrable. I can't fathom how Joseph could have accessed this and used it as a source. I would appreciate you selecting the relevant names and places that Joseph cribbed from it.

And Hannah Adams and Maurice who were discussed earlier as sources.

Thank you for sharing your research in such a patient manner. It's important to me to go to original sources rather than depend on another person's use of them.

In my opinion, there is little probability that Joseph drew from any or all of these arcane sources in his translation of the Book of Mormon. That Joseph absorbed so many tidbits of information from such disparate sources and then recalled them all to produce the Book of Mormon is not reasonable.

Edited December 11, 2024 by Bernard Gui

Zosimus · December 12, 2024

Apologies for the slow response, been traveling over Thanksgiving holiday.

On 12/4/2024 at 1:14 AM, Bernard Gui said:

I want to make sure I understand this most plausible explanation for the Book of Mormon...

I don't know if it's the most plausible explanation, but it is one plausible explanation out of many. There are numerous paths that the information in The Works of Claudius Buchanan could have reached Joseph Smith.

On 12/4/2024 at 1:14 AM, Bernard Gui said:

Inspired by this narrative, Joseph then conceived of the idea to create a massive history of another group of Manassehites who fled Jerusalem in 600BC carrying their scriptures on brass plates, and kept their chronicles engraved on golden plates that were buried to be discovered and translated centuries later.

Buchanan mentions in Christian Researches that the Cochin Jews told him of 65 other colonies of Israelites beyond India. I believe this is why Jacob tells us "wherefore as it says isles, there must needs be more than this, and they are inhabited also by our brethren." Jacob is aware that other Israelites had been led away to the isles of the sea at some point before 559 BC.

As for the record on metal plates. Joseph Smith Sr. told Fayette Lapham that the Lehites had kept a record of their journey down the Arabian Peninsula on brass plates. (source) Buchanan also stated that the Cochin Jews had ket a record of their journey down the Arabian Peninsula on brass plates. According to Fayette Lapham, the Lehites were later instructed to transfer the record on the brass plates to gold plates.

On 12/4/2024 at 1:14 AM, Bernard Gui said:

Everything in the book was impossible for Joseph because he was absolutely not a typical author in 1829. He showed no previous bent for literary achievement that could explain the fact that he could write the most sophisticated American religious text. That author would have been older and better educated like Spalding or E. Smith who were in their later years and were ordained ministers and college graduates. No other authors in 1829 wrote their one and only magnum opus without some sort of advanced education, literary experience, and financial means. Do you have any other particular author in mind?

I don't have another author in mind. I think Joseph Smith was capable. His translation work on the Old Testament, which began just four months after the Book of Mormon was published, demonstrates his capabilities in 1830.

On 12/4/2024 at 1:14 AM, Bernard Gui said:

To be clear, Joseph was familiar with:

1. the words and thoughts of Luther Bradish, Samuel Mitchill, and Charles Anthon,
2. the works on Native Americans by Rafinesque (who passed through Palmyra in 1826),
3. the King James Bible and the apocrypha,
4. Buchanan's works about his studies in the Far East
5. and Charles Anthon's Classical Dictionary.

1. Yes, Martin Harris would have informed Joseph about the discussions he had with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon.
2. The reason I mention Rafinesque is because he was a friend of Mitchill. Rafinesque also claimed to translate a spiritual history of American Indians from material he acquired in 1820.
3. Yes, Joseph demonstrates his familiarity with the KJV in his letters to the Colesville saints in 1830. "Other than the very first sentence, every sentence contains at least one biblical quotation, allusion, or echo, with many of them containing more than one." (source)
4. The Works of Claudius Buchanan were widely distributed and discussed. There are numerous paths that this information could have reached Joseph. His Aunt Clarissa is just one path. Bradish is another. Mitchill and Anthon would have also known the publications of Buchanan.
5. Harris met with Anthon just a few months previous to his work as scribe for the translation of the Book of Mormon. We don't know the contents of their discussion, but Anthon's comments would have been in line with the material he published in the 1827 version of his Classical Dictionary. As you say, this is a heavy text. I'm working on a summary of the material.

On 12/4/2024 at 1:14 AM, Bernard Gui said:

In my opinion, there is little probability that Joseph drew from any or all of these arcane sources in his translation of the Book of Mormon. That Joseph absorbed so many tidbits of information from such disparate sources and then recalled them all to produce the Book of Mormon is not reasonable.

These sources were not arcane in 1829. They were widely published and discussed. I've found hundreds of references to Buchanan and Anthon in the years before the publication of the Book of Mormon. Martin Harris even met with the author of the Classical Dictionary. He also met with America's most knowledgable professor and his friend who had traveled by camelback through the region described in what was the Book of Lehi.

Again, what exactly do you find in the Book of Mormon that would not have been known to this small circle (Joseph Smith, Martin Harris, Luther Bradish, Samuel Mitchill and Charles Anthon) involved in the discussion of the characters found on the gold plates just two or three months before translation work commenced?

Zosimus · December 12, 2024

On 11/28/2024 at 12:27 AM, Kevin Christensen said:

Howe, Hurbut, and Cole were also trying to explain the Book of Mormon. The neighbors expected an absurd silly book (see The Book of Pukei) and when Joseph produced a formidable book, they looked for other potential authors such as Spaulding or Rigdon. At the time, no one mentioned View of the Hebrews or The Great War. John Gee noticed the implications of Pukei, Manuscript Found, and View of the Hebrews:

More than the Smiths, I think the neighbors that expected an absurd silly book were the ignoramuses. We know from Fayette Lapham that the core narrative or mythology was in tact and discussed in the year before publication. Smith Sr. gave Lapham a detailed and mostly accurate summary in 1829. As I mentioned in the comment above, I believe this mythology borrows from Buchanan's 1809 accounts of historical Israelites that had fled Jerusalem to establish unknown colonies in distant lands in 600 BC.

On 11/28/2024 at 12:27 AM, Kevin Christensen said:

In The Great Angel, Margaret Barker observed that the exile in Babylon provides a great obstacle to anyone trying to reconstruct what was going in in Jerusalem 600BCE. Joseph Smith and Barker use very different methods and sources. It would not be surprising if their pictures were mutually contradictory and very different. Indeed, Barker used the evidence of pre-Christian writings preserved only by Christian writers and discovered only by the accidents of archeology subsequent to the production of the Book of Mormon.

Which pre-Christian writings preserved only by Christian writers does Barker refer to?

Margaret Barker has discussed groups of Israelites in China that she believes fled the reforms of Josiah. The Kaifeng Jews are another group that, according to their own ancient tablets, originated in Jerusalem and established colonies in India and China. These are the same Israelites that Buchanan encountered in Cochin India.

I've gone through the Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem link you shared. But we need to remember that Luther Bradish actually got a glimpse of Egypt, Jerusalem and Syria nine years before he was asked by Joseph (according to the Lapham account) and also Harris to comment on the characters found on the gold plates.

On 11/28/2024 at 12:27 AM, Kevin Christensen said:

Rather than deal with any of this, I have noticed that most critics like to cite a few high level parallels, and to ignore the vast majority of this work. Nibley observed that Book of Mormon critics have made an art of explaining the whole of the Book of Mormon via a very small part.

Perhaps critics individually don't deal with all of it. But as a whole the critics do respond to all the proposed parallels. As a whole, I don't see anything in the Book of Mormon that would not have been known to the circle of people that were involved in the discussion about the characters taken from the gold plates a few months previous to the translation of the Book of Lehi.

To follow the question I asked above. What exactly in the mythology of the Book of Lehi would not have been known to Luther Bradish, who had traveled overland by camel with Bedouin traders from Cairo to Jerusalem? Joseph Smith Sr. told Fayette Lapham that Joseph Jr. discussed the gold plate characters with Bradish. Harris also met with Bradish. We don't know what was discussed but its not unlikely that Bradish would have mentioned his travels with proper Bedouins through the desert from the Red Sea to Jerusalem.

On 11/28/2024 at 12:27 AM, Kevin Christensen said:

Lehi and Mulek and the Jaredites are all different than Lost 10 Tribes notions.

Lehi was Tribe of Manasseh, one of the "Lost" 10 Tribes.

webbles · December 12, 2024

11 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

I've gone through the Glimpses of Lehi's Jerusalem link you shared. But we need to remember that Luther Bradish actually got a glimpse of Egypt, Jerusalem and Syria nine years before he was asked by Joseph (according to the Lapham account) and also Harris to comment on the characters found on the gold plates.

Let me get this straight: For the last 4 years, Joseph has been saying that he has been told that there is an ancient book that he found. After he supposedly gets it, he then writes down some gibberish on paper and goes to Bradish and asks his opinion about it. Bradish talks about his own history and Joseph decides to write a book using what Bradish just told him.

So, what was he planning on writing before he met Bradish? It sounds like you are saying that Joseph came up with the entire story in just the few days between meeting with Bradish and starting the "translation"? Because the entire start of the Book of Lehi (per Lapham) supposedly matches what Bradish told Joseph (per you).

By the way, Lapham also says that Joseph went to New York to ask experts. We know that didn't happen. So he is almost definitely getting Martin and Joseph mixed up in that part.

Bernard Gui · December 12, 2024

2 hours ago, Zosimus said:

Again, what exactly do you find in the Book of Mormon that would not have been known to this small circle (Joseph Smith, Martin Harris, Luther Bradish, Samuel Mitchill and Charles Anthon) involved in the discussion of the characters found on the gold plates just two or three months before translation work commenced?

Perhaps all those good men were unwittingly finding evidences that that which transpired with the Book of Mormon peoples was true? That there really were Israelites scattered abroad who followed similar practices as the Lehites. That the best method to preserve records is to engrave them on metal. Etc.

What did Joseph contribute to the mix?

The purpose, significance, universality, covenant, and mode of baptism.

Baptism for repentance was performed anciently (before John the Baptist).

Words and commandments given by the voice of God the Father.

The role of the Law of Moses in preparation for the Gospel.

A more comprehensive understanding of the universal resurrection.

A fuller explanation of the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

The pre-mortal and post-mortal bodily nature of Christ.

The pre-mortal existence of man.

The pre-mortal calling of prophets, the significance, and the role of the Holy Priesthood after the order of the Son of God.

The importance of Melchizedek.

A confirmation that Jesus organized a church in the Old World.

The requirement for apostolic authority in administering the ordinances and teaching the gospel.

The role of the 12 Apostles in the final judgment.

The extraordinary status of the Apostle John

A thorough explanation of the sacrament, the prayers, and how it is to be administered.

The necessity, purpose, benefits, and significance of the Fall of Adam.

The restoration of Israel and the gathering of the Jews and the establishment

Identity of the “other sheep.”

The existential dangers of the secrets of Satan/Cain.

A promise that more sacred records will come forth from other people’s.

A rationale for plural marriage.

The importance of the descendants of Joseph of Egypt.

Prophecy and knowledge of Joseph of Egypt

The role the Lehites will play in the end times.

The role of Gentiles in the end times and the gathering of Israel.

The Jaredite/Lehites “land of promise” covenant also pertains to us today.

The position of the United States, North America and the new world in the latter days.

Definition and explanation of the justice and mercy of God.

The imperative of the opposition of good and evil in the Plan of Salvation.

The primacy and inviolability of moral agency.

Foreordination depending on worthiness rather than predestination.

Writings of Jewish prophets not known in the Old Testament.

Explicit prophecies concerning the birth and death of Jesus Christ.

The name of the Savior (Jesus) was known to prophets before he was born.

Jesus Christ is Jehovah.

An appearance of the resurrected Jesus Christ to another group of Israelites in the Americas.

God’s use of natural and technical objects as the means of giving revelation.

A “translator” using stones whose method of revelation parallels the ancient Jewish Urim and Thummim/breastplate/stones.

How Christ is both Father and Son.

How the sins of parents/society affect later generations.

A more complete understanding of Spirit prison/paradise after death.

Our character in the next life will be the same as in this life.

Condemnation of priestcraft.

The Antichrist exposed and exemplified in detail.

The role of the Holy Ghost in confirming true religion and other facts.

The notion that specific plain and precious things were removed from the Bible.

Two aspects of the Atonement. (Gethsemane and Calvary)

Wars of aggression versus wars of defense.

Condemnation of racism.

The notion that leaders in any society should lead by serving.

The importance of keeping written records.

Justification of war to defend liberty and preservation of scripture.

A coherent geography and timeline of Israelites in the Americas.

A great destruction in the Americas at the time of Christ’s death.

(From another board member)….A more detailed account of what transpired in the Garden of Eden:

Two commandments given by God both of which could not be obeyed (mutually exclusive, only one or the other could be kept). One is to keep away from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (do not even touch it). The other is to be fruitful and multiply.
God needed to remove Himself from undue influence that would cause Adam/Eve to favor one choice over the other.
Why would God create a pristine Garden of Eden that was a place of no death and functioned like Utopia? Why would God place both trees that could cause problems? Did not God have the power of creating obedient and wise beings that would have childlike purity without a hint of malice?
Most of the christian world believe that humans born into the world began their existence in the mother's womb (both body and spirit). The BoM teach that we were spirit beings before the Creation. This is a major distinction that helps us to understand the purpose of the Garden of Eden and how it was structured.
The "Big Picture" in describing the Plan of Happiness. It describes what transpired in the Pre-Existence and how the War in Heaven started. The importance of the Fall and the necessity for a Savior to provide the Atonement that enables the Plan of Happiness to be put into operation.
A method for evaluating competing paradigms that is not completely paradigm dependent. Alma 32.

Among other things….

If Joseph’s account of how the BoM came to be is dishonest, please explain your understanding of the process he followed to write it using this collection of scholars, farmers, and others as his sources. Did he and/or Harris interrogate them and record his interactions? Did he make notes, outlines, and drafts? Was it all from his memory of conversations? Where and when did he do all this preparatory work? Why didn’t anyone say they observed him doing this? Was it, like Mozart, composed all in his head? Was Harris the real author? If so, why did he pick an obscure uneducated teenager as his front? What was his motive in supporting fraud? Couldn’t he see that Joseph was copying others’ work? During those two or three months, how did he and Joseph put it all together? Was he secretly writing the book as it was being “translated,“ passing pages to Joseph each night to memorize for the next day’s production? During the translation did Joseph read from a prepared manuscript hidden in his hat or under the table? Why didn’t these learned men expose Harris and Smith as frauds and plagiarists? Why didn’t all those eager local discussion participants smoke the plagiarism? Did any of them ever suggest Joseph had stolen his ideas from the experts they so admired? If the countryside was on fire with their writings and discoveries, why didn’t anyone recognize them in Joseph’s stories? How did they explain the sudden appearance of this remarkable book from the hands of a nobody? Why did no one say, “Hey! This is what Buchanan, et al., have been talking about?” One might suppose that the printer and his crew were up on the local scholarly religious excitement, so why didn’t they blow the whistle as they read the manuscripts?

By the way, your method of providing sources is not working.

Edited December 12, 2024 by Bernard Gui

Zosimus · December 12, 2024

34 minutes ago, webbles said:

Let me get this straight: For the last 4 years, Joseph has been saying that he has been told that there is an ancient book that he found. After he supposedly gets it, he then writes down some gibberish on paper and goes to Bradish and asks his opinion about it. Bradish talks about his own history and Joseph decides to write a book using what Bradish just told him.

It wouldn't have been just a few days. It would have been months. And remember, the translation began with the Book of Lehi. Richard Bennet suggest that the 116 pages was the right length of a draft for a literary agent like Bradish to review. Bennet suggests that Bradish was the "particular friend" that was anxious to see the 116 page manuscript. (source)

Bennet's "hypothesis is a simple one. Only four months after Harris had shown Bradish, Anthon, and Mitchill the transcript, he and Joseph Smith had finished translating 116 pages of manuscript. Against his better judgment, Joseph had turned the manuscript over to Harris. After he had shown the transcript to those who were privileged to see it, according to his oath, he laid it aside. Then one day, “a very particular friend made him a visit to whom he related all he knew concerning the record.” Lucy’s account says further: “The man’s curiosity was much excited, and he earnestly desired to see the transcript. Martin was anxious to gratify his friend,” and as we all know, the rest is lost history.

Whoever that “particular friend” was, he was likely no mere acquaintance but someone Harris knew well and regarded so very highly that he was willing to break his oath in the hopes of gaining some real assistance in return. He had to be someone who could have helped with the entire enterprise, someone of means, someone trusted in the community by almost everyone (including Grandin), and someone who would have lent almost instant credibility to the story of the Golden Bible. And if Harris was thinking of a possible publisher, at a time when American publishers were avidly looking for manuscripts (even preliminary portions of manuscripts often from 80 to 120 pages in length), who better than the man he had shown the transcript to earlier in the year—a man who would have been keenly interested in the progress Harris had made on the work in just a few months?"

Quote

So, what was he planning on writing before he met Bradish? It sounds like you are saying that Joseph came up with the entire story in just the few days between meeting with Bradish and starting the "translation"? Because the entire start of the Book of Lehi (per Lapham) supposedly matches what Bradish told Joseph (per you).

It wasn't until 1826 or so, following the Bainbridge trial, that Joseph spoke of the object retrieved from the Hill Cumorah as a gold record. He doesn't seem to make any comment before 1829 about what the nature of the record, or where it came from, or the identity of the characters. This doesn't really happen until Martin returns from his visits with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon.

The scenario above is one plausible scenario to explain the Book of Lehi narrative/mythology. There are others, but which is more plausible for the unbiased observer: 1. Joseph gathers the account as it is written out on a rock, or 2. Joseph pieces the account together from information collected from Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon in the months previous to the translation of the Book of Lehi.

I accept there are many that have good reasons, from spiritual revelation, to answer #1. But there is also good reason to accept that #2 is plausible.

44 minutes ago, webbles said:

By the way, Lapham also says that Joseph went to New York to ask experts. We know that didn't happen. So he is almost definitely getting Martin and Joseph mixed up in that part.

There are additional reasons to believe Joseph Sr. did tell Lapham that Joseph met with Bradish at some point.

1. Lapham claims Sr. said that Jr. met with Crane, who told him the characters resembled those on a travel document Bradish had. This is not in the account Harris gives of his journey to NY.
2. Lapham claims that Joseph Jr. went to visit Mitchill in Franklin County. Harris met with Bradish in a hotel in Albany.
3. We don't know that Joseph Jr. never met with Bradish in Palmyra or Moira, NY or that Joseph didn't also meet with Anthon or Mitchill.

Lapham's mention of Crane's comment about Bradish's Turkish passport and then going to Moira to ask Bradish is very specific. To make it fit into Harris's account we'd have to assume that Sr. was wrong about his son meeting with Crane and then Bradish in Moira, and that it was instead Harris that met with Crane and that Lapham was wrong about Harris following up with Bradish in Albany instead of Moira.

I dunno, Bradish was from Palmyra. It doesn't feel unlikely that at some point in the years after Bradish returns from the Middle East that Joseph had a discussion with him. Harris certainly did.

Zosimus · December 12, 2024

27 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Perhaps all those good men were unwittingly finding evidences that that which transpired with the Book of Mormon peoples was true? That there really were Israelites scattered abroad who followed similar practices as the Lehites. That the best method to preserve records is to engrave them on metal. Etc.

I explored and promoted this hypothesis for over a decade. You can check my posting history here to confirm. I'd love nothing more than to find the data to support it. I can't. The more I research it, the more clear it has become to me. afaict, the knowledge Joseph needed to produce the Book of Mormon was accessible in 1829.

34 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

What did Joseph contribute to the mix?

Thanks, this is helpful and thorough. I'll need some time to respond.

41 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

By the way, your method of providing sources is not working.

I try my best to link to original sources as I also prefer to go straight to the original without all the interpretations. Apologies if I missed something. Let me know and I'll link it.

Bernard Gui · December 12, 2024

20 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

I explored and promoted this hypothesis for over a decade. You can check my posting history here to confirm. I'd love nothing more than to find the data to support it. I can't. The more I research it, the more clear it has become to me. afaict, the knowledge Joseph needed to produce the Book of Mormon was accessible in 1829.

Thanks, this is helpful and thorough. I'll need some time to respond.

I try my best to link to original sources as I also prefer to go straight to the original without all the interpretations. Apologies if I missed something. Let me know and I'll link it.

Accessible? But how? It requires so much dependence on coincidence, memories over periods of time, contortions, speculation, ifs, perhaps, stretched interpretations, and more and more. But it never explains how Joseph could do it.

Thanks, but I really don’t expect you to respond to all that.

The way you provide links to sources does not work. Maybe try another way?

webbles · December 12, 2024

8 hours ago, Zosimus said:

It wouldn't have been just a few days. It would have been months. And remember, the translation began with the Book of Lehi. Richard Bennet suggest that the 116 pages was the right length of a draft for a literary agent like Bradish to review. Bennet suggests that Bradish was the "particular friend" that was anxious to see the 116 page manuscript. (source)

Bennet's "hypothesis is a simple one. Only four months after Harris had shown Bradish, Anthon, and Mitchill the transcript, he and Joseph Smith had finished translating 116 pages of manuscript. Against his better judgment, Joseph had turned the manuscript over to Harris. After he had shown the transcript to those who were privileged to see it, according to his oath, he laid it aside. Then one day, “a very particular friend made him a visit to whom he related all he knew concerning the record.” Lucy’s account says further: “The man’s curiosity was much excited, and he earnestly desired to see the transcript. Martin was anxious to gratify his friend,” and as we all know, the rest is lost history.

Whoever that “particular friend” was, he was likely no mere acquaintance but someone Harris knew well and regarded so very highly that he was willing to break his oath in the hopes of gaining some real assistance in return. He had to be someone who could have helped with the entire enterprise, someone of means, someone trusted in the community by almost everyone (including Grandin), and someone who would have lent almost instant credibility to the story of the Golden Bible. And if Harris was thinking of a possible publisher, at a time when American publishers were avidly looking for manuscripts (even preliminary portions of manuscripts often from 80 to 120 pages in length), who better than the man he had shown the transcript to earlier in the year—a man who would have been keenly interested in the progress Harris had made on the work in just a few months?"

No, it would have been several days. Here's how I see the timeline:

* Joseph goes to Bradish and discusses the gibberish that he wrote. Bradish tells him the stories of Arabia and Joseph decides to include that in his book.

* Joseph returns home and within a few days, starts to do the writing with Martin Harris. This is the Book of Lehi. It takes about 4 months to write out the Book of Lehi as a rough draft.

* Martin then asks to take it to Bradish but Joseph thinks that's a bad idea but is finally persuaded.

So, Joseph wrote the entire Book of Lehi within 4 months. And the beginning of it is pretty much what Bradish would have told Joseph (per you) so Joseph took only a few days to incorporate the new details from Bradish into his story. The 4 months were all writing.

8 hours ago, Zosimus said:

It wasn't until 1826 or so, following the Bainbridge trial, that Joseph spoke of the object retrieved from the Hill Cumorah as a gold record. He doesn't seem to make any comment before 1829 about what the nature of the record, or where it came from, or the identity of the characters. This doesn't really happen until Martin returns from his visits with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon.

The scenario above is one plausible scenario to explain the Book of Lehi narrative/mythology. There are others, but which is more plausible for the unbiased observer: 1. Joseph gathers the account as it is written out on a rock, or 2. Joseph pieces the account together from information collected from Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon in the months previous to the translation of the Book of Lehi.

I accept there are many that have good reasons, from spiritual revelation, to answer #1. But there is also good reason to accept that #2 is plausible.

Ok, 3 years, not 4. We also know, from Lucy, that Joseph was telling stories during this time. So he already knows what he is about to write, and it was going to be about the inhabitants of the American continent.

The problem with #2, is all of that information happened days before he started writing. He started the Book of Lehi within days. Latham gives us a pretty good idea of what was written in the Book of Lehi. I just don't see how those people could have influenced the story telling all that much. It is too close to the beginning of the writing.

8 hours ago, Zosimus said:

Lapham's mention of Crane's comment about Bradish's Turkish passport and then going to Moira to ask Bradish is very specific. To make it fit into Harris's account we'd have to assume that Sr. was wrong about his son meeting with Crane and then Bradish in Moira, and that it was instead Harris that met with Crane and that Lapham was wrong about Harris following up with Bradish in Albany instead of Moira.

Well, we know that Lapham is wrong about Joseph going to Albany.

webbles · December 12, 2024

9 hours ago, Zosimus said:

Lapham's mention of Crane's comment about Bradish's Turkish passport and then going to Moira to ask Bradish is very specific. To make it fit into Harris's account we'd have to assume that Sr. was wrong about his son meeting with Crane and then Bradish in Moira, and that it was instead Harris that met with Crane and that Lapham was wrong about Harris following up with Bradish in Albany instead of Moira.

Where are you seeing "Moira"? Lapham just says "Franklin County". Moira is a city in Franklin County.

And that's quite a travel for Joseph at the time. Google Maps says it is 3 days to walk from Palmyra to Moira.

Edited to add: It is even worse. Joseph was living in Harmony at the time. It is a 7 day walk to Moira from Harmony.

Edited December 12, 2024 by webbles

Zosimus · December 16, 2024

On 12/12/2024 at 9:58 PM, webbles said:

Where are you seeing "Moira"? Lapham just says "Franklin County". Moira is a city in Franklin County. And that's quite a travel for Joseph at the time. Google Maps says it is 3 days to walk from Palmyra to Moira.

Bradish lived in Moira at that time. It was a long walk from Palmyra but one thing I'm just now realizing is that Moira is adjacent to Stockholm, where Asael Smith and most of his children were living in 1829-1830. Joseph's Uncle Jesse had mentioned in his 1829 letter to Hyrum that a messenger had visited his brother Samuel and informed him of the gold plates and the translation project. Some scholars have speculated that this messenger was Martin Harris.

So assuming that Uncle Samuel was around Stockholm at the time (he died in nearby Potsdam in 1830), I'd agree with you that Joseph did not go to Moira as Lapham said. Had Joseph made that trip he surely would have visited his uncles and grandfather 15 miles away, then Uncle Jesse would have known about and mentioned that Joseph was the visitor from Palmyra in his letter to Hyrum that year.

So what would Harris be doing all the way up around Franklin County before June 1829? My guess is that he had assumed Bradish would be at his home in Franklin County. After arriving in Moira and learning that Bradish was in Albany, he changed his plans and went there before going to New York City.

If the above scenario is correct, this means that Harris would have had the characters from the gold plates with him when he met with Uncle Samuel. 🤔

Quote

Edited to add: It is even worse. Joseph was living in Harmony at the time. It is a 7 day walk to Moira from Harmony.

There's one problem with the scenario above. Joseph Sr. told Lapham that Joseph Jr. showed the characters to Crane who had said they resembled the characters on Bradish's travel documents. Crane lived in Macedon near Palmyra, not Harmony. We know from the Barber & Howe account that it was Joseph that met with Crane, seemingly before Harris was even in the picture. (source)

Here's how I see it:

Joseph Jr. collects the gold plates from Cumorah in 1827.
Joseph can't read the characters so he copies them onto a manuscript with the hopes of identifying their origins and getting funding to translate.
Joseph shows the characters to George Crane, who informs Joseph that they resemble those on Bradish's travel documents.
Joseph also shows the characters to Martin Harris who takes them to Moira to compare with Bradish's travel documents.
Bradish is not in Moira so Harris continues to Albany, where he finds Bradish.
Bradish is curious enough to refer Harris to respected scholars Mitchill and Anthon who both confirm the characters are authentically ancient.
Harris returns to Joseph Smith with endorsements and information about the origin of the characters collected from Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon.
Translation of 116 pages of the Book of Lehi begins.
Harris is given the Book of Lehi manuscript and shows it to family members and an unidentified "particular friend" (Bennett proposes this was Bradish).
The Book of Lehi is lost.

My hypothesis is that the Book of Lehi was intended to be a draft of an American Indian history intended to satisfy the interest of Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. The Book of Lehi was based on Buchanan's accounts of Israelites with brass plates who had fled Jerusalem for Comorin (India) and 65 colonies extending into China and farther abroad. Buchanan describes one such group of Tartars as "Nephthalites". Both Mitchill and Anthon believed that the moundbuilders in North America were Polynesians and Tartars (eg. Nephthalites). As late as 1836, Anthon was still actively seeking evidence that these groups originated in Meroe (Egypt) and traveled across the Pacific Ocean by boat to North America.

webbles · December 16, 2024

17 hours ago, Zosimus said:

Here's how I see it:

Joseph Jr. collects the gold plates from Cumorah in 1827.

Joseph can't read the characters so he copies them onto a manuscript with the hopes of identifying their origins and getting funding to translate.

Joseph shows the characters to George Crane, who informs Joseph that they resemble those on Bradish's travel documents.

Joseph also shows the characters to Martin Harris who takes them to Moira to compare with Bradish's travel documents.

Bradish is not in Moira so Harris continues to Albany, where he finds Bradish.

Bradish is curious enough to refer Harris to respected scholars Mitchill and Anthon who both confirm the characters are authentically ancient.

Harris returns to Joseph Smith with endorsements and information about the origin of the characters collected from Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon.

Translation of 116 pages of the Book of Lehi begins.

Harris is given the Book of Lehi manuscript and shows it to family members and an unidentified "particular friend" (Bennett proposes this was Bradish).

The Book of Lehi is lost.

My hypothesis is that the Book of Lehi was intended to be a draft of an American Indian history intended to satisfy the interest of Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. The Book of Lehi was based on Buchanan's accounts of Israelites with brass plates who had fled Jerusalem for Comorin (India) and 65 colonies extending into China and farther abroad. Buchanan describes one such group of Tartars as "Nephthalites". Both Mitchill and Anthon believed that the moundbuilders in North America were Polynesians and Tartars (eg. Nephthalites). As late as 1836, Anthon was still actively seeking evidence that these groups originated in Meroe (Egypt) and traveled across the Pacific Ocean by boat to North America.

http://www.eldenwatson.net/BoM.htm has a possible timeline of the translation process as well as traveling and other factors.

It has Joseph copying the characters in December of 1827 (per his own history). He said he started to copy them once he was at his father-in-law's house, in Pennsylvania. It could be possible that he mispoke/misremembered/lied and that he actually did some copying up in Palmyra and showed them to Crane. How did Joseph come up with authentic looking characters that convinced Crane and Bradish? Did he copy the characters out of a book in the Palmyra library?

It has Harris making it back to Harmony after his travels around at the beginning of March 1828. He then goes back to Palmyra, back to Harmony (with his wife), back to Palmyra, and then back to Harmony to start the translation, which is around the beginning of April.

So, Joseph has 1 month to come up with a story based on all the details that Martin told him about from his travels. That just doesn't feel like enough time, but maybe?

Also, are you supposing that the translation process for the Book of Lehi was different from the rest? The rest appears to be a stream of conscience, with no back tracks, edits (except mispoken edits), etc. Did Joseph and Martin work together to come up with the story, or is it still completely Joseph who came up with all of it?

And where does Buchanan mention Nephthalites? Is it in his well known works that Joseph could have heard about, or is it in works that only Bradish, Mitchel, and Anthon would know about? Same with "Comorin"? I also believe the brass plates idea is not in his well known works since you referenced people that Buchanan would have known about but not what he put in his "Star in the East" sermon.

Edited December 16, 2024 by webbles

Zosimus · January 6, 2025

On 12/17/2024 at 3:03 AM, webbles said:

It has Joseph copying the characters in December of 1827 (per his own history). He said he started to copy them once he was at his father-in-law's house, in Pennsylvania. It could be possible that he mispoke/misremembered/lied and that he actually did some copying up in Palmyra and showed them to Crane.

Crane commented on the characters before Harris met with Bradish. The only two possibilities I see are:

1. Joseph showed Crane the characters before he went to Harmony.
2. Harris returned to Palmyra and showed them to Crane before his trip to Albany to meet Bradish.

The Watson timeline does add the possibility of Harris taking the manuscript to Palmyra before Albany. Since there's no evidence of a characters manuscript before Martin went to Harmony, #2 seems most likely to me.

On 12/17/2024 at 3:03 AM, webbles said:

How did Joseph come up with authentic looking characters that convinced Crane and Bradish?

Crane wasn't convinced. All we know is he thought there was some resemblance to the Arabic characters on a passport Bradish was issued in Constantinople. Crane doesn't seem to believe the characters were authentic, he even advises Smith to stop with the stories else he end up in jail. I'm also unsure Bradish was convinced the characters were authentic. All we know of the discussion with Bradish is what Lapham heard from Joseph Sr., that Bradish advised Smith to go into another occupation. Not much different to what Crane advised Smith.

Quote

Did he copy the characters out of a book in the Palmyra library?

Anthon did mention that he recognized something that looked like the Mexican zodiac in a book published by Humboldt. Joseph Sr. told Lapham that the second page of the plates contained "representations of all the masonic implements, as used by masons at the present day". So there's a strong possibility at least some of the characters were copied out of contemporary books.

Quote

It has Harris making it back to Harmony after his travels around at the beginning of March 1828. He then goes back to Palmyra, back to Harmony (with his wife), back to Palmyra, and then back to Harmony to start the translation, which is around the beginning of April.

So, Joseph has 1 month to come up with a story based on all the details that Martin told him about from his travels. That just doesn't feel like enough time, but maybe?

I'm only suggesting the core narrative of the Book of Lehi was based on the details Martin brought back from his discussions with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. The Watson timeline has Martin discussing the details of his trip to NY with Joseph on March 4, 1828. The translation then begins on April 12, 1828. We know from Joseph Sr's interview with Lapham that the core narrative found in the Book of Lehi was not so complex that it couldn't have been constructed between March 4 and April 12. Martin took the 116 page manuscript to Palmyra on June 15, three months after he returned from his meetings with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. This doesn't seem impossible.

Quote

Also, are you supposing that the translation process for the Book of Lehi was different from the rest? The rest appears to be a stream of conscience, with no back tracks, edits (except mispoken edits), etc. Did Joseph and Martin work together to come up with the story, or is it still completely Joseph who came up with all of it?

We don't have the Book of Lehi so we don't know whether there's evidence of back tracks, edits, mistakes etc.

I believe Joseph dictated the Book of Lehi solo. Joseph Sr. told Lapham that the translation was done using the spectacles. Uncle Jesse also says the messenger told Uncle Samuel that spectacles were involved.

Quote

And where does Buchanan mention Nephthalites? Is it in his well known works that Joseph could have heard about, or is it in works that only Bradish, Mitchel, and Anthon would know about? Same with "Comorin"? I also believe the brass plates idea is not in his well known works since you referenced people that Buchanan would have known about but not what he put in his "Star in the East" sermon.

In The Works of the Reverend Claudius Buchanan here and here

webbles · January 6, 2025

7 hours ago, Zosimus said:

I'm only suggesting the core narrative of the Book of Lehi was based on the details Martin brought back from his discussions with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. The Watson timeline has Martin discussing the details of his trip to NY with Joseph on March 4, 1828. The translation then begins on April 12, 1828. We know from Joseph Sr's interview with Lapham that the core narrative found in the Book of Lehi was not so complex that it couldn't have been constructed between March 4 and April 12. Martin took the 116 page manuscript to Palmyra on June 15, three months after he returned from his meetings with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. This doesn't seem impossible.

It feels really weird to me to have Joseph Smith plan to write a book for the last 3 years, tell stories about it to his family, and then base the core of the book on something that he learns 1 month prior to his starting to write it. Also, the 116 pages is more than just the travel out of Jerusalem. It goes all the way to King Benjamin (D&C 10:41). So the core narrative that Martin could have told him from Bradish, Mitchel, and Anthon would have been written at the beginning. I'm not saying it isn't possible, but it just feels weird.

8 hours ago, Zosimus said:

We don't have the Book of Lehi so we don't know whether there's evidence of back tracks, edits, mistakes etc.

I believe Joseph dictated the Book of Lehi solo. Joseph Sr. told Lapham that the translation was done using the spectacles. Uncle Jesse also says the messenger told Uncle Samuel that spectacles were involved.

I was just wondering if you felt like the Book of Lehi translation was similar to what happened with the rest. If Joseph didn't do editing or backtracking later, then I'll assume he didn't do it previously. Why change his process, especially into a process that is even harder?

Zosimus · January 23, 2025

On 1/7/2025 at 1:09 AM, webbles said:

It feels really weird to me to have Joseph Smith plan to write a book for the last 3 years, tell stories about it to his family, and then base the core of the book on something that he learns 1 month prior to his starting to write it. Also, the 116 pages is more than just the travel out of Jerusalem. It goes all the way to King Benjamin (D&C 10:41). So the core narrative that Martin could have told him from Bradish, Mitchel, and Anthon would have been written at the beginning. I'm not saying it isn't possible, but it just feels weird.

I get that, but if you really break things down and put it in a timeline there's plenty of time to assemble the narrative of the Book of Lehi following the visits with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. Its not much of a stretch to imagine Bradish discussing with Harris his travels along the Red Sea with Bedouin traders, or Mitchill sharing his opinions on the Jewish brass plates of Cochin, or Anthon discussing his theories of Egyptians from Meroe sailing across the Pacific to build temples in the Americas. In short, there's nothing in the Book of Lehi that would have been much of a surprise to the 3 people that examined and commented on the gold plate characters in the months previous to the translation of the 116.

Had Bradish read the 116 page manuscript, would there have been anything there that he would have thought impossible for Joseph to write? If so, what?

Edited January 23, 2025 by Zosimus

webbles · January 23, 2025

11 hours ago, Zosimus said:

I get that, but if you really break things down and put it in a timeline there's plenty of time to assemble the narrative of the Book of Lehi following the visits with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. Its not much of a stretch to imagine Bradish discussing with Harris his travels along the Red Sea with Bedouin traders, or Mitchill sharing his opinions on the Jewish brass plates of Cochin, or Anthon discussing his theories of Egyptians from Meroe sailing across the Pacific to build temples in the Americas. In short, there's nothing in the Book of Lehi that would have been much of a surprise to the 3 people that examined and commented on the gold plate characters in the months previous to the translation of the 116.

Had Bradish read the 116 page manuscript, would there have been anything there that he would have thought impossible for Joseph to write? If so, what?

My issue is that there is only 1 month for Joseph to incorporate what ever Martin heard from those 3. Joseph already had a story planned so it feels really short for him to completely change the beginning to fit this new information. Again, I'm not saying it is impossible, but it just feels weird to me.

webbles · January 23, 2025

15 hours ago, Zosimus said:

I get that, but if you really break things down and put it in a timeline there's plenty of time to assemble the narrative of the Book of Lehi following the visits with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. Its not much of a stretch to imagine Bradish discussing with Harris his travels along the Red Sea with Bedouin traders, or Mitchill sharing his opinions on the Jewish brass plates of Cochin, or Anthon discussing his theories of Egyptians from Meroe sailing across the Pacific to build temples in the Americas. In short, there's nothing in the Book of Lehi that would have been much of a surprise to the 3 people that examined and commented on the gold plate characters in the months previous to the translation of the 116.

Had Bradish read the 116 page manuscript, would there have been anything there that he would have thought impossible for Joseph to write? If so, what?

Also, some of those ideas had to have already been in Joseph's story. The idea of plates is already in the story before Martin talks to the men because Joseph already is saying he has the Golden Plates. And the idea of sailing across the ocean to the Americas is already in the story because it has people in America from the old world. Martin's discussions might have affirmed to Joseph that his story would work, but I'm not sure they would actually have influenced the story that much.

Zosimus · January 24, 2025

11 hours ago, webbles said:

My issue is that there is only 1 month for Joseph to incorporate what ever Martin heard from those 3. Joseph already had a story planned so it feels really short for him to completely change the beginning to fit this new information. Again, I'm not saying it is impossible, but it just feels weird to me.

One month if you're counting from Martin discussing the Bradish/Mitchill/Anthon meetings with Joseph to the first day of translation. Three months if you're counting from Martin discussing with Joseph to the time Martin took the 116 pages to Palmyra.

December to February, 1827 - Joseph copies characters from the gold plates for Martin Harris to take to Luther Bradish, Samuel Mitchill and Charles Anthon.
February 9, 1828 - Martin Harris meets with Luther Bradish in Albany. He continues on to New York City to meet with Samuel Mitchill and Charles Anthon.
March 6-7, 1828 - Martin Harris returns to Harmony and shares the information gathered from his meetings with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon with Joseph Smith Jr.
March 18-31, 1828 - Martin and Lucy Harris visit Joseph Smith in Harmony. Possibility of two weeks of further discussion with Martin about the information recorded from his meetings with Bradish/Mitchill/Anthon.
April 12, 1828 - Translation begins on the Book of Lehi.
June 15, 1828 - Martin Harris takes 116 pages of the Book of Lehi to Palmyra to show his family and a "very particular friend". The manuscript is lost and translation work stops.
November 1828 - Joseph Smith Sr. and Lucy Mack Smith visit with Joseph Smith in Harmony.

----

April-June 1829 - Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery begin translation starting with Alma in April. The replacement text for the Book of Lehi is translated in June, a full year after the completion of the Book of Lehi translation.
March 1830 - Book of Mormon is published and available for purchase.

7 hours ago, webbles said:

Also, some of those ideas had to have already been in Joseph's story.

I don't disagree with you, but there's no evidence for it. When Joseph sends Harris to meet with Bradish, he doesn't seem to have any idea what the characters were or anything about the contents of the plates. This is why I believe Joseph includes this part to the Book of Lehi following the meetings with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon:

"The family [of Lehi] then moved on, for several days, when they were directed to stop and get materials to make brass plates upon which to keep a record of their journey..." But because Joseph had already told everyone the account was on gold plates, he added the following:

"After traveling many days, they came to a mountain, from which they were directed to get gold plates to keep their records upon, and to transfer to them those already on the brass plates. Finishing these, they resumed their journey; and, after traveling many days, came to a wide water, where they were directed to build a vessel."

This way the Book of Lehi became aligned with historical accounts of a group from Manasseh who had left Jerusalem in 600 BC while also explaining how the account of their journey ended up on gold plates.

Quote

And the idea of sailing across the ocean to the Americas is already in the story because it has people in America from the old world. Martin's discussions might have affirmed to Joseph that his story would work, but I'm not sure they would actually have influenced the story that much.

I'm not aware of anything being said about the account on the gold plates, or the setting being the Americas, before Harris met with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. The earliest comment on the setting of the gold plate account seems to be Mitchill telling Harris the characters were authentic, of a nation in the east that is no longer, which he named.

IMO, whichever nation Mitchill named became the setting for the Book of Lehi.

Edited January 24, 2025 by Zosimus

webbles · January 25, 2025

23 hours ago, Zosimus said:

One month if you're counting from Martin discussing the Bradish/Mitchill/Anthon meetings with Joseph to the first day of translation. Three months if you're counting from Martin discussing with Joseph to the time Martin took the 116 pages to Palmyra.

For 2 of those months, he is telling the story. The brass plates, jews in the old world, etc are all in the beginning of the book. So he had only 1 month to come up with it. You can't count the extra 2 months because that was during the transcribing. And it is possible he had even less than 1 month because Emma recounts that she was a scribe and she could have been transcribing before Martin showed up. There is only 1 month to work with.

23 hours ago, Zosimus said:

I'm not aware of anything being said about the account on the gold plates, or the setting being the Americas, before Harris met with Bradish, Mitchill and Anthon. The earliest comment on the setting of the gold plate account seems to be Mitchill telling Harris the characters were authentic, of a nation in the east that is no longer, which he named.

Lucy says that Joseph told the family stories about the inhabitants of this continent. Now, that is an later telling and so could have been misremembered. But it fits the idea that Joseph is making up a story about the ancient inhabitants of his area.

23 hours ago, Zosimus said:

I don't disagree with you, but there's no evidence for it.

It has the same amount of evidence that Joseph incorporated ideas that Martin heard from those 3 men. We have no idea if those 3 men mentioned anything that ended up in the Book of Lehi. If they did, we have no evidence that Martin mentioned it to Joseph. Lapham is useful to try and figure out what might have been in the Book of Lehi but he interviewed Joseph Smith Sr AFTER the Book of Mormon was mostly translated (he talks about the missing 116 pages and talks about the coming of Christ which definitely isn't in the Book of Lehi). Lapham also wrote the interview in 1870. How much of what he is telling is from the Book of Lehi and how much is from the Book of Mormon? Pointing out that Lapham says "make brass plates", does that mean Book of Lehi had them make plates or is Lapham confusing the account of retrieving the brass plates with Nephi being commanded to make plates that is recorded in the Book of Mormon or is Joseph Smith Sr confusing the accounts (because how well did Joseph Smith Sr know the Book of Mormon at that time?)?

Zosimus · January 25, 2025

1 hour ago, webbles said:

So he had only 1 month to come up with it. You can't count the extra 2 months because that was during the transcribing.

It's quite common to add details to stories as you go. I would think most books are written that way. In this case, Joseph could have easily developed the core narrative or an outline of headers within a month, and then added detail to that narrative as he went along over the next two months.

Some of the most prolific authors dictate their books, including Dan Brown and Kevin J. Anderson, a member of the church who has published 165 novels with a total wordcount of 15 millions words. Here's a presentation of him explaining how he wrote On Being a Dictator: Using Dictation to Be a Better Writer in one month, using dictation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CwtdvhFVtY

Joseph had three months from start to finish to dictate the Book of Lehi. Since we know nothing about the dictation process at this point we can't assume there wasn't any editing and revising going on up until Harris took the manuscript to Palmyra in June.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

Lucy says that Joseph told the family stories about the inhabitants of this continent. Now, that is an later telling and so could have been misremembered. But it fits the idea that Joseph is making up a story about the ancient inhabitants of his area.

Are you saying he was dictating stories from the Book of Mormon during these sessions? Maybe. But if so then he was also practicing and perfecting his skills at dictating narratives. This would make it even easier for him to dictate the entire Book of Lehi in one month.

One thing I read recently, William Hyde, a friend of Joseph Smith Sr. had said something very similar independent of Lucy Smith's account. He said that Joseph Smith Sr. would chat with him night after night of the "former inhabitants of this continent, how a large portion of the earth now covered by the Pacific Ocean was once occupied by land, etc." (source)

That seems unusual that he follows his statement that Joseph Sr. would speak to him about the former inhabitants of the Americas with a comment about unidentified lands in the Pacific Ocean. Sounds an awful lot like Charles Anthon's theories about the moundbuilders in America coming from Meroe via India, Atlantis, the Polynesian Islands or some other space in the Pacific Ocean. Remember Harris returned from speaking with Anthon in February of 1828, previous to the chats Joseph Smith Sr. was having with William Hyde about the former inhabitants of the American continent.

I'd imagine Joseph Smith Sr. and Joseph Smith Jr. were both telling stories about the former inhabitants of the American continent, and the sources from whence they sprang many months/years previous to the dictation of the Book of Lehi.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

It has the same amount of evidence that Joseph incorporated ideas that Martin heard from those 3 men. We have no idea if those 3 men mentioned anything that ended up in the Book of Lehi. If they did, we have no evidence that Martin mentioned it to Joseph.

Yes, we don't know the substance of the conversations. But we do know that both Mitchill and Anthon confirmed the characters were authentic. Knowing that, we can be sure they didn't just say "oh that's cool, authentic ancient characters written on metal plates in a hill near Palmyra" and then send Harris on his way. Surely they would have discussed the origins of the characters, other historical examples of writings on metal plates, and how such plates might make their way to New York. Surely Mitchill knew of Buchanan's account of Jews with brass plates, and if he really believed that Joseph's characters from metal plates were authentic, he likely would have mentioned it. Or he may have mentioned Jahn's comments on Jews writing on gold in his Biblical Archaeology, noted by WW Phelps in The Evening and the Morning Star 1833.

It'd be unusual if Harris didn't communicate the substance of his discussions with Mitchill and Anthon to Joseph Smith. It'd be unusual if the substance of those discussions didn't influence the dictation of the Book of Lehi one month later.

Edited January 25, 2025 by Zosimus

Sign In

Joseph Smith's Schooling/Vocabulary to produce The Book of Mormon

Recommended Posts

Bernard Gui

Zosimus

webbles

Zosimus

webbles

Bernard Gui

Zosimus

Zosimus

webbles

Bernard Gui

Zosimus

Zosimus

Bernard Gui

webbles

webbles

Zosimus

webbles

Zosimus

webbles

Zosimus

webbles

webbles

Zosimus

webbles

Zosimus

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members

Activity

Browse