Jeff Lindsay's Moses "parallels"

I haven't had the time or interest to do peer reviews of the Interpreter lately, but people have asked about Jeff Lindsay's papers about the Book of Moses and to save time answering questions, I wrote this post that I can refer to people. This post is preliminary to elicit feedback. Thus it lists only some of the "connections" from the original papers.

The paper consists of two parts.

"Parallels between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon, Part 1: Details of Their Distribution and Relationships to the JST"

https://interpreterfoundation.org/journal/parallels-between-the-book-of-moses-and-the-book-of-mormon-part-1-details-of-their-distribution-and-relationships-to-the-jst

"Parallels between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon, Part 2: The Updated List of 146 Parallels"

https://interpreterfoundation.org/journal/parallels-between-the-book-of-moses-and-the-book-of-mormon-part-2-the-updated-list-of-146-parallels

_____

TLDR summary: As usual, the Interpreter publishes another "peer-reviewed" article to propose a narrative that most Latter-day Saints would like: the idea that the Nephites had access to a version of the Old Testament that contained what we have now as the Book of Moses.

However, in developing this narrative, Jeff promotes the SITH narrative while overlooking the logical and factual fallacies that contradict the SITH narrative. The evidence not considered in the article corroborates Joseph Smith's claim that he translated the plates.

At the conclusion of his article, Jeff writes: 

Alternate hypotheses and new questions are welcome as we explore the implications of the data, but for now, the connections between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon strike me as important evidence for the divinity, authenticity, and antiquity of both texts, and for their miraculous translation into English.

We doubt Jeff (or anyone else at the Interpreter) will actually welcome any alternate hypothesis that contradicts SITH, so we'll post this here.

Of course, I'd be happy to develop this into an actual article if the Interpreter was actually willing to publish alternative hypotheses, but that is highly unlikely. And if they did, they would hold the article until their editorial staff found someone to critique it, not as peer review suggestions ahead of publication, but in an effort to reassure their readers that SITH (and M2C) remain the only authorized explanation for the origin and setting of the Book of Mormon. And then of course I wouldn't be able to respond to the inevitably misleading criticism except in comments that no one reads.

Sigh...

:)

_____

In the pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding, we'll begin with charity.

Charity: Jeff's a great guy, faithful Latter-day Saint, sincere, smart, with good intentions.

Understanding: Jeff's article proposes that 

"the Book of Mormon’s relationship with the Book of Moses appears to be unique and consistent with an ancient brass-plates version of Genesis that influenced Book of Mormon personalities such as Lehi1, Nephi1, Jacob, and Alma2... the distribution of parallels at the book level and the chapter level is consistent with a meaningful application of material from a brass-plates version of Genesis by authors or speakers familiar with the brass plates."

To support that assertion, the article cites "connections" in the two texts and cites Royal Skousen's Early Modern English (EME) theory. 

Clarity: Three points:

(i) The article relies on Skousen's EME theory that relies on the assumption that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery intentionally misled everyone about the translation, and that Joseph merely read the words that appeared on the stone-in-the-hat (SITH) instead of actually translating the characters "after the manner of [his] language." But if, as he claimed, Joseph translated the engravings on the plates, and then a year later produced the Book of Moses, we would expect Joseph to use words, phrases and concepts he learned during the first translation process, which is what the evidence shows.

(ii) The article lists 146 "parallels" between the Book of Mormon and the Book of Moses, including nonbiblical terms and phrases, and attributes these to a hypothetical "brass-plates version of Genesis" without recognizing that these nonbiblical terms and phrases were readily available to Joseph Smith, such as in the works of Jonathan Edwards, which supports Joseph's explanation that he translated the plates. Specific examples are included at the end of this post.

(iii) The article suggests a distinct distribution of parallels among books and chapters without accounting for the differences in narratives (e.g., war chapters in Alma vs doctrinal passages in 1 and 2 Nephi). 

_____

More detailed analysis. Original in blue, my comments in red, original quotations in green.

Jeff's explanation (page 315)

This project began with a quest for answers, not a search for parallels to support a preconceived argument.

Assuming that is accurate, the project as published conveys exactly that: a search for parallels to support a preconceived argument. That may explain the logical and factual fallacies in the pursuit of corroborating SITH. 

It began with my puzzling over 1 Nephi 4:2, where Nephi1 tries to motivate his brethren by saying, “Let us be strong like unto Moses, for he truly spake unto the waters of the Red Sea and they divided hither and thither.” I wanted to know what Nephi₁ was alluding to, for I could find nothing in the Old Testament calling Moses strong.

And yet the OT refers to the Exodus being accomplished "by strength of hand." 

3 ¶ And Moses said unto the people, Remember this day, in which ye came out from Egypt, out of the house of bondage; for by strength of hand the Lord brought you out from this place: there shall no leavened bread be eaten. (Exodus 13:3)

14 ¶ And it shall be when thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying, What is this? that thou shalt say unto him, By strength of hand the Lord brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage: (Exodus 13:14)

16 And it shall be for a token upon thine hand, and for frontlets between thine eyes: for by strength of hand the Lord brought us forth out of Egypt. (Exodus 13:16)

The strength of Moses was also mentioned by Jonathan Edwards in the 1808 edition on sale in Palmyra.

"Alas! how far are we from having the strength of holy, meek, aged Moses!"

Whether Joseph read the Bible or Jonathan Edwards, he had reason to associate Moses with strength, and his translation of 1 Nephi 4:2 is consistent, especially with the Jonathan Edwards extract.

Nephi: "Let us be strong like unto Moses."

Edwards: "Alas! how far we are from having the strength of holy, meek, aged Moses!"

Jeff continues:

That’s when I learned of Noel Reynolds’s paper pointing to thirty-three connections between the Book of Mormon and Book of Moses. Intrigued, I began examining the Book of Moses and quickly found a clear connection that helped to explain what Nephi₁ might have been referring to: “blessed art thou, Moses, for I, the Almighty, have chosen thee, and thou shalt be made stronger than many waters; for they shall obey thy command as if thou wert God” (Moses 1:25). It was the perfect candidate for a source describing Moses as strong in the context of crossing the Red Sea as the waters obeyed his command, as in 1 Nephi 4:2.

Jeff makes a fair point here. Certainly it is possible that Nephi had access to a version of Genesis that we no longer have. As a believing Latter-day Saint, that proposal appeals to me. It confirms my biases.

But confirmation bias brings with it the likelihood of overlooking "multiple working hypotheses." Because Jeff's bias in favor of SITH contradicts my own bias in favor of what Joseph and Oliver taught, I think it is useful and important to consider evidence that supports and corroborates what Joseph and Oliver said about the translation.

Thus, Nephi could have also relied on the Exodus verses, and Joseph translating whatever Nephi (and Moses) originally wrote could have rendered it along the lines of what Edwards wrote.

Jeff (and/or his peer reviewers) should have at least mentioned this alternative explanation instead of simply confirming his SITH bias.

This was not a random parallel with a couple of similar words being used but one that offered a specific common context and had explanatory power. That find offered a satisfying answer to a legitimate question and added relevant background to a Book of Mormon passage. Many of the subsequently discovered parallels likewise answer questions and add richness to the Book of Mormon text. This goes beyond parallelomania.

This observation indicates that Jeff, being satisfied with his answer, stopped further inquiry. From that point on, he had a theory to pursue. His confirmation bias led him to find additional parallels, all assuming that Joseph didn't translate anything but instead read words that appeared on the stone-in-the-hat. 

An alternative explanation for his list of "parallels" is that Joseph translated the engravings on the plates "after the manner of [his] language," based on the vocabulary and concepts readily available to him.

Jeff's implicit rejection of the alternative explanation is expressed in this paragraph:

In our studies to date on connections between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon, the outcomes that have been reported are largely based on the use of common words or expressions that make the connection apparent. Had the translation of either the Book of Mormon or the Book of Moses been simply expressed in Joseph’s own language with the semantic variability that can easily occur when one is doing the “heavy lifting” of expressing meaning in one’s own choice of words, many and perhaps most of the parallels might not have been detected.

The logical and factual fallacy here arises from Jeff not looking for other sources of the "connections" between the texts. And yet most of the "connections," both biblical and nonbiblical, are found in the writings of Jonathan Edwards, as shown below. 

Further, as Rebecca Lambert observed, a more uniform distribution across chapters edited by Mormon might be expected if Mormon were responsible for most of these parallels.⁴¹

The fallacy here is creating an "expectation" that is outcome driven, as well as labeling these as "parallels" in the first place.

Let's look at the conclusion to summarize the analysis.

Conclusion

In the process of addressing reasonable questions about the connections between the Book of Mormon and the Book of Moses, several further discoveries have been made which seem to strengthen the case for meaningful ancient relationships. 

The discoveries are more "parallels" or "connections" common to the two books, which can be explained by Joseph having translated the Book of Mormon first "after the manner of [his] language" and then using similar words, phrases and concepts in dictating the Book of Moses.

The patterns in the distribution of the parallels show non-random results in which those writers most familiar with the brass plates are most likely to allude to material related to the Book of Moses.

1 and 2 Nephi dealt with topics similar to Moses and were explicitly not the record of wars and government issues that consume much of the abridged plates. Plus, there is no reason to assume or infer that Mormon did not have access to, and was not familiar with, the brass plates. Moroni specifically reminded us that 

3 And as I suppose that the first part of this record, which speaks concerning the creation of the world, and also of Adam, and an account from that time even to the great tower, and whatsoever things transpired among the children of men until that time, is had among the Jews— 

4 Therefore I do not write those things which transpired from the days of Adam until that time; but they are had upon the plates; and whoso findeth them, the same will have power that he may get the full account. (Ether 1:3–4)

 

(As an aside, we can see that Joseph had the power to get the full account from the records in the repository in Cumorah, which presumably included the Book of Moses.)

Intriguing insights can be obtained by looking at the level of individual books, chapters within books, and verses themselves. The density of parallels in some sections, such as the words of Lehi1, is noteworthy, but we can also learn much from the “gaps” where one or more chapters are free of parallels.

This is easily explained by the difference in content. Joseph translating similar content would use similar words, phrases, and concepts.

Exploring the Joseph Smith Translation also shows that something unique occurred for the initial portion of the JST that became our canonized Book of Moses. Perhaps a revelatory outpouring rooted in ancient texts occurred in that initial work, followed by continuing revelation but in ways less directly related to the Book of Mormon. 

An alternative is that Joseph was familiar with the Book of Moses material as Moroni indicated.

The pervasive and often meaningful connections between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon are not found in the remaining JST, just as they are not found with the Book of Abraham. This contributes to the wonder and uniqueness of the Book of Moses connections and undermines theories that the connections can be explained by Joseph Smith simply reusing familiar Book of Mormon language in his subsequent translation work. The Book of Abraham and the latter portions of the JST are evidence against such naturalistic hypotheses, as are the details of the distribution of the parallels.

The connections are not only between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon but also the KJV and Jonathan Edwards. The remaining JST would not be included in what Moroni explained in Ether 1:3-4, and the Book of Abraham involved different content altogether.

The hypothesis Reynolds originally proposed was that a text that could have influenced Book of Mormon writers was something like our Book of Moses that might have existed on the brass plates. For the first thirty-three parallels that Reynolds uncovered, he observed that the writers of the small plates, whom we might expect would be particularly well schooled in the brass plates, are responsible for most of the Book of Moses’s influence that he had identified:

This is a good theory, but ignores alternative hypotheses.

It is also impressive that most of the influence from the Book of Moses in the Book of Mormon shows up early in the small plates and the writings of the first generation of Book of Mormon prophets—significantly, those who had custody and long-term, firsthand access to the brass plates. Many of the later passages that use Book of Moses terminology and concepts tend to repeat earlier Nephite adaptations of the original materials.49

Again, the abridged records dealt with different topics, so we would not expect parallels.

Over time, his hypothesis, based on only thirty-three parallels, has held up well, and now over 140 parallels have been identified. It is still the case that several small plates authors or speakers have particularly high levels of parallels, though we can also appreciate many more important parallels across many books.

The parallels also extend beyond these two books to Joseph's own language. 

The surprisingly high level of intertextuality between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon presents a series of challenges to those who claim Joseph Smith was the author of both. I propose that a study of these parallels, their characteristics, and the insights they provide can help us better appreciate the ancient origins of both texts.

This does not logically follow. Whether Joseph translated or composed the text, we would expect a high level of intertexuality. 

Such investigation can also help us appreciate the marvel of the divine translation processes that gave us the English, especially when we consider the chronology of the translation work. For example, consider Parallel 11, “lies-lead-will-deceive-eyes” from Moses 4:4 with relationships to 1 Nephi 16:38, with a newly added cross-reference to Alma 20:13, as discussed above (also included in the updates listed in Part 2 of this series50).

See the table of parallels below.

The words of King Lamoni’s father in Alma 20:13 were dictated shortly after the Book of Mosiah, but long before the dictation turned to the small plates. 

But the dictation had already covered this material in the lost 116 pages.

Having the recrimination against “the son of a liar” worded to allude to Laman’s ancient accusation—before that story was even translated and written in English—is a remarkable thing for a text dictated on the fly without notes at a high rate of speed and without major revisions. If the Book of Mormon were a modern composition, how does the author of Alma 20 subtly allude to a backstory in 1 Nephi that hasn’t been written yet, with the precisely worded backstory to be filled in weeks later near the end of the translation process when 1 Nephi 16:38 is reached? 

The 116 pages were dictated a year before Alma 20...

And then how does one craft that verse to allude to yet another backstory, the characterization of Satan that came later in Moses 4:4—not dictated until well over another year would pass? Joseph as the author of such subtle, forward-looking allusion seems unlikely.

Arguments based on the "likelihood" of a coincidence are entirely subjective. 

Many such questions abound in the utterly unexpected connections between the Book of Mormon and the later-translated text of the Book of Moses, which improbably seems to provide the backstory to and key terminology for many aspects of the earlier Book of Mormon. 

None of these connections are unexpected, let alone "utterly unexpected," when we accept Joseph's claim that he translated the engravings on the plates. Instead, we would expect Joseph, as translator, to use similar terminology for similar content, which is what we observe.

This all makes little sense, especially considering Joseph’s education and the translation process observed by many witnesses, unless one can entertain the possibility of real ancient texts with real ancient authors, where one ancient text could influence the other, and where both were produced “in the wrong order” in modern times by a prophet translating with the power of God.

When one text (Moses) is produced by the same person who translated an earlier text (the Book of Mormon), we should expect the earlier text to influence the other. That is just common sense. Jeff merely infers the opposite influence to confirm his bias.

One key to Jeff's thesis is his assumption that Joseph was too ignorant to use the vocabulary we find in these texts, despite Joseph's own explanation that he translated the plates after he had an "intimate acquaintance with those of different denominations" as well as the KJV of the Bible. 

The "many witnesses" Jeff alludes to consist of decades-old statements by David Whitmer and Emma Smith. Emma's is problematic for several reasons, and David admitted he was not around for most of the translation. Both specifically and overtly contradicted what Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and John Whitmer said. 

It’s a surprising story backed by surprising and unexpected data. 

None of this is surprising or unexpected, except for those who disbelieve what Joseph and Oliver said about the translation; i.e., those who agree with Royal Skousen that Joseph and Oliver deliberately misled everyone.

Alternate hypotheses and new questions are welcome as we explore the implications of the data, but for now, the connections between the Book of Moses and the Book of Mormon strike me as important evidence for the divinity, authenticity, and antiquity of both texts, and for their miraculous translation into English.

We'll see.

_____

Below is a summary of some of the "connections" showing that they had precedence readily available to Joseph Smith as he acquired his "intimate acquaintance with those of different denominations."

Note how often non-biblical phrases in the latter-day scriptures appear in the works of Jonathan Edwards, a fact that neither Jeff nor his peer reviewers considered. This is good evidence of Joseph Smith as the translator.

This section starts with Jeff's explanation. I added comments to his table.

This is far from a comprehensive review. I just looked at the first few and some others that were already familiar to me from my annotation work.

See annotations at https://www.mobom.org/jonathan-edwards

Abstract: In exploring the connections between the texts of the Book of Mormon and the Book of Moses, several updates to previously published parallels need to be made, including the discovery of even more apparent parallels. The total number of proposed parallels that cannot readily be explained by the language of the King James Bible now stands at 146. In this article I present the current list and the updates. Of particular importance may be the expanded findings related to Samuel the Lamanite and connections to the account of Enoch in the Book of Moses in updated Parallel 86.

Numerous parallels between the Book of Mormon and the Book of Moses have been identified that are consistent with Noel Reynolds’s original 1990 proposal that a version of Genesis on the brass plates may have contained some of the non-King James Version language and concepts found in the Book of Moses.¹ These parallels generally exclude those that can be readily explained as mere incorporation of King James Version language. In many cases, they cannot be explained as Joseph simply borrowing Book of Mormon language and concepts to compose the Book of Moses. Some of the parallels reflect a one-way direction of influence from the Book of Moses to the Book of Mormon, as if Book of Mormon authors were often alluding to a backstory or to well-developed concepts that the Book of Moses provides. Examples of how these new-found parallels enrich our appreciation of familiar accounts will be offered below.

Given that the Book of Moses translation began well after the Book of Mormon translation was complete, these parallels may cast doubt on common assumptions about how Joseph produced the Book of Moses. Indeed, they can be viewed as evidence that both books have ancient origins, with something like the Book of Moses possibly having been on the brass plates, where it could have influenced Book of Mormon authors—especially those most familiar with the brass plates. Indeed, a recently published companion article, Part 1 of this two-part series, examines the distribution of the parallels in the Book of Mormon, arguing that the hypothesis of brass plates influence on ancient Book of Mormon authors has significant explanatory power with respect to the details of the distribution and reduces the likelihood that the distribution arises from random word choices by Joseph.²

Summary of All Proposed Parallels

It is helpful to view the proposed parallels grouped according to when they were discovered. Accordingly, I have organized them into five groups, in tables 1 through 5. In total, there are 146 proposed parallels.

Tables 1 and 2 form the original thirty-three parallels identified by Reynolds.

Table 1. Concepts not directly found together in the KJV Bible.

No.	Concept	Book of Moses	Book of Mormon
1	transgression-fall, fall-death "by reason of" OT (41) NT (10) BM (3) PGP (1) JE (600) "passed upon" NT (1) BM (1) DC (1) JE (30) "born into the world" NT (1) PGP (1) JE (15) "plan of" BM (33) PGP (1) JE (20) "great Creator" BM (3) JE (15) "a living soul" OT (1) NT (1) BM (1) PGP (4) JE (8) "must be born again" NT (1) BM (1) PGP (1) JE (20) JE: "a man must be born again , in order to enter into the kingdom of God" "cleansed by" BM (2) PGP (1) JE (5) JE: "will save none but those whose conversation has been cleansed by the blood of Christ" "being cleansed by the blood of the paschal lamb" "sanctified by" DC (1) PGP (1) JE (5) "words of eternal life" NT (1) DC (1) PGP (1) JE (5) "immortal glory" PGP (2) JE (8) JE: I have now particularly considered the account which Moses gives us in the beginning of the Bible, of our first parents, and God's dealings with them, the constitution he established with them, their transgression , and what followed. And on the whole, if we consider the manner in which God apparently speaks to Adam, from time to time; and particularly, if we consider how plainly and undeniably his posterity are included in the sentence of death pronounced on Adam after his fall, founded on the… And it is plain, that it was for his transgression , and not Eve's, that the sentence of death was pronounced on mankind after the fall (Genesis 3:9)	Moses 6:59 59 That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory; (Moses 6:59)	2 Nephi 9:6 6 For as death hath passed upon all men, to fulfil the merciful plan of the great Creator, there must needs be a power of resurrection, and the resurrection must needs come unto man by reason of the fall; and the fall came by reason of transgression; and because man became fallen they were cut off from the presence of the Lord. (2 Nephi 9:6)
2	order-days-years-eternity "after the order of" OT (1) NT (7) BM (9) DC (12) PGP (1) JE (35) "without beginning of days" BM (2) DC (2) PGP (2) JE (4) Cf: "Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually."(Hebrews 7:3) "from all eternity" BM (2) DC (1) PGP (3) JE (200) "from eternity to" BM (1) DC (1) JE (20) "to all eternity" BM (3) DC (2) PGP (3) JE (200) JE: the Priests were Reckoned a very holy Order of men upon that account because they were Concerned...	Moses 6:67 67 And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity. (Moses 6:67)	Alma 13:7 7 This high priesthood being after the order of his Son, which order was from the foundation of the world; or in other words, being without beginning of days or end of years, being prepared from eternity to all eternity, according to his foreknowledge of all things— (Alma 13:7)
3	Lord-from all eternity-to “all eternity” BM (5) DC (8) PGP (7) JE (500) “from all eternity” BM (2) DC (1) PGP (3) JE (200) "to all eternity" BM (3) DC (2) PGP (3) JE (200)	Moses 7:29 29 And Enoch said unto the Lord: How is it that thou canst weep, seeing thou art holy, and from all eternity to all eternity? (Moses 7:29)	Mosiah 3:5, 8:18 5 For behold, the time cometh, and is not far distant, that with power, the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth, who was, and is from all eternity to all eternity, shall come down from heaven among the children of men, and shall dwell in a tabernacle of clay, (Mosiah 3:5)
4	God-gave-man-agency JE: He that has given understanding and will to angels and men, and made 'em voluntary agents, has counsel and understanding and free agency himself in the highest perfection.	Moses 7:32	2 Nephi 2:16
5	Lord’s Spirit-withdraws-from-man JE: what great things does the skill and zeal of instruments do now, when the Spirit of God is withdrawn ? For although there are many dark clouds, and God's Spirit is greatly withdrawn from some places where it has lately been remarkably poured out, and Satan seems at present greatly to rage and prevail; yet God is still carrying on his work, if not in one place, yet in another. if the Spirit of God should be as much withdrawn from me always, as for the week past, notwithstanding all I do, I should not grow, but should languish, and miserably fade away. I perceive, if God should withdraw his Spirit a little more, I should not hesitate to break my Resolutions, and should soon arrive at my old state.	Moses 1:15	Alma 34:35; Helaman 4:24, 6:35, 13:8, Mosiah 2:36
6	children-whole-from foundation JE:  And therefore who can imagine that at the same time orders should be given to smite and slay utterly, without their eye sparing or having pity, those that were a great deal more evidently free from having any share in the sin of the city, because they are not capable of sinning, which is the case of little children if they have no original sin; “not capable” BM (1) JE (100) “original guilt” PGP (1) JE (1) JE:  Through our whole Lives time that original Guilt would be sufficient to undo us	Moses 6:54	Moroni 8:8, 12 wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin (Moroni 8:8)
7	“Only name” “whereby salvation shall come unto the children of men,” coupled with explanation on the salvation of children (revised from Reynolds’s original)	Moses 6:52	Mosiah 3:16–18
8	devil-father-of all lies “father of lies” BM (1) JE (5) “father of all lies” BM (2) PGP (1) JE: “He is a liar and the father of lies , and the father of all the sin and wickedness that is or ever has been in the world.”	Moses 4:4 4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice. (Moses 4:4)	2 Nephi 2:18, 9:9; Ether 8:25 18 And because he had fallen from heaven, and had become miserable forever, he sought also the misery of all mankind. Wherefore, he said unto Eve, yea, even that old serpent, who is the devil, who is the father of all lies, wherefore he said: Partake of the forbidden fruit, and ye shall not die, but ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. (2 Nephi 2:18) 9 And our spirits must have become like unto him, and we become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the presence of our God, and to remain with the father of lies, in misery, like unto himself; (2 Nephi 9:9) for it is built up by the devil, who is the father of all lies; (Ether 8:25)
9	devil-lead-captive-his will “lead captive” NT (1) Are we delivered from the reigning power, so that no lust has dominion over [us], to lead us captive …  so that satan Leads them Captive at his will	Moses 4:4	2 Nephi 2:27; Alma 12:11, 40:13;
10	devil-deceive-blind-lead JE: Seeing 'tis so evident, by the plain account the Scripture gives us of the temptation which prevailed with our first parents to commit that sin, that it was so contrived by the subtlety of the tempter, as first to blind and deceive 'em as to that matter, and to make them believe that their disobedience should be followed with no destruction or calamity at all to themselves (and therefore not to their posterity) but on the contrary, with a great increase and advancement of dignity and happiness…. It is from the blinding and deceitful nature of sin. The nature of sin is to blind and deceive; it is the spawn and offspring of the devil, that great deceiver, who makes it his whole business to deceive.  That Satan has such arts to deceive and blind men, shows the need we stand in of a keeper.	Moses 4:4	3 Nephi 2:2
11	lies-lead-will-deceive-eyes JE: Contrive some way or other to deceive him & blind his Eyes	Moses 4:4 4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice. (Moses 4:4)	1 Nephi 16:38 (cf. Alma 20:13) 38 Now, he says that the Lord has talked with him, and also that angels have ministered unto him. But behold, we know that he lies unto us; and he tells us these things, and he worketh many things by his cunning arts, that he may deceive our eyes, thinking, perhaps, that he may lead us away into some strange wilderness; (1 Nephi 16:38)

Table 3. Finds from the 2023 “Strong Like Unto Moses” paper.

No.	Concept	Book of Moses	Book of Mormon
34	The strength of Moses JE: Alas! how far are we from having the strength of holy, meek, aged Moses! loc. 21433	Moses 1:20–21, 25	1 Nephi 4:2
35	Chains of darkness, chains of hell, chains of the devil Chains of death BM (1) DC (1) JE (10) Chains of darkness NT (1) DC (1) PGP (1) JE (30) Chains of hell BM (6) DC (1) Chains of the devil Great chain NT (1) PGP (1) JE (2) JE: freedom from the cruel chains of sin and the devil if he had cast us down to hell and bound [us] in chains of darkness  their Confinement in the Chains of darkness in the Prison of hell   And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. (Revelation 20:1)	Moses 7:26, 57 26 And he beheld Satan; and he had a great chain in his hand, and it veiled the whole face of the earth with darkness; and he looked up and laughed, and his angels rejoiced. (Moses 7:26)   57 And as many of the spirits as were in prison came forth, and stood on the right hand of God; and the remainder were reserved in chains of darkness until the judgment of the great day. (Moses 7:57)	2 Nephi 1:13, 23, 9:45, 28:19, 22; Alma 5:7, 9, 10, 12:6, 11, 17, 13:30, 26:14–15, 36:18
36	Veil of darkness DC (1) PGP (1) JE: in the secret of his tabernacle, behind the veil , in the thick darkness There is a kind of a veil now cast over the bigger part of the world that keeps 'em in darkness; but then this veil shall be destroyed The shadow was accompanied with darkness and obscurity; gospel things were then hid under a veil . And wise connection of disposals would be hid by a veil and lie concealed in darkness Covers all with a veil of thick darkness made manifest that before were totally hid & covered as with a thick veil of darkness	Moses 7:26, 61	Alma 19:6 (cf. Ether 4:15)
37	Song of redeeming love/ everlasting joy, contrasted with chains of darkness/hell “redeeming love” BM (3) JE (30) JE: Bless yourselves in Christ Jesus, and let your soul the more sweetly rest in the arms of his redeeming love “everlasting joy” OT (3) BM (1) DC (5) PGP (1) JE (25) Isa 35:10  and JE “come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads” See annotation of Alma 5 here: https://www.mobom.org/bm-kjv-and-je-alma-5	Moses 7:53–57 53 And the Lord said: Blessed is he through whose seed Messiah shall come; for he saith—I am Messiah, the King of Zion, the Rock of Heaven, which is broad as eternity; whoso cometh in at the gate and climbeth up by me shall never fall; wherefore, blessed are they of whom I have spoken, for they shall come forth with songs of everlasting joy. (Moses 7:53)	Alma 5:7, 9, 26, 26:13–15, 36:18, 22 7 Behold, he changed their hearts; yea, he awakened them out of a deep sleep, and they awoke unto God. Behold, they were in the midst of darkness; nevertheless, their souls were illuminated by the light of the everlasting word; yea, they were encircled about by the bands of death, and the chains of hell, and an everlasting destruction did await them. 9 And again I ask, were the bands of death broken, and the chains of hell which encircled them about, were they loosed? I say unto you, Yea, they were loosed, and their souls did expand, and they did sing redeeming love. And I say unto you that they are saved. (Alma 5:7–9)
38	The use of satanic oaths and covenants in forming secret combinations JE: “It gloriously appears in conquering him in that greatest and strongest combination and opposition of the devil and his adherents 12.36v. against Christ and his church just before the fall of Antichrist, wherein his visible kingdom has a fatal blow given it” “own counsels” OT (3) PGP (1) JE (10)	Moses 5:29, 49–52; 6:28–29 28 And for these many generations, ever since the day that I created them, have they gone astray, and have denied me, and have sought their own counsels in the dark; and in their own abominations have they devised murder, and have not kept the commandments, which I gave unto their father, Adam. 29 Wherefore, they have foresworn themselves, and, by their oaths, they have brought upon themselves death; and a hell I have prepared for them, if they repent not; (Moses 6:28–29)	Alma 37:27, 29; Helaman 6:21, 25, 26; 4 Nephi 1:42; Ether 8:15, 16, 20
39	The great antiquity of secret combinations and satanic covenants “great dominion” OT (2) PGP (1) JE (1) “numerous” BM (45) PGP (2) JE (300) “administering” BM (3) DC (9) PGP (1) JE (25) “secret works” BM (9) PGP (1) JE (1) JE: “they shall be recompensed according to these secret works of theirs”	Moses 5:28–31, 49; 6:15 15 And the children of men were numerous upon all the face of the land. And in those days Satan had great dominion among men, and raged in their hearts; and from thenceforth came wars and bloodshed; and a man’s hand was against his own brother, in administering death, because of secret works, seeking for power. (Moses 6:15)	2 Nephi 26:22; Helaman 6:27; Ether 8:9, 9:26, 10:33
[Page 326]40	Cain’s involvement in a secret combination to keep Abel’s murder secret “plot” BM (2) JE (15) “plots” BM (2) JE: “The opposition which Satan has made against the Reformed religion has been principally of the following kinds, viz. that which was made, 1, by a general council of the church of Rome; 2, by secret plots and devices;” “The papists have often endeavored to overthrow the Reformation by secret plots and conspiracy” “men are wont to divide into parties and set up their wills and envy one another and hate one another and plot against one another” JE: “Here is fulfilled what was shadowed forth of old by the murder of Cain and his city in the land of Nod”	Moses 5:29 29 And Satan said unto Cain: Swear unto me by thy throat, and if thou tell it thou shalt die; and swear thy brethren by their heads, and by the living God, that they tell it not; for if they tell it, they shall surely die; and this that thy father may not know it; and this day I will deliver thy brother Abel into thine hands. (Moses 5:29)	Helaman 6:27 27 Yea, that same being who did plot with Cain, that if he would murder his brother Abel it should not be known unto the world. And he did plot with Cain and his followers from that time forth. (Helaman 6:27)