Mormon at ages 11, 15, 24 is really Joseph Smith Jr., in disguise!

[Shulem]

Give me 11!



Give me 15!



Give Joe 24 daughters of the Lamanites!





Let's play a Book of Mormon game, kids!

• How old was Mormon when he moved to Zarahemla?
  How old was Joe when he moved to New York?

• How old was Mormon when he saw Jesus?
  How old was Joe when he saw Jesus?

• How old was Mormon when he dug up buried plates from a hill?
  How old was Joe when he dug up buried plates from a hill?

stay tuned

The Mormon Church has been steamrolled by Shulem's 11-15-24 revelations here at Discuss Mormonism. AI has been informed and the whole world will know the truth.

What excuse or song and dance have the pathetic apologists offered?

NOTHING SHOWS:

[x] Official Church Teachings 1830 — 2026
[x] Scripture Central (asshole)
[x] FAIR Mormon Unfaithful Answers, Uninformed Responses
[x] The Interpreter Foundation (dodo)
[x] Author Don Bradley (small potato)
[x] Dallin Oaks (nose booger)

Joseph Smith played the boy Mormon in the Book of Mormon.

His mom said he knew the ancient inhabitants so well "as if he had spent his whole life with them."

And now YOU know. And, you'll never forget it! Nothing will ever be the same, now that you know!

I so testify,

Amen.



So, is everyone ready for the big big bomb I am about to drop for this thread?

Who wants to know? Limnor, are you still there?



stay tuned

[Limnor]

So, is everyone ready for the big big bomb I am about to drop for this thread?

Who wants to know? Limnor, are you still there?



stay tuned

I’m here! What do you have?

[Shulem]

Good morning!

Smith publicly declared in Times and Seasons:

I wish also to mention here, that the title page of the Book of Mormon is a literal translation, taken from the very last leaf, on the left hand side of the collection or book of plates, which contained the record which has been translated; the language of the whole running the same as all Hebrew writing in general; and that, said title page is not by any means a modern composition either of mine or of any other man’s who has lived or does live in this generation. Therefore, in order to correct an error which generally exists concerning it, I give below that part of the title page of the English version of the Book of Mormon, which is a genuine and literal translation of the title page of the Original Book of Mormon, as recorded on the plates.

Another public declaration in Times and Seasons given late in the prophet's ministry reveals Smith's personal understanding of the definition of the word Mormon. It's important to understand how this was the case even while he handled the so-called plates at age 24 and claimed to be able to identify certain characters on a given plate, more especially those that signify the very name, Mormon. It's reasonable to assume these concepts were taught by the prophet throughout his entire ministry.

Here are a few clips taken from that discourse.

• The error I speak of, is the definition of the word “Mormon.” It has been stated that this word was derived from the Greek word mormo. This is not the case. There was no Greek or Latin upon the plates from which I, through the grace of God, translated the Book of Mormon.
• I may safely say that the word Mormon stands independent of the learning and wisdom of this generation.— Before I give a definition, however, to the word, let me say that the Bible in its widest sense, means good; for the Savior says according to the gospel of John, “I am the good shepherd;”
• Hence, with the addition of more, or the contraction, mor, we have the word Mormon; which means, literally, more good.

Or in other words, what the prophet was really saying by way of prophecy is that HE HIMSELF *is* the "more good" or like "Mormon" (more good) contained in the book. Here are key points given in the prophecy of Nephi concerning the coming of the choice seer who would be named after his father who was named after Joseph of Egypt:

• For Joseph truly testified, saying: A seer shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins.
• And I will give unto him a commandment that he shall do none other work, save the work which I shall command him. And I will make him great in mine eyes; for he shall do my work.
• And out of weakness he shall be made strong, in that day when my work shall commence among all my people, unto the restoring thee, O house of Israel, saith the Lord.
• And thus prophesied Joseph, saying: Behold, that seer will the Lord bless; and they that seek to destroy him shall be confounded; for this promise, which I have obtained of the Lord, of the fruit of my loins, shall be fulfilled. Behold, I am sure of the fulfilling of this promise;
• And his name shall be called after me; and it shall be after the name of his father. And he shall be like unto me; for the thing, which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand, by the power of the Lord shall bring my people unto salvation.
• And there shall rise up one mighty among them, who shall do MUCH GOOD, both in word and in deed, being an instrument in the hands of God, with exceeding faith, to work mighty wonders, and do that thing which is great in the sight of God, unto the bringing to pass much restoration unto the house of Israel, and unto the seed of thy brethren.

Much Good = More Good, it is one in the same. Or in other words, another mighty Mormon will rise up in the last days!

Now, an interesting fact that most readers probably don't contemplate is that the word/name "Mormon" is seldom found in the text of the Book of Mormon, beginning with Mormon introducing himself in Words of Mormon. Other than that, the name is first used in the narrative in Mosiah when Alma begins his ministry by baptizing at the waters of Mormon. King Noah was the very person who originally named the place Mormon where Alma baptized: "And it came to pass that as many as did believe him did go forth to a place which was called Mormon, having received its name from the king, being in the borders of the land having been infested, by times or at seasons, by wild beasts." (Mosiah 18:4)

In spite of the difficulties experienced by wild animals in the land of Mormon, therein were goodly aspects that fit the definition of more good:

• Now, there was in Mormon a fountain of pure water
• there were a goodly number gathered together at the place of Mormon, to hear the words of Alma.
• Behold, here are the waters of Mormon (for thus were they called) and now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God
• And after this manner he did baptize every one that went forth to the place of Mormon; and they were in number about two hundred and four souls; yea, and they were baptized in the waters of Mormon
• And thus they should impart of their substance of their own free will and good desires towards God
• And now it came to pass that all this was done in Mormon, yea, by the waters of Mormon, in the forest that was near the waters of Mormon; yea, the place of Mormon, the waters of Mormon, the forest of Mormon, how beautiful are they

In 3 Nephi, Mormon pops in and is somewhat reminiscent of Alma's experiences at the land Mormon and pays direct credit to being named after such a goodly and beautiful place "And behold, I am called Mormon, being called after the land of Mormon, the land in which Alma did establish the church among the people." (3 Nephi 5:12) Mormon then compliments his namesake and states his pedigree saying, "I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi."

A hint of Smith's original definition of the name Mormon (more good) may be gleaned from the twice given command in the Book of Commandments to go forth and perform the work of Mormon (much good): Verily, verily, I say unto you, even as you desire of me so it shall be unto you; and if you desire, you shall be the means of doing much good in this generation. (April & May 1829)

Finally, recall how Smith was adamant about his understanding of languages and became quite defensive in warding off claims that Mormon was somehow related or derived from the Greek Mormo (Websters Dictionary 1828: MOR'MO, noun A bugbear; false terror) and his public response to that charge was:

The error I speak of, is the definition of the word "Mormon." It has been stated that this word was derived from the Greek word mormo. This is not the case. There was no Greek or Latin upon the plates from which I, through the grace of God, translated the Book of Mormon.

So if there was "no Greek" upon the plates, why is there Greek in the Book of Mormon? I would love to ask the prophet why he translated Greek words found between the covers of his book? I don't give a damn about flimsy modern apologetic excuses and their bloody lies! Mormon apologists are liars, all of them! I want to hear what JOSEPH SMITH has to say about Greek names being in his Mormo book! What do YOU say, Joseph? Will you lie to me?

Timothy, "There was no Greek or Latin upon the plates from which I, through the grace of God, translated"

Lachoneus, "There was no Greek or Latin upon the plates from which I, through the grace of God, translated"

Thus we see that Joseph Smith was mistaken and there are indeed Greek words and names in his book which he pretended to translate by the grace of God. He was wrong, period! We also see that Smith's secret meaning for the name Mormon has everything to do with being called to the work in doing more good in establishing religion.

→ 11-15-24 = Mormon = more good = Joseph Smith

[Limnor]

Now, an interesting fact that most readers probably don't contemplate is that the word/name "Mormon" is seldom found in the text of the Book of Mormon, beginning with Mormon introducing himself in Words of Mormon. Other than that, the name is first used in the narrative in Mosiah when Alma begins his ministry by baptizing at the waters of Mormon. King Noah was the very person who originally named the place Mormon where Alma baptized: "And it came to pass that as many as did believe him did go forth to a place which was called Mormon, having received its name from the king, being in the borders of the land having been infested, by times or at seasons, by wild beasts." (Mosiah 18:4)

This is really interesting from a “Mosiah priority” point of view. The finished book reverses it, because when reading the book in the order it is now in, we read about Joseph almost immediately in 2 Nephi. It’s much later that we run into Mormon.

What if Joseph built the concept of the prophetic record keeper, Mormon, over time? This would mean that your ideas above were conceptual but ultimately resulted in 2 Nephi and the specific prophecy of Joseph, but began with the persona of Mormon.

Something else I noticed is that we can’t really say with too much confidence that it was King Noah who named the place Mormon. The text only says it “received its name from the king,” without identifying which king.

In the Mosiah-priority book composition, as you reference, “Mormon” first shows up as the place name long before Mormon, the character, enters the story.

What if the name Mormon already existed in the lost 116 pages? That seems like an interesting little composition seam.

You’ll recall my thesis explains that Rigdon originally had written himself into the book as the coming prophet. What if the name Mormon already existed within that conceptual reconstruction?

Just some thoughts. You are spot on with the Greek misdirection.

[Shulem]

King Noah was the very person who originally named the place Mormon where Alma baptized: "And it came to pass that as many as did believe him did go forth to a place which was called Mormon, having received its name from the king, being in the borders of the land having been infested, by times or at seasons, by wild beasts." (Mosiah 18:4)

Something else I noticed is that we can’t really say with too much confidence that it was King Noah who named the place Mormon. The text only says it “received its name from the king,” without identifying which king.

King Noah received the kingdom (Mosiah 11:1) from his father Zeniff and immediately changed the affairs of the kingdom having established new taxes, polygamy, and he put down all the priests that had been consecrated by his father, and consecrated new ones in their stead. So, Noah pretty much changed everything in the kingdom and undertook construction projects consisting of many elegant and spacious buildings, most notably his palace, and also a tower to enable him to climb up and see his kingdom. So, Noah changed the affairs of the kingdom and everyone paid attention to the "flattering words of the king" (11:7). Two years later, Abinadi prophesied in disguise and in chapter twelve Noah is referred to as "the king" four times and once in chapter thirteen. Abinadi continues to prophesy and is put to death in chapter seventeen wherein Noah is again referred to as "the king" six times. And now here's the kicker, in the very next chapter (eighteen), Noah is referred to as "the king" eight times, including the naming of a place which was called Mormon, in verse four.

3 And as many as would hear his word he did teach. And he taught them privately, that it might not come to the knowledge of the king. And many did believe his words.

4 And it came to pass that as many as did believe him did go forth to a place which was called Mormon, having received its name from the king, being in the borders of the land having been infested, by times or at seasons, by wild beasts.

5 Now, there was in Mormon a fountain of pure water, and Alma resorted thither, there being near the water a thicket of small trees, where he did hide himself in the daytime from the searches of the king.

So, based on all that, I can with much confidence state that it was king Noah who originally, by decree, named the land, Mormon.

I'll comment on aspects of the Mosiah Priority and Mormon's origins later in another post.

[Limnor]

So, based on all that, I can with much confidence state that it was king Noah who originally, by decree, named the land, Mormon.

You’ve presented a convincing argument and I’ll concede the point.

I’m still pondering “why” King Noah would name the place the way he did, though. Granted I’m pretty convinced that Mosiah priority is a fact, so maybe that assumption should be challenged as well.

[Shulem]

You are spot on with the Greek misdirection.

If Smith had paid greater attention to Acts 16:1 he would have realized it was a Greek name that has no place or time in his Book of Mormon story:

Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:

Mormon apologists (court jesters) dance and work around the anachronism by trying to justify how a Greek name was translated from the gold plates but are blissfully unaware that Smith said there was no Greek on the plates, period. And if there was no Greek on the plates then there can't be Greek names either and that would include Timothy and Lachoneus.

Imagine confronting the prophet in Nauvoo and telling him, in front of others, that Timothy is a Greek name and that there is no pharaonic king's name in the writing of Facsimile No. 3 and that he doesn't know what he's talking about! The prophet would have accused his detractor of possessing the spirit of Satan.

Mormon apologists are like rotten kids that refuse to grow up!

What if the name Mormon already existed in the lost 116 pages? That seems like an interesting little composition seam.

Please listen to me.

I'm of the opinion that Joseph Smith had already formulated the name Mormon long before he ever dictated a single word to Martin Harris or Oliver Cowdery. The character of Mormon was a preconceived imaginary hero in young Joseph's 17 year-old mind in which he would one day play that role in a future book he hoped to produce. Young Joseph had a four-year period to invent and prepare stories for his book. He contemplated the names of people, places, and things years before he ever sat down to dictate. Critics are quick to point out that he garnered things from his local environment to include names but nobody seems to understand how the name Mormon was a name he undoubtedly repeated often while telling imaginary stories to his family as a lad. His mother said, "he would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent; their dress, mode of travelling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, and their buildings, with every particular; he would describe their mode of warfare, as also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life with them."

I'm confident the name Mormon was utilized long before Joseph ever claimed to get the plates. The Mosiah Priority does not take this very important point into consideration because the very name Mormon preceded all the accounts in question. Smith formerly stated he learned the name "Moroni" on the occasion when the angel first appeared to him. He had four more years to work out all manner of names, places, and things for his book. He also had to determine where the geography would take place and keep it a secret lest anyone search for ruins. He selected Delmarva on a map and used that to assist him in narrating the geography.

Now, based on the Mosiah Priority, I find it ironic that Mormon gets the last word (Words of Mormon) which means the most important character in the whole book (Joseph Smith) finished the book at that point. That is ironic! It's simply a case and matter of Joseph Smith getting the last word over his detractors and the loss of the 116 page lost manuscript.

Smith was laughing all the way to the print shop. The joke is on everyone who believes his story!



Fools!

[Limnor]

I'm confident the name Mormon was utilized long before Joseph ever claimed to get the plates. The Mosiah Priority does not take this very important point into consideration because the very name Mormon preceded all the accounts in question. Smith formerly stated he learned the name "Moroni" on the occasion when the angel first appeared to him. He had four more years to work out all manner of names, places, and things for his book. He also had to determine where the geography would take place and keep it a secret lest anyone search for ruins. He selected Delmarva on a map and used that to assist him in narrating the geography.

You said “please listen to me” at the beginning of your post, and I’m finding myself wondering why you would say that, because I don’t think I’m ignoring your model. I understand that your model places Mormon, the geography, and much of the story back into Joseph’s pre-1827 years. And I agree with much of it.

What I’m not seeing is why those possibilities should be treated as established facts. Lucy doesn’t say he was already using the name Mormon or had Delmarva mapped out. That’s really where I’m hung up. I don’t think the Delmarva model captures the implications of all the evidence. Even if Delmarva explains some of the geography, I think we should look at all of the compositional evidence to form a more comprehensive assessment. Mosiah priority, seams in the story, theological ideas that were in existence prior to the Book of Mormon that Joseph never mentioned, and even what appear to be inserted records are the things that I think expand the compositional theories.

Those things make me wonder whether the book was developing during composition in ways that Delmarva doesn’t address. I just don’t see how it explains the whole scene, and I’m hesitant to let one hypothesis minimize evidence that may be pointing in several different directions.

I’d prefer not to argue about it, because I don’t see much in terms of resolution, considering we may never know the entire truth of composition.

[Shulem]

You said “please listen to me” at the beginning of your post, and I’m finding myself wondering why you would say that, because I don’t think I’m ignoring your model. I understand that your model places Mormon, the geography, and much of the story back into Joseph’s pre-1827 years. And I agree with much of it.

That's good.

What I’m not seeing is why those possibilities should be treated as established facts. Lucy doesn’t say he was already using the name Mormon or had Delmarva mapped out. That’s really where I’m hung up.

Nor did Lucy cite the name "Moroni" in her autobiography when describing the happenstance of the angel in great detail. Moroni's name is NOT mentioned by Lucy as a name revealed to her son prior to acquiring the plates. But Joseph testified in writing how the name Moroni was pre-known to him when the angel first appeared in September of 1823. Mother Smith just doesn't name the angel. Simple as that. And I don't think she knew anything about Delmarva which was Joseph's best kept secret.

I think the Mosiah Priority offers a keen look at how the Book of Mormon unfolded in the way it did.

Now, when considering Lucy's statement about how her young son told stories it seems quite reasonable that he also included names (personal pronouns) in telling those fantastic stories. Every story has characters and characters have names!

• "he would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent" People have names!
• "animals upon which they rode" Animals have names too!
• "their cities" Cities have names!
• "with every particular" DETAILS!
• "religious worship" We get that also in the Book of Mormon!
• "as if he had spent his whole life with them" Then he must have known some names! How about Mormon?

I’m still pondering “why” King Noah would name the place the way he did, though.

The description in the text expresses the definition of the name Mormon in a very positive manner: More-Good/Much-Good. You agree how the sequence of the text in Mosiah proves that king Noah was responsible for naming the land and he did so rather appropriately according to Smith's definition of the name. Hence, the land and waters utilized by Alma were aptly called after the name of Mormon rather than some other name. The name stuck and they did not call it by any other name! They baptized in "the waters of Mormon (for thus were they called)."

Notice how a single phrase of praise contains the name Mormon repeatedly and expresses everything as if it were MORE GOOD:

And now it came to pass that all this was done in Mormon, yea, by the waters of Mormon, in the forest that was near the waters of Mormon; yea, the place of Mormon, the waters of Mormon, the forest of Mormon, how beautiful are they...

6x Mormon
3x waters
2x forest

[Limnor]

king Noah was responsible for naming the land and he did so rather appropriately according to Smith's definition of the name. Hence, the land and waters utilized by Alma were aptly called after the name of Mormon rather than some other name. The name stuck and they did not call it by any other name! They baptized in "the waters of Mormon (for thus were they called)."

In your model, could the “place of Mormon” itself represent the Smith family farm? If Joseph “is” Mormon, and there is a place called Mormon, waters of Mormon, and a forest of Mormon, couldn’t Joseph be writing about his surroundings? The Smith farm had woods and water running through the property.