Episode #206: An Analysis Of The Documentary Hypothesis

0:26 The. You're listening to the Mormon Renegade podcast. Here we go. Here we go. You ready? I'm ready. Ready for war. War. We're going to war. I pray for peace. But you prepared for war. Ready for war? It's good. That's a good saying that needs to be on a T-shirt too. Oh, for sure. That needs to be on a T-shirt for sure. You know, this, this topic here I spent a little bit of time on, right? And I was careful about who I selected to come on and talk about it because it's, it's, it's super.

1:07 I won't say it's vastly important, but it is a way that we view scripture, right? And when we view scripture, I don't care who we are, we have a filter that we view it through, right? And, and those filters aren't always bad, but it's important to know what the filter is. So we're going to cover the documentary hypothesis now. This will be the first one that we drop in this series. The other one is going to be with Josh Erickson. And that audio is buried deep in a vault that nobody knows about in Missouri. Because I didn't want to get now before you and I had a chance to talk first. Gotcha. Because I I knew I didn't want to do like a debate style thing. I just wanted two guys who were going to put their best foot forward on where they fall on this. And so you are firmly in the camp of the documentary hypothesis being a thing, right?

1:59 So let's just say yes. But I think it offers compelling things to think about. I'll put it that way. OK, OK, very compelling arguments. OK. And so you're going to be doing the pro and then Joshua will be doing, Joshua Erickson will be doing next week will be doing the kind of critique of the of the documentary hypothesis. Yeah, I mean, I suppose so. Right. Yeah. And I'm not, I didn't go to school for this or anything. So this is just all the things that I've thought about, right? And we're just going to see what's interesting.

2:40 So. So that's my take on it. Start out here. What is the? Documentary hypothesis. So the documentary hypothesis was first given in its first original format, probably late 19th century. And it's like in the realm of source critical Bible scholarship, I think is what you'd call that and. Source critical. What do you mean? Like you're going in and reading. So like, for example, let's say like evangelical and Protestant Christians look at the Bible and this is like God made this like, but almost like God handed it to to mankind, Like he handed the 10 commandments to Moses kind of a situation versus like, let's look at this academically.

3:28 Let's see if we can find traditions in it. Let's see if we can find like what the literary devices are rhetorical devices, you know, like really, you know, it's like going to college, you know, and breaking down the text, finding the themes that are overlooked, Right. OK, things like that. Source critical. And I think that there's a lot of thought provoking insight there. I think it's valid to to think in those dimensions and not just accept blindly on faith or on tradition. Right. And I speak personally about myself. I think I'm kind of personally my own. The way I view my faith is there's a pretty even tension between the logical, skeptical side and like the zealous, right, You know, crusader by, you know.

4:17 I think that's extremely I think that's a real good way to look at you're, you're very self aware there, which I always appreciate, right? Like I tend to be the guy who who wants it to be literal. And I know that sometimes that can lead me down some paths if I'm not careful with with with that right and check it at times, right. I I like, maybe it's just because I'm lazy. I like, I like it spelled out for me, right. And so I, I, I see where you come from, but no, that, that is an apartment description of you. I I would agree with that 100%. And so the documentary hypothesis as it was first formulated was I, and I think it was Julius Welhausen or Welhausen was basically his theory was there were four complete texts that he discerned that made-up the Old Testament as we know it and you call it. There's the J text, the E text or E source, J source, the D source, and the P source, which is J for Yaoist, E for Eloist, P for Priestly, and D for Deuteronomist and PP is for Priestly.

5:28 OK. And so the weaknesses of the documentary hypothesis are the act like that model, that original model have like it was accepted for like over 100 years as like that was pretty much like the written law in universities as far as like it was like this is fact. And within recent terms, it's kind of been disavowed in the sense that it's like a not complete, like it's not viewed as complete. And so that's an interesting conversation because the idea being is, as we mentioned earlier, like do we literally believe the first five books of Moses called the Pentateuch were written by Moses, or were there elements not written by Moses? You know?

6:13 And so Wellhausen postulates that J&E came together around the 8th century, so 720 BC or so, right? And then the other sources were added later and then more recent biblical scholarship, and I'm not endorsing this by the way. This is just what bit more recent biblical scholarship says is that even they're pushing the date to more recent like the Bible wasn't really compiled until after 600 BC, and even a lot of it between 300 and 100 BC. And and you don't subscribe to that? I've never looked into that. OK, so. You have no opinion. I have zero opinion on that point on that. Got you. OK, that makes sense. So that gives us kind of the formation here, right, That that tells us kind of according to the documentary hypothesis, there were, there were several, I don't want to call them authors 'cause it sounds like it's more than right. It's a, it's a class people, right? The Eloists, the Yahwehists, the Deuteronomists, the priests. Yeah.

7:11 And J and for those who don't know, yeah, J, it's, it's called in scholarly terms, is Yahwist. But the J makes a Yah or a Yeah, because the Germans, they're all German Bible stalkers. And the even, I'm pretty sure, yeah, like Jehovah comes from the, you know, it's the Germanized or anglicized version of the Hebrew, right? Gotcha. Yep, Yep. OK. And so the the thought is, is that, and now is this just the five books of Moses or does this stretch into like kings and. So, yeah, the, there's a with the, so there's the documentary hypothesis and then there's kind of a separate topic, but they're interrelated is the Deuteronomic reforms.

7:55 They think a separate tangential topic, right. And so the idea with the Deuteronomic reforms is that there's a class of literature called the Deuteronomic history, which is considered Joshua through Second Kings as well. OK. All right. And does it stretch into the New Testament at all? No, no, no, no. So it's just specific to the Old Testament parts of the Old Testament, not not all of it. Yeah. OK. All right, So then explain the hypothesis this way. When do they come together? Why? Well, first let's start start here. Why are they apart, right? What what do we got going on?

8:36 So that's probably. Why some of the, you know, the smart people decided like, oh, maybe we should take a look at this. And it's not like it's an interesting thing from what I understand is like, while that was kind of like the guy that ruled the school was that thought they've kind of wanted to step back, but nothing concrete is like replaced it with that that much power and presence and like that field like they have. So they've supplemented it. Yeah. And so the, the original idea was like, yeah, the E source was there complete, the J source was there complete, and then the D source was complete and the P source was complete. Then you had an editor coming in and fixing it all together. Well, there's no evidence of that. There was a you know, we've never found E We've never found J. Like we've never found, like we've gone through the Dead Sea Scrolls and found anything performing at the. This is the complete original J document written in 700 BC, right?

9:32 But that doesn't mean to me. I don't think it means dismiss the whole thing. So the supplementary ideas to this are OK, maybe they didn't exist as complete written documents, but they were oral traditions. Oh I see that then came from different backgrounds. And so instead of viewing the kingdoms of Israel and Judah as a unified religion, look at that more like in the state of our world, we have many factions and groups, and we're kind of competing theologically on certain things. Sure, OK, we're in discussion. And then over time, at pivotal moments, there was a synthesis into the text of the different traditions. And so maybe the traditions of J&E came together 1st and then you had other editors also called redactors coming in and finalizing.

10:21 OK. But you have several when it goes down. And that could be why some biblical scholars think that what we have as the Old Testament didn't really exist between until between 300 and 100 BC, Right. And so an interesting parallel, though, too, is to me, you know, we have an advantage, so to speak, with the Book of Mormon because the redactors are vocal and they identify themselves. Yeah, I guess so, right, Because in the. Bible, it doesn't do that. It's a silent redactor. But Mormon and Moro and I taught and Nephi, you know, because that's when you yeah, like the when you look at the small plates versus the the later, the narrative type changes too, right.

11:03 And so if we can be honest about scripture and how it comes together based on what we know, like the Book of Mormon is an anthology of Nephi records. And maybe even more so than just small plates of Nephi, large plates of Nephi, we have this and this this tradition of, you know, I think Joseph and Oliver are seeing like a cave of treasures type motif where they see that whole cave full of Nephi record, Nephite records, right, right. And Mormons and Emeroni are abridging a lot of history, OK and right. And so that that would kind of be the model then according to the Deuteronomous right now, now our our are E&J separated geographically. Is that what we're against?

11:46 The. Idea and some people dispute E being legit I guess, but I think it's relatively compelling from the little I have seen. I didn't have time to dive into this topic, but I've heard that some Latter Day Saints scholars are pretty well convinced that the Nephites learn more E. If though, if we, if we can then compare, then why not compare the Book of Mormon on the same level as biblical source critical scholarship and evaluate those things? Like if they're saying things that seem to be like what we would consider and classify as the E text, and they're like, they're saying a lot more of that kind of stuff, that kind of language than the others. Like that's interesting.

12:28 That would be interesting because that would be a proof to the Book of Mormon if you could actually tie that there, right? Right. And so it's interesting too, considering that the tradition of E is that it's a Northern tradition and Lehigh's family was from Manasa, which is the Northern Kingdom. OK, so that fits. All right. I see. I see where you're going there. So E is the Northern Kingdom, J is the the Southern Kingdom. Yeah, and interestingly enough, you know, you could almost consider it E being Ephraim and J being Judah, even though the scholars say it being it's Elohim or Jehovah, right? OK, it kind of fits. You know, that's kind of how they break it down anyways. And then where would the Deuteronomous come from? Or are they like a classical scribe or?

13:08 Or other scribes that come in later, you know, in the, in the, I mean, it's all put in as like that happened during, let me say, after Israel, northern Israel was destroyed by Syria is when everyone thinks that was after that point that the Deuteronomic reforms happened under King Josiah. And maybe there was other reforms also under Hezekiah, which is like two or three kings like a generation before him. And so there's some interesting stuff there, but mostly under Josiah. Interesting. Now OK, so we got E in the north, J in the South. The Deuteronomous would have been scribes, right?

13:51 So they could have came from anywhere. And then what about the what about the the priestly classes would have come from the southern right or the Levites. OK, so and they would have been over the. Temple and their whole thing is they're obsessed with temple stuff and they're obsessed with dates and calendars and minutiae. OK, so. Anything that would be like hard to be an oral tradition, like with that idea that we're talking about earlier that like these are all oral traditions except P, which is like all these details of things. Like even with like the flood myth that we discussed a while back, where it's like finished, you know, the the arc will be 300 cubits by whatever, by whatever, by whatever, and then it will be finished to a cubit of the top. Like all those detail, like the priests love those things, the idea.

14:36 And so like when you have all those details, that's kind of evidence to those, the people who believe in this that like, OK, that was probably a written source. OK. It's documented. Actually documented, not just thoroughly. Transcribed, I got you. OK, so I'm going to sum this all up and then I want to move on to kind of like the evidence for it, right. So we have the Elois who would be in the northern kingdoms, the the Yahweh S which would be in the southern Kingdom. Yeah. Then we have the priestly class, which were the Levites. And then we have the Deuteronomous who were essentially scribes. OK.

15:18 Now in my estimation, so the essentially the, the if, if we're looking at it as kind of predominantly NS, there was some rub going on there between those two groups, right? There was big rub. So my question is, is do we see evidence of that rub through here, right? Do we see because? Because my thought would be if, if, if the documentary hypothesis is a thing, I would expect to see some rub going on between the text. You see the rub rubs there? All right.

15:58 There's some chafe, bro. Is there? Yeah. Big time. Interesting. Yeah. I mean, yeah. So you have like, one example is who sold Joseph into slavery. You know, we talked about this a little bit. Was it Reuben or was it Judah? You have different fingers pointing. You have the story with Shechem, which was interesting to me. I just learned this one. Like you have one story is like and probably from the Judah side, talking about how Reuben, Simeon and Levi was it went and killed all the males and check them for raping their sister Dinah. And then like in another part it says that they bought that they bought the land. Interesting.

16:42 OK, you know, so which is it, right? You know, so if you're just if you're not aware of that, you're going to read over this and not necessarily see a contradiction. There isn't, but it also maybe seems like there could be stuff like that, right. Let's see. There's, I don't know all the unfortunately, I'm not prepared on this one. I wish I would have been but Aaron and the golden calves is thought to be a polemic, you know, against Levites from or by Levites against. So for example, like what that we have this people might take this the wrong way. I don't know, but we have Aaron making the golden calves at Mount Sinai and we know how that goes. It's really interesting.

17:33 But do we know how many people know that a few 100 years later, King Jeroboam of northern Israel does the same thing. He sets up a golden calf down in Rama, I want to say, or a or somewhere in Samaria, right where the wherever the capital was close to Jerusalem. And then he sets another one up in the north territory in the in Dan. So there's 2 golden calf idols on the southern extremes of the northern Kingdom and the northern extreme of the northern Kingdom. And people think that the story about Aaron actually making the golden calves was a retroactive story put in to prefigure and slander Jeroboam.

18:20 Interesting. You know, like, look, he was such an idiot that he, you know, he did what Aaron did, you know, and was who was cursed, you know, and LED Israel to sin and as a way to dismiss his authority as a schismatic nation, right? Because he, Jeroboam, was the first king of Israel after Solomon died and Rihoboam was Solomon's son. And all the tribes got together and Rheubom raised the taxes or he threatened to. He said, I'm going to raise the taxes and do all this stuff. And all the 10 tribes were like, what have we to do with the House of David? See you later. Got you. That's when the Kingdom split, right? And then the text, the Bible says that, or it kind of intimates that to avoid northern dependency on the southern cult or the priesthood of the Levites at the temple which was established in Jerusalem, they set up their own altars and their own temples so that their people would not pilgrimage to another Kingdom.

19:22 Right, right. That's interesting. Is that, is that where we start getting like, oh, the temple on that elephant teen idol would that be? So that's later, but yeah, and there's stuff like that where it's like in Deuteronomy, it says that you should only build the temple in the place that God designates. And then in the Deuteronomic history, which is in Kings, says that place is Jerusalem, and there can't be a temple outside of Jerusalem. But then we find a temple in LFT Island in Lower Upper Egypt, which is southern Egypt. And we're sure it's it's, it's, it's a Jewish temple. 100% OK, yeah, interesting. But it doesn't play by all the rules we think of with Judaism either.

20:07 Really. How's it different? Well, if I recall, there's like other gods involved. Really. Yeah. And so that's another thing that's kind of interesting is it seems that there's been times in Israel where they weren't always monotheist, right? And however you're going to slice that, and some people would argue, well, that's why they were always cursed, you know, it's because they could get it through their heads not to worship anyone but God. Right. But then on the other hand, it seems to be that the Deuteronomic reforms were like, and not my contention, the thing that I kind of see is they got rid of the idea that God had a family and they get rid of God having a wife and children. Yeah.

20:59 You know, it's kind of the what goes away with that. Really. So so in according to the Documentary Hypothesis, the Deuteronomous would have. According to the Deuteronomic reform OK. Deuteronic reform. They would have moved away from that into a more solely monotheistic kind of a thing. God doesn't have a family. God is just a solo being hanging out in the heavens. Yeah, I've heard it called Yahweh alone ISM. OK, all right. Interest. OK, So what other kind of proofs do we got? So yeah, this is interesting to me. You know, the compelling thing to me is the a lot of the evidence seems to be in the Book of Mormon and out the gate, Nephi.

21:42 Can you hand me the scriptures right there? I think I I would like to read some of this if you're good with. That I do. I mean, I hope you're more up to date on your scripture mastery than me, because I put I I'll still I'll do my best to help you out, but I don't know if I have I don't have in my notes handy particular verses. Got. You. But we can spend time to look for them if you want. I don't care. But if you recall, Nephi says the the he doesn't really care for the way that the Jews think or write. And I'm not going to teach my children after the learning of the Jews. And to really understand Isaiah, for an example, you have to be studied after the manner of the learning of the Jews. And so like, what does that mean? Like Nephi does not like whatever that is. And you have to remember Nephi is not a Jew, right? You know, So and the archaeology from this seems to point that like around that time that the northern Kingdom was destroyed, a lot of refugees showed up in Jerusalem. And the archaeology shows, like building the, you know, construction boom.

22:44 You got to put and build all these homes for all these refugees. And so the population increases and we got to make room for all these northern people, which could have been Lehigh, you know? Is that why the brass plates were a different tradition? You know, where there's prophets like Zenith, Zenith and Noom who prophesied that the Jews would kill the Messiah. But then the Jews didn't like that, and they killed those prophets, right? You remember that? That's in the Book of Mormon. I do, yeah. That's that's like in the very first one or two chapters, right. I mean. And so Skousen points that out and I don't remember which work, but he saw, he talks about that in in in at least some places where he says that the reason that the Jews killed, you know, the book of Mormons says that the Jews killed Zenith and zenith and knew them because they told the Jews that they would kill the Messiah. Well, why didn't the Jews write about that? Why don't we have that in the Bible? Because they weren't from Judah.

23:39 Those prophets were not, weren't, weren't from Judah. You know, that's fascinating because I did AI did a podcast with Ken Peterson, Shut Up to Ken, where we talked about DNA and the Book of Mormon and and he made the point and it didn't dawn on me like I felt kind of silly in the moment, right, Which it's really just kind of the theme of this is like I have on really smart guys and I'm just a meathead here. But like Nephi and and Lehigh, they weren't Jews because they were from the Northern kingdoms, right? And so everyone's looking for Jewish DNA, but shouldn't expect to find any there. Right.

24:24 Interest. Yeah, not necessarily. And so, yeah, you have this idea that Nephi doesn't like. Can I explore this just a little bit here before we before we crank on? Yeah, Yeah. But they would still offer sacrifices and kind of the Jewish tradition, right? Yeah, they kept the Law of Moses, so they said OK. All right, until Christ. So they weren't Jewish, but they were adhering to the Jew. They weren't ethnic Jews, but they were practicing Judaism according to the Law of Moses. So let's say this in different terms, maybe let's say Judaism. For anyone out there, let me translate that saying it in different words is like OK, let me help you me ahead. Let's.

25:11 Say that there was a previous Hebraic tradition or Israelite tradition or traditions, and Judaism is one of many as it's come down to us today, so. So kind of like we could say that like the Church of Christ over in Pennsylvania is a Restoration tradition. Yeah, but it's not the same tradition exactly as what's practiced in the LDS Church or Brighamite tradition. Right. And let's say that Judaism is apostasy and but it came from something else. You. Know. That had, yeah, that wasn't as apostate originally, You know, it came from a source that was more pure. And so this is like, to me, this kind of is a helpful tool. Like these things, talking about the documentary hypothesis, the Deuteronomic reforms, and viewing the Book of Mormon through this lens is a tool to us to be careful to integrate apostate Judaism or even apostate Christianity back into like our world view, OK.

26:20 You know, And so if you read because I think there can be a trend, you know, to read the Old Testament or the New Testament and kind of impose that on US versus viewing it through the Restoration lens. OK, so, so OK, so that that makes perfect sense. So we we have and, and is that what the scholarship says is that a lot of what's going on in the Southern Kingdom is kind of an apostate version of the original? Oh, I don't know if it's a apostate of the. I mean, by definition, I guess it would have to because the, you know, the definition of apostasy is just turning from beliefs that a person formerly held to be true. OK.

27:07 That's the literal definition of apostasy, right? And so, yeah, it's a reform, though, you know, to put it nicely. And so it's just like an evolution of theology. OK. All right. Nope. That makes sense. All right. Thanks for clearing that up. So, but interestingly, the timing is really good with the Deuteronomic reforms because King, so the story goes, and this is the important thing. And you tell me if there's anything to sniff at here, but it's kind of weird. Do you know how old King Josiah was when he was made king? No, 8 years old. Really. Yeah. His his father Ammon was killed by a coup, and then he was put on the throne and things actually held together enough for him to do. But he was 8 years old.

27:57 Right. So he's not really running things. No, there's no way. No. There. There's someone who's trusty and trust running that thing until he's of age. Well, then when he's like 16 to 18 years old or so, the high priest goes into the archives and is like, sire, I found this book. It's the book of the law of the Lord. And then he gives it to Josiah to read it. And Josiah like Rens his coat or whatever. He's like, why haven't we been following this? And like everyone, all the scholars are like, that's Deuteronomy. And so like, it has a questionable origin. What? What makes him think it's Deuteronomy? You want to I can do a quick Google search. Yeah, go ahead, I can edit this. Yeah, 'cause 'cause I think that is kind of a linchpin moment there, right?

28:38 It is, but it sounds suspicious off the, you know, sure. That's like, oh, we can do whatever we want. We're the scribes and the priests and we have a weak ruler. Like if there's an opportune moment to do something that we want to do, like that's the time to do it. Got you. OK. Does that make sense? Yeah. But let's let's let's look at this real quick. OK, so quick search says, because the text's context contents, so the book of Deuteronomy's contents regarding its laws and its historical narrative strongly are, are strongly reflected in Josiah's subsequent reforms. So like Second Kings or whatever this happens talks about all the changes that Josiah makes.

29:22 Gotcha. And then you can read those and then go read Deuteronomy and it would be like. Kind of think so. Probably not word for word, but similar ideas are there. Right. And so it's like the question that needs to be asked, why weren't they living? If, if Moses wrote that, why weren't they doing it before? Interesting. And so the and then, but it's like, well, it was hidden. The book was hidden. And to me that's like, that's suspicious that it was right in the archives and no one knew it was there. Like the 1886 revelation, like the 1886 revelation, except for like 700 years, right? You know, yeah, it's just hiding in there. Right. And then one priest decides to upload it to the Internet and hope everyone notices.

30:04 Check you know OK. And we can get into what the reforms were in a minute. Yeah, or whatever, it'll come up. So yeah, this happens in the days of Lehi like or Jeremiah I should say. And Jeremiah's prophet prophetic ministry starts taking off during Josiah's reign. Right and contemporary. With Lehigh, So like I would wait, this is head cannon or the way I envision this, you know, gospel according to Elder Ness, Lehigh would probably would have been a really young man. OK. Or maybe his father would have remembered the way things would have been and witnessed the changes. Gotcha.

30:48 OK. And you're probably going to get guys like both like Lehigh and maybe even Ishmael who left Jerusalem, who come from families who remember the way things used to be. And after being led by the Lord, we're told to leave to preserve the way things used to be before the reforms. Right. OK. All right. And so to me, that's kind of very, it's not a connection, but it's correlated, if that makes sense. Yes, there's a very provoking correlation to those themes, right? Yeah, it's not necessarily causation. It's it's more of right. But also, so now into the, the whole thing about the Yahweh alone ISM, you know that like the Deuteronomic reforms got rid of Asherah, which is like the the divine wife or consort of God. And then you get rid of the divine Mother, you get rid of the Son, right, right.

31:38 And then what happens when Lehi's preaching, when he's called as a prophet in his more mature years, his first message in the 1st chapter of the Book of Mormon is Babylon's going to come destroy us. And he kind of gets laughed at like whatever, dude. And then he says, repent and believe in the Son of God. And then now that we're going to kill you, dude. So he crosses a line somewhere where? Where where he talks about a Messiah. Interesting. And then you have Lehman and Lemuel who are like, we know that people in Jerusalem are right just because they keep the law. So are they Deuteronomists? Interesting. OK, you know, or pro Deuteronomic reforms because they're not atheists, you know, as like or just infidels or recalcitrant children be like I was right, you know, as you think growing up like there's rebellious like no, maybe they were well educated in the school that they were brought up in. That's an interesting way to look at it. So, so the the theory there would be is that they weren't just like this.

32:43 I guess the way it's presented in Sunday school from an LDS tradition, it's like Nephi is the one that goes to church. Nephi is the one that follows through with baptism. Follows the Prophet. He follows the prophet, he goes and he gets the fast offerings when he's 12 and he blesses the sacrament of 16. And then Lehman and Lemuel are the ones driving in the fast car, and they're drinking. Behind the trust building. OK. But that's not necessarily what we could be looking at here according to this hypothesis here. It could be looking at it as they were very learned in a particular school in a particular school and that's clashing with Nephi and Lehi on what what they believe. And they're, what do they call them?

33:24 A visionary man. Oh. Yeah, and so Lehi and Nephi's whole thing is more like being taught by the Spirit in Revelation versus the law as it's written. I think there's a point there right because it never says that layman and Lemuel are are pardoning expression pissed because dad won't let me go corrals with the women right. We don't hear of any law of chastity issues. We don't hear of any anything where they don't want to keep the commandments necessarily they. Just want to stay in Jerusalem. Interesting. OK. Yep. All right. That's that's kind of interesting. All right, I could see that. Yeah.

34:05 Anyway, thought provoking in my opinion. And then so Jeremiah, we're talking about him a lot right now. I do have a verse that we can go to, but it's Jeremiah 88, I believe. Let's check it. OK. 88 you said. I believe so. Who's going to get there first? I got it. See. Can't just always count on attack, OK? It is that is the right one. You want me to read it? Read it. And then I'm going to read a different translation because the King James sucks. OK, how do you say we are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us, though certainly in vain may he it.

34:51 The pen of the scribes is in vain. What? Do you think it means it's kind of hard on that one? It I think it's a, it's a criticism that that maybe the scribes are inserting some things there. That's exactly what it's saying, but it is a little cumbersome with King James English. Yep, that's fine to get one here. I'll just read a few. Maybe even How do you say we are wise and the law of the Lord is with us?

35:31 Lo, certainly in vain made he it. The pen of the scribes is in vain. That's interesting, right? This is Jeremiah during the ministry of or the during the reign of. King Josiah. And that's that's verbatim from the King James. OK, that's verbatim How can you say we are wise, we possess the Lord's instruction when the lying pen of the scribes has surely distorted it? Interesting. What translation is that? CEB, whatever that is. I'm looking at a whole bunch of translations erv You keep saying we have the Lord's teaching so we are wise, but this is not true because the scribes have lied with their pens. Interesting.

36:13 So in Jeremiah it's saying something about the scribes have been been fooling around. And there's and there's look at us, we have the law. And because we have the law and we follow it, we're wise. And Jeremiah saying, what does that matter if you if it's false, OK. And the law is Torah. It's the same word, by the way, right? So you could substitute Torah in for that. You know, we are wise because we have the Torah. What does that matter if it's been falsified? Interesting. OK, that's interesting. I'm trying to look for any footnotes or anything there, but there's not much in the the King James LDS version there that would that would shed any more light on that. But it does seem to be saying that the scribes were taking liberties.

37:02 Right. And the timing's perfect. Yeah. With when that would have been. Written well, yeah, because Jeremiah's contemporary Lehigh. Yeah. And we discussed how Lehigh gets in trouble when he starts talking about the Son of God again. We're like, theoretically that's been removed from the discourse, you know, of approved correlated teachings. Right. And you kind of get a hint at where they went with that because there's, there are scriptures like that God has a son. So how do you interpret that? And they kind of like view it as a, you know, Jews to the state, for example, if they view it is like Israel as God's son, it's like the whole nation collectively.

37:43 Gotcha. Is God's son like the chosen? You know, Yeah. The chosen seed, you know, is the whole nation of Israel. And it's not like refiguring a Messiah. Well, and and. Look, a divine figure because they believe that they're the Messiah will be political right. Right, well, and and there there is like the overarching theme in, in my opinion, of a lot of the Old Testament is God is dealing with a whole group of people not worried about the singular as much, right. It's not to the New Testament that we get Christ really speaking singularly to people, right? So that makes sense. Yeah, I think so.

38:25 You got anything else? No, I'm ready to move on when you are. Cool. Me too. Another cool evidence is the brazen serpent. OK. In my mind, this is pretty cool. We're all aware. Yeah, Children of Israel are in. I think it's in numbers is when it first pops. I think it's in numbers 21 and the people are wicked, and the Lord sends snakes and fiery things. Fiery. Flying serpents, yes, that's the way it reads in the English. Although, you know, for example, the Stick of Joseph podcast, just in an episode like this week, or at least it where they kind of went into that one and they're like, well, Dave was like kind of says two things. It sent snakes and he sent fiery things, which is seraphim. OK, and it gets read as the same thing. OK, all right.

39:21 But then the Lord said, or the, the the people go to Moses and say, dude, we're dying. We're getting bit by snakes or poison. And then the Lord says to Moses, go make a seraphim. And yeah. And then then it says Moses then made a bronze serpent and put it on the pole. It's like, is the serpent the seraphim? Maybe. But in any case, the serpent gets or the seraphim seems to be represented by the brazen serpent and it's lifted up. And then Christ uses that image and the. Few years back I started to get the feeling that we, as fundamentalists and orthodox Mormons, we need our own stuff.

40:06 Up to now, we've been able to buy and purchase all of our scriptures, books, art, and music from other restoration organizations, and that's been good. But there's no guarantee it's going to remain that way. Also, it can be a bit tricky as you scour the Internet trying to find all the books from your favorite fundamentalist or orthodox Mormon authors. As I thought about this, I feel like I was really given a solution now through the hard work of others, because let's face it, I'm the guy least qualified in all the world to build a website. I'm happy to present to you 1830 mercantile.org. Right now on the website you can see that we have all the books that have ever been written by 4 authors, including names like Drew Brownie and Ogdenkraut. Also very soon there will be a link to buy art and music all produced by Mormons with a deep love for the restored gospel. There's also places for you to get free resources where you can find podcasts, videos, classes, and other presentations. Also coming very soon there will be a place for events where you can list the events from your organization so that you can get the most out of that attendance.

41:14 Now this can be as big as you want it to be. It's all up to you guys out there if you want to buy and post things on here. Now, if you're someone who produces something that you feel like others can benefit from, 1830 Mercantile is a place where you can make all of those products available for purchase. All you need to do is drop me an e-mail at mormonrenegade@gmail.com and put 1830 in in the title of that e-mail with a short message and either myself or someone else from the 1830 Mercantile team will reach out to you so we can get your product up there on the site. Now to make sure that all the products that we offer are affordable and to ensure that the vast majority of the profits go to the producer, the website percentage is only three to 4% of the total cost.

42:02 And that's just so I can pay the pros that have created this website and keep the lights on the website itself. Finally, by making some of your purchases at 1830 mercantile.org, you will be supporting folks whose principles and morals are close, if not the same as yours. At the same time not giving your money away to people who stand against everything you stand for. So no matter if you're looking to make a purchase or you're a seller that wants to get your products listed, head on over to 1830 mercantile.org today. Drop me an e-mail and we'll make sure that we get back out to you. Now back to the show. That's the way it reads in the English, although, you know, for example, the Stick of Joseph podcast just did an episode like this week, or at least it where they kind of went into that one and they're like, well, Dave was like, it kind of says two things.

42:53 It sent snakes and he sent fiery things, which is Seraphim. OK, And it gets read as the same thing. OK, all right. But then the Lord said or the the the people go to Moses and say, dude, we're dying. We're getting bit by snakes, your poison. And then the Lord says to Moses, go make a seraphim. And yeah. And then then it says Moses then made a bronze serpent and put it on the pole. It's like, is the serpent the seraphim? Maybe. But in any case, the serpent gets or the seraphim seems to be represented by the brazen serpent and it's lifted up. And then Christ uses that image and the prophets in the Book of Mormon use that image as a type of Christ, right? Right.

43:46 And in the Book of Mormon, it's overwhelmingly positive, the association of the, the brazen serpent with the Messiah, right? And it's like 5 times in the Book of Mormon that I'm aware of that they pointed out there could be more. And there's like 4 times that it's mentioned in the Old Testament and the connotation is bad. It's a bad thing. So why are the Nephites using it as a good image? And when the Deuteronomic history is like, this is bad stuff, This is idolatry. And one of the reforms was like, so presumably this artifact, this relic that Moses made was in the temple.

44:30 I hope. Yeah. In the days of Isaiah, it was in chapter 6. In Isaiah, he sees it in the Holy of Holies. And then in the days of Josiah, about 100 years later, Josiah breaks it and says the people were idolatrous and you shouldn't offer sacrifices to it. And yeah, they're very interesting. But Isaiah did in chapter chapter 6 and so. There's a rub. And so there's a rub and so it's, and it's not like animal sacrifices. It was incense offerings. Right. But here you got Isaiah offering incense offerings to something that Josiah breaks and removes from the temple.

45:15 Gotcha. You know that the Nephites, say, are good, and the Nephites really like Isaiah. Right, right. Yes, because in fact, Christ kind of comes and scold them. Like why aren't these words in here? Corona is like, bro, if I had more room on these plates, I'd write more Isaiah. It's like the last few chapters of the Book of Mormon, he says. Right. Yeah, interesting. OK, so there's there's definitely a rub, right. OK. Yeah, and the the text of the Bible says that King Josiah put to death false priests. And it seems like it makes it seem like they were Pagan or like idolatrous or like or like temple prostitutes.

45:56 OK, to and there's some push back, like I think Margaret Barker and some others have postulated that, OK, maybe they weren't that and that's like a polemic like slander and like maybe they were actually high priests like Melchizedek priesthood is, but in our vernacular, interesting. And then they were overthrown violently by Levites by by Levites loyal to King Josiah. OK, all right. And Dave Butler points that out on several Stick of Joseph podcast. He's really, you know, hard on that one he said talks about and he draws the parallels between King Josiah and Melchizedek as a king. And it's like, look at all the things that King Josiah does when he says the people are wicked.

46:40 Let's go smash their stuff and kill people. And then in the Book of Mormon, Alma's talking about the best king that ever was. And when they're when his people were wicked, he preached repentance under that right. And he draws the distinction. But both the Bible and the Book of Mormon both use the term, these were the best kings or the best priests that God has ever had. And so Dave's contention was like, I think Alma knew what the Deuteronomic reform said, and that was actually a plug and he was taking a shot at the Deuteronomists.

47:21 Oh, OK. When he said, you know, this is the best king or the best high priest that you know that's ever lived, just like the Old Testament says King Josiah was the greatest king that ever lived or there was none better as a that's what that's what it says about Melchizedek too, right? OK, there was none greater. So So what? Let me, let me. Stop right there. The methods are different completely. Different, right? Let let me let me stop right there. And and is is so king Josiah is the king during the time of Jeremiah and. Or Lehi's early life would have been because at the at the when they leave Jerusalem, Zedekiah is king, right? But like during during Lehi's boyhood years, Josiah would have been an older man.

48:01 Now let me ask this question. That account of of the priest going in and slaughtering all the other priests, smashing the idols, would that have been before? Or after Lehi had left Jerusalem before. Before, definitely. Well, it could have been an ongoing thing. Like maybe let's look at it this way. Maybe there was a massive up upheaval beforehand. But like now it's kind of like, OK, Lehi comes from this other tradition and you got to be secret until the Lord tells you to go start preaching, OK? And then like you get identified like what school you belong to and how they want to kill you. OK all.

48:43 Right, because you're illegal. Because because I'm like thinking, OK, So what? What would be on the the brass plates, right? Good. Question. Because I think that would that like it would be hard for me. And maybe I'm I'm wrong here and you can correct me if I'm wrong, right? And and this is me, you know, pushing back here a little bit gently. It'd be hard for me to think that Lehigh would have the entire book of Jeremiah, right, because they are contemporaries, right? And so this idea that that Alma would be quoting what was going on in the book of Jeremiah, but it's mounting on the time frame. Do you see where I'm going? I. Do but it's not necessarily that they're taking or ripping off Jeremiah because you have like the Jeremiah, yeah, he has his own prophetic works, but like, but it's different literature because you have the history of the nation, which is kings 2nd, 1st and 2nd kings. And then you have Jeremiah, which is prophetic literature and they're different even like if you were to go talk to a Jew, you have like the the the the Tanakh, which is the Old Testament is the Pentateuch, the first five books of Moses. That's the law, that's and then you have the prophets, which is Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah, Amos, Malachi, all that's the prophets.

49:57 And then you have whatever the word is for like Psalms, Proverbs. So there's three classes of like literature in the Tanakh, right? And so the Jeremiah covers his life, obviously, but like the history, like the more secular history, it's not prophetic writings are also covering the same time as Jeremiah in the history side, right? All right, so. OK, so. Except for, interestingly enough, Second Kings, if I recall correctly, does not mention Jeremiah even though it's the same time period. Interesting.

50:37 So he's omitted from the history and we only have his words. Yeah, Isaiah is mentioned in First and Second Kings. Right. But Jeremiah is admitted. We have Jeremiah and Lamentations, right? They're written by Jeremiah. Right. Because do we have an account of what all was on the brass plates? I don't think we do we. Don't have nothing, but we have quotes out of the Book of Mormon. That's as quote that's as much as we have you know. So when when various prophets quote Zenith or Zenos, we have those quotes like the allegory of the olive, right? We have where Alma's teaching the Zoramites to go pray in your closet and pray over your fields and pray over your cattle and pray over everything before you do anything and consecrated unto the Lord.

51:29 You don't you know the prophet Zena or Zena said you don't need to worship in a synagogue like we have those quotes got you. We know that would be on the brass plates or be paraphrasing something on the brass plates, right? But besides those things we can glean from the Book of Mormon as quotes, we don't have anything. OK, OK, Nope, that that answers that. I think that that survives it. But there's a, you know, you, you ask where it comes from. And it's interesting that it, you know, I think there's a reasonable case that it was probably maybe not the E source, but more close to the E source, like the mythical E source that we're talking about the Los source.

52:12 You know, if what other Book of Mormon scholars have said is that, oh, the Nephites use language that seem more Elohist than anyone else, that could be a reason why, you know, because they're, they have the brass plates, right? It doesn't, you know, it all it brings into question like, why was that necessary? Because, you know, why couldn't they have just carried Torah scrolls? Well, because it's not the same book. Interesting. Yeah, it's not the same tradition. So there's something in the brass plates that aren't in the scrolls that are necessary. Right. That were necessary. And so the Nephites probably had both or all of it. They probably had the Torah and and the brass plates and the supplement together just like we have the Book of Mormon in the Bible and the Doctrine Covenants in the Pearl of Great Price.

52:55 OK. No, that makes sense. I see. I see how that can track all right. And so the idea and we have a, we have quotes from Joseph of Egypt that aren't in the Bible, in the Book of Mormon, presumably. I don't know if it might even say this. I don't recall off the top of my head if it does attribute it to the brass plates, right. But you have prophecies and quotes from Joseph. Where do they come from? How did how did the Nephites know about those things? They're probably written on the brass plates. So some people have thought it might even be in Don Bradley's book 116 Lost Pages, where they pause it that the that Joseph made the brass plates and it was passed down through either Ephraim or Manasseh as a record of Joseph's family, like a journal that became scripture. Right, All right, gotcha.

53:49 OK Nope, that makes perfect sense it it would and and the part that that is that's a little madding is we don't have many sources right on on this stuff. It's not like we have found the equivalent of the Dead Sea Scrolls for the Eloists. Right, right. But the scholars, interestingly with my last point, are fairly certain that all the Joseph material in Genesis is the source. Really. Yeah, yeah. And so the first few chapters like Genesis 1, I, I should say it, Genesis 1 is P Genesis two through like 35 is mostly J, supplemented by Deuteronomists and priests. And then after chapter 35, it's heavily E&J mixed. And all the Joseph stuff seems to be predominantly E OK, all right, that makes sense.

54:49 Yep. And so that does fit with the brass plates potentially being from Joseph, right? And the Book of Mormon being more Eloist in nature. Yeah, 'cause it there is, there is that that prophecy in there about, you know, he shall be called Joseph after his father. And then the Captain Moroni lays the title of liberty and says, you know that this is a type of Joseph. When Joseph's father Jacob saw the coat that was rent, he said, so shall this, you know, because these remains, I have these remains of the coat, I prophecy that the seed of Joseph will remain. And that's not in the Bible, that's just in the Book of Mormon.

55:30 Right. Right, but Moroni quotes that when he when he raises the title of liberty. OK. So he had access to something that's not the Torah. Got you. OK. Yeah. But let me ask this question. I imagine that if if if if the documentary or Yeah, the documentary hypothesis is correct. I imagine that the priests in class would have a vested interest in nobody other than the Levites performing sacrifices. Correct. That would be fairly, yeah, I'd say so. OK.

56:12 So that's fair. With that, we do see Lehi and Nephi offering sacrifices in the Book of Mormon, right? They're not Levites. They're not Levites. Now, how do Levites square this with things like Abraham, right? Yep, that's a big question. So. So do we see anything that would lend itself to say that the Levites were then critical of Abraham? And there's Noah. And so that when we went over the flood podcast, you know, we have we we dissected the two flood narratives and one is P and one is J and Ji recall has no offering sacrifices. But the P1, the priestly source, does not have Noah offering sacrifice because he's not a Levite. Right, interesting.

56:59 OK, so there is a rub there going. On there is a rub. OK, interesting. Yeah. And yeah, you have even to with the stuff like the Deuteronomic reform people, the the D source is critical of certain things that other that the patriarchs did, like Abraham worshipped in Groves. You know, you ever read those phrases where the kings that were good in Israel and Judah were the ones that tore down the Groves in the high places, right. You've read that? But but aren't those connected to like ballism? Or or. The text says that they are, but Abraham worships in high places in Groves. OK.

57:45 And you know, there's the he, he gets the promise at the the oak tree of where where he gets promised by the Lord of having each one seed. You know in the the tree symbol is a symbol of Asherah which is the divine feminine which gets erased by the Deuteronomic reforms. Which, oddly enough, shows back up in Lehigh's vision. Oh yeah, there are people. I think it was Dan Peterson or whoever the, you know, big scholar at BYU wrote a whole thing called Interpreter Foundation, yeah, called Nephi and his Asherah. OK. But that imagery pops up all throughout the Book of Mormon. And so that was another thing that they took out of the temple too, allegedly was the menorah was a symbol of the tree of life, which is at the divine woman, you know. 3 And so they removed the brazen serpent, which is a sign of the sun, and they removed the menorah, which was the which was a symbol of the divine mother, and they removed or broke those things from the holy of Holies and or they broke the serpent.

58:46 And according to Dave Butler, his contention is they moved the menorah out of its proper sequence into the second room of the temple instead of the third room, which is the holy of Holies. And that's why Isaiah says woe unto those that take darkness for light and make light darkness is because they took the light source out of the the Holy of Holies to illuminate the darker room and left the room that was supposed to be illuminated. To be dark now. Now hear me out here though, maybe I'm misunderstanding something. Didn't the menorah come into being during the Maccabee period? I don't think so. OK. All right. Because I thought that was. I think it played a part, but I think it needed that. It predated that.

59:27 OK, all right then. That's my mistake. So the Hanukkah came from the Maccabee. That was a holiday because it was like the miracle that the they were able to keep the menorah lit for while they were under siege. Oh, OK. That's why I'm getting confused. All right, The menorah was already there. It was the oil that was running that should have ran dry, and it didn't. OK, check. Let's see if Jacob anointing a a pillar or a stone, which is like I guess so like that. There was another. It's been a long time since I've looked into any of that, but it's it sounds like having an idol almost. But when you erect. Like a monument in that fashion, you know, they were called Asherahs for the feminine goddess and then Amasaba, I think for the for the male and Jacob arex Amasaba at Bethel and that's like not allowed, but Deuteronomists, but he does it.

1:00:26 And it just never gets like. It stays in the narrative because he does it, you know? See, and and this is where it gets tricky, right? Because I'm like if and, and maybe it's my misunderstanding here of the documentary hypothesis, but my thought is based on what we read here in Jeremiah 8, it says, OK, the scribes, you're making all these changes. Why would they stop? And not leave it or not take it out entirely. Not take it out entirely, right, Because if, if you're going to change something, you got to change something to the effect that no one ever questions should something else be here. Yeah, I don't know. Right. So that's, that's interesting too, right? Because like maybe they were just lazy.

1:01:08 I don't know, Like I I'm not sure. But for some reason there was an obstacle that they couldn't get away with that I don't know. OK, I don't know the answer. To that. OK, good enough. But you do have other interesting things like for example, I think like if you were to take this idea that it's possible for a scribe to say, oh, if this happened, let's write like this bad thing happened. So let's write in the scriptures like the Lord had said not to do this, and like apply it retroactively do. You see what I mean? I see kind of kind of like what OSHA does, right? Some dude falls off the ladder and so the the fix is is to go back and say.

1:01:49 Why weren't you wearing your harness? Right, exactly right. And then that this so they they come up with the the prohibition based on the bad outcome. But then you said they they credit the Lord with saying don't do that. Right. And so like when you look at the Deuteronomic history, which is like first, Second Samuel, Joshua, 1st and 2nd Kings, when this is, I know this might touch a few people in a weird spot, but I'm just going to go there. Samuel's like, you want a king, This is what's going to happen. He's going to multiply wives unto himself. And it's like, well, that sounds like Solomon. Right. Was it because they wrote that in the history later?

1:02:29 Oh God, you know, Solomon did this and like, oh, this is where we went wrong. So therefore we have to create a a mythos for like why we went wrong? OK, all right, so there. So the thought there being is that we'll create a story around where it went wrong to show. Yeah, Why? Why? Solomon was bad, OK or whatever got you. OK. Not that he was bad, but like the bad things that he ended up doing, why he fell from grace. Right, Right. Which, OK, as polygamous people, we should be maybe more willing to look at that more closely and be like, OK, I mean, not saying that like if you were to go and multiply gratuitously under yourself, all these women, because just because you're a king, right?

1:03:16 That's probably not a good thing to do. But it does jive with like, oh, polygamy is bad on a on a little bit, you know. But wasn't wasn't polygamy pretty? I don't want to say it was ubiquitous, but it was fairly common practice, right? Even amongst the Levites. It's in the law, it's in Leviticus that it's legal. Interesting. Just a bunch of contradictions in there. Interesting. Which, you know, if they're, look, I want to say this, right, This is who does anything else to try to account for the contradictions, right. Because there does seem to be some in there floating around.

1:03:57 Yeah. Yeah, there's another fun one. I don't know if I can go deep into it, but like you have Mount Horeb and Mount Sinai. Which is it? Oh, that's another. That's another one of those doublet things almost where it's like like Abraham having Sarah wanted to be stolen. By which one is it? Is it Pharaoh or is it Abimelech, you know, king of Gaza or Pharaoh, king of Egypt, you know, happens twice to him, but then also the same thing happens to Isaac where Abimelech wants Rebecca. Which is it? Or the three separate traditions that got put in? Gotcha. You know, and so like, which is it not? Or over Mount Sinai, you know, which is you know, why is it called by different names when it's the same mountain? So let let.

1:04:39 Me ask you this. We do that though, right? Maybe Gulf of Mexico and the Gulf of America, right? Or. You know, it's always been the Gulf of. America, right, or, or, or you know, then I think, I think they flirted with Denali on this, if I'm not mistaken, or there was a mountain in oh, McKinley, right? They they renamed McKinley for a while and then it got changed back as far as Pharaoh. Could Abimelech have been a name or Pharaoh? Right like Pharaoh's a title? So I mean, Gaza is a different place than, I mean, it's close. It's adjacent to Egypt. It's like, right. It's really, it's like that border area between Israel and Egypt, right on the coast. And so, I mean, it's close geographically, but I mean, I couldn't say.

1:05:25 Got you. You. Know I I wouldn't think so personally that OK, but that is the area that Abraham was sojourning in you know the land of Canaan and Egypt alternately. Got you. OK. Yep. No, I'm, I'm, I'm down. Yeah. And you also have the same stories with like in different literature, Abraham going through like the sacrifice motif and is it, is it Nimrod or is it Pharaoh? Right. Right, Which one is it? But it's like the same story and being offered as a sacrifice. You know, our Book of Abraham says it's Pharaoh, but like the apocalypse of Abraham or whatever that book, other book is, it was it was Nimrod that plays that role.

1:06:10 Yeah. Wanting to offer Abraham. And that would be, that would be another Rep right where it seems. Like maybe, maybe and look a lot of maybe. I mean, I guess horrible thought, but maybe Sarah's just hot. She's attracting that kind of. That's that's where people go with it and maybe that's true. Right. Yeah, they would. I mean, would the Lord really need to test Abraham three times that way though? I wasn't right, Right. No, it it makes sense. Yeah. No, I could see that. OK. And like I said, already fitting with like, how many times does this need to happen before you can really say like something weird's happening here with like when you go through Joseph and you know, is it Ruben or is it Judah selling them? Is it, you know, you see all these doublets and it's like this is happening a lot.

1:07:01 You know, these doublets and triplets and all these little things. Like there's a lot of details like that thing would be broken down. And so it just makes you start to wonder. What we have going on here? Yeah. And so, and then also going back to the Book of Mormon, it leads us to like, say, OK, there's some other evidence not pertaining to the Book of Mormon, but that illustrates the contents we've talked about where it does, you know, OK, that could fit where we're talking about why there's this discrepancy between the Nephites tradition and the and the Jewish tradition, although they're they come from different traditions, right. You have a let's see, I lost my train of thought. No, you're good.

1:07:46 Oh, the Book of Mormon says that Moses didn't die. Right. But Deuteronomy does, which also the main theme of this idea of the documentary hypothesis is like, OK, Moses didn't write the first all of the Torah, you know, how could he have written that? He died. Someone else would have had to have written that right? Gotcha. And furthermore, Deuteronomy continues after the camp of Israel crosses the Jordan, but Moses never crossed the Jordan, so how could he? How could he have written the things that they did and saw at that part of the narrative? Right. You know, right?

1:08:29 Moses was the most meek man that ever lived. Did he write that? You know that's. Right. No, that's it. That's a good point. That's a good point. OK, the censor, you know, we've all laughed at that, that scripture where it's like, that's not, that's like the most opposite thing that a meek man would say, write about himself saying I'm the most meek man that ever lived, Right, right. Right. Yeah, that's that. That's a pompous piety that I like to talk about. Yeah, humble bragging. Right. There's different views theologically on like the nature of God between like like within the Bible itself, right that I think it lends support to this. For example, parts of the Bibles like Moses saw God face to face and spoke to him as a man and that's usually the yallest source by the way.

1:09:24 Like when the Bible describes God as anthropomorphic meaning in the form of a man and in the likeness of a man and corporeal. That's J normally, but then D the D sources like no man can see God. And so when you get to the book of Deuteronomy and like back-to-back chapters in one chapter it's like Moses saw God face to face. You have an explanation later, but he really didn't see God face to face. He only saw, you know, his backside. It says, you know, they never, you know, because no man can see God and live. You know, and then you have that that tradition is carried over a little bit into the into the New Testament where it's John says, you know, as it comes down to us.

1:10:13 In any case, no man can see God the father and live. No man can. No man can see God at any time save the Son. Reveal of him is what John says interest, you know, and so you have two different views on the nature of God within the Bible or more, you know, and so I think you can chalk that up to different traditions and how they viewed God and his relationship to humanity. Right. And that explains the seeming contradictions that would make sense. So, so we, we have this apparently this anthropomorphic view of God, right? Which I think Mormons would fall under that, right? Because Joseph talks about being able to see him in his first vision.

1:11:01 Now that's a vision, right? And I want to get, get that clear that the word vision, like Mormonism is different in terms of there's visitations and then there's visions, right? Visions, I think are open to anybody, right that visitation, we know from some deeper doctrine, take some stuff right you, you got to be prepared for that. So when, when you when we start talking about this could, could that be some of the stuff that's at play here a little bit? So some of the scholars have thought that. So like when you compare E to J on that topic, E is more like God communicates through angels, through prophets and visions and J's like you can see God and he's a male.

1:11:51 Interesting. See that that so? Could it be both? Sure. I'm not saying it's one or the other. I think all of that can happen. Yeah, because I would think because it seems out of place for me, right as I'm thinking about it, right, Because predominantly the priestly class, the, the, the Levites are going to come from the South, right? Because they're hanging out around the temple. Yeah, a lot of them would be. Anyways, there there was a few Levites who stuck up north for sure, or people who were or one of the charges against the Northern Kingdom was that by the South. The charge against them by the South was that they took the common people and made them Levites, whatever that means.

1:12:32 That's interesting, right? Like is that unsanctioned priesthood delivery, right. Like there's, there's some things there to think about on that one. Yeah, there are. And and that would, yeah, that's interesting. But the narrative also, if I don't recall, if I recall correctly, it's been a few years since I've read that part of the Old Testament. When the Kingdom split, a lot of the Levites that were in the north moved to the South. Oh, so then you'd have kind of like a cross pollenization of ideas that would infiltrate the priestly, priestly class. Well, I don't think you can necessarily discount that idea either, right? Because we know that not all of the Pharisees or all of the Sadducees were all against Jesus, right?

1:13:17 We have Joseph of Arimathea, who I believe is a Pharisee, right? Or is he a Sadducee? Would not be a Sadducee. He'd be a Pharisee more than likely. Yeah, OK. Who seems to be really on board with Joseph? I mean, not Jesus, right, Because he, it's him that offers up his tomb for Christ. Yeah. And there's some thoughts that they were related to. You know, that's interesting. OK, So but but Jesus would have came from that southern Kingdom as well. Well, he grew up in Galilee, which is the north. Yeah, it is the north. OK, Big time North. Interesting.

1:13:59 You know by that time Rome is that conquered the whole world practically. And so you had like tet sharks, which I think that was like divided. The whole land was divided into like 4 different areas, right. And so Galilee was a different governorship or like protectorate than Judea was. OK. And Galilee is like in the northern extreme of what the northern Kingdom was. And Judah of the more ancient days would be Judea under Rome. OK. All right. That makes sense. And so Jesus is during his ministry. He's traveling between. Between the Northern and the Southern kingdoms. Right. OK. What?

1:14:39 They would have been right. Yeah. Interesting. So he was born in Bethlehem, which is South of Jerusalem. But he was raised and his family came from the north and he was raised in the north. So do we ever find a spot at which the E voice is completely drowned out? Right. Do we get to a book in the Bible where either one of the J or the E source is essentially yeah non existent anymore? I mean, so Genesis from what I the little I've read, like Genesis 2 is all J, yeah, practically, maybe some P as well, but no E, right? Like E doesn't start really until 35 I want to say. And one of the tell tale signs of E if I understand correctly is they like to use the word Elohim for God instead of Jehovah until like Exodus 3 where you have in the narrative where God reveals his name as Jehovah to Moses. So then he will start using Jehovah as well. Now there's a conjunction there at some point too, where that becomes.

1:15:55 Both Jehovah, Elohim, Lord God in our capital letters. Right. Interesting. So there's a rub going on with the very nature of God here. Very much so, yeah. And then is there ever? Is there ever a place at which this seems to get rectified right, or does it always seem to be this rub throughout the the Old Testament? And I think that one narrative, one editor tries to rectify it by saying Moses didn't really see God right after it says that he saw God. You know, there's that element, but you also have, I don't know if it ended up being rectified, but you see the illustration of different like attitudes of God, I think, which kind of explained why some people look at the Old Testament and they're like, this is a mess of contradictions where, you know, God's behavior is kind of erratic to them seem like he treats some people more harsh or, or his his level of knowledge is even different.

1:16:59 I've seen that where it's like, does God know all or is he changing his mind? You know, you have several things where it's like God repented himself that this or like when is when he's trying to lead Israel out of Egypt and he gets so frustrated at some point where he says to Moses, basically, this is my words. You know, you go down there and chill out while I figure out what to do with you, right? That kind of language, like, I don't know, like what I'm going to do. So like not not the omniscient God. Got you. Motif. Well, there, there does seem to be a part in the Old Testament, right? And I believe it's Numbers. Don't quote me on this, maybe it's still Exodus, but the Lord definitely seems to allow Moses to plead. See for the people right where where Moses is like you don't do want to do this is.

1:17:53 Yeah, because God tells them, OK, Moses, stand back. I want to wipe them out and I want to start over with you, and I'll make you a mighty nation, right? And Moses says, what will all the other nations say, right? That you just LED us out of Egypt just to kill us. Right, right. And there you find that that again, it seems to be a more anthropomorphic God in that scenario. Right. And with with Abraham talking to God over Sodom and Gomorrah, that's a that's AI don't recall. It's either J or E, you know, and it's, I think it's J and it's opposed to the way that God seems to act in other instances. You know, I've seen that noted in some of the stuff that I've read.

1:18:34 Gotcha. OK. No, I, that all makes sense. So we have that rubbed there with the with with the very nature of deity. That's fascinating. OK, what else you got? The Jews don't believe in the devil. Really. No, they don't, not really. And there's different schools of Judaism. But if you were to ask. So this is really interesting because this gets more into metaphysics, right? But like your most like modern, the more general view of Judaism today through like rabbinical Judaism is they have the metaphysical view of the universe of being like I think it. How would you pronounce that?

1:19:23 Monistic or monistic? Monastic. No, no, not monastic like in a monastery, but monism or monism. Oh, OK, Like Mono. Right one. One And so God is the one, and all good and all evils attributed to it. And so where it says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart, you know it has, because there's no devil you know God is in charge of doing good or evil. Well, and it does seem to fly in the face of what Joseph tells us. God granted to man, which was free will, right? I mean that the Lord's going to be like, now he doesn't get his free will. I'm going to harden his heart for him, right?

1:20:05 And so then you have another traditions like Manichaeism and like Gnosticism, it's dualism. So not mono, it's dual and there's like it's Zoroastrianism is another religion that's a dualistic where there's a good God and there's an evil God. And so some scholars, and this is kind of an off topic from like what we've been talking about in a way where it's, it's not documentary hypothesis or Deuteronomic reforms, but the idea that like some scholars have said that Jews, some and Christianity were influenced by Israel's contact with Persia.

1:20:45 And that's where the devil really comes from because their religion was dualistic. And that's where we get the devil from, is that there's an evil counterpart to God, right? And like, and it kind of solves the problem of like, where does evil come from? Because we don't want to attribute it to a good God, right? Right now that would be for more of a more the purely scholarly, almost atheistic point of view though. Right, 100 percent, 100%. But Lehi in the book of Mormons, like according to the things I have read, I suppose that an Angel fell from heaven and became the devil. Where is that in the Old Testament? It's not in there, right? Go ask a modern Jew right now about what the devil is or like, Oh, or you go to him with a Christian worldview and well, the devil's right there in the first in the, in the 3rd chapter of the book, you know, Genesis 3 comes as a serpent and tempts Adam and Eve.

1:21:40 And the Jew will say it doesn't say that this is the serpent. It's not the devil Interesting. So yeah so so according to modern rabbinical tradition then their their answer would be no. It was just a serpent who was hanging out in the garden and and tempted Eve. It's it's not a someone who's done something similar someone's. Not a fallen Angel, right? Not a fallen Angel necessarily. That would be viewed as like a later Christian interpretation, kind of a. Thing. But they would say, yeah, like their idea, they would reject the idea. The Jews would reject the idea of the Christian concept of the devil as a fallen Angel.

1:22:24 Their version, like Satan exists as a word like, ha, Satan, the Satan. Like, you know, you could say like Peter is called Satan, like Christ, you know, get thee behind me, Satan. It's an adversary and it can be applied to anything. Anyone that's an adversary is a Satan, right? And so, but you go look in Job, if you talk to the Jew about Job, they'll say, well, that Satan was an Angel, not a fallen Angel necessarily. But the way that God works under like the, the monistic metaphysical view is that God needs a prosecuting attorney that's leveling charges against us.

1:23:09 And that's the role that an Angel is designated to play as a Satan, as a prosecuting attorney to like charge US against our, our infidelity to the law. Interesting. And so that's the function. But he's actually under God. You see what I mean? Yeah, yeah. He's, he's part of the political system. He's but yeah, it's, it's it's very much a judicious system, right? They are. There's a prosecutor and then there is a defense, right. And then God's going to be the judge on the stand. Yep. Interesting. But Lehi says something different. He settles a fallen Angel, and I know it was an Angel who was in the up there with God and he fell, right.

1:23:54 And so now we're like. Which is interesting. Where did that come from and why is that not in the Bible? Because the brass plates probably had a different tradition. And the scholars will say and agree with this interpretation that like, Oh yeah, that's a later Christian idea. Well, maybe it's not a later Christian idea. Maybe the Christian just got it right. Right. Maybe the Nephites and the Christians? Well, John definitely has a vision of that, right? He does have a vision of that. Right, they're close to heaven. And then Joseph backs that up. And so, yeah, the people who form the Christian nucleus in the Old World and the Nephite nucleus, you know, either through Revelation or through sources that are no longer available to us, had a common tradition on that. Got you.

1:24:34 OK, The Jews may have reformed out. I mean, if you're getting rid of God the Son and God the Mother, why not get rid of the devil? OK, so I can't believe I'm going here to to ask this question. So we just said that modern rabbinical tradition doesn't necessarily believe in a a supernatural evil necessarily, right? Yeah. Separate from God, that God is responsible for all, essentially. Gosh, you can't believe I'm bringing this up. OK, so the one guy worked with back East. OK. I asked him about something similar. He's like, oh, no, we believe in something similar. I was like, well, what do you call it? He's like dibbix.

1:25:20 Dibbix. Yeah, but there's like a Dibbix box. So like, it's a box that will that will hold an evil spirit. OK. And so like, I don't know what sect of Judaism he was, but he looked pretty darn Orthodox to me, right? And so I'm wondering how that that plays there and that that fits. In it could have been Hasidic, and that's not rabbinical. OK, so OK, so cause 'cause the Hasidic Jews look very traditional with the locks and OK that would make sense then 'cause so they are not rabbinical. They're not. They're way more esoteric and into a Kabbalah and mysticism.

1:26:01 00 Kev. Almost an entirely different theology, honestly. From what? OK, OK, no, I'm, I'm, I'm tracking with you. All right, that's good. I just was curious. That was my that was for me. So, so, so let me, let me ask some questions here because yeah, these, these ones are, are are kind of something that's sticking in my mind here that I think I would, I would like to kind of get, get an answer for. So let's just start with Jesus quoting Deuteronomy, right? Because I did watch a couple videos on this and like there, there gets to be a point with with the documentary hypothesis that they do look at the book of Deuteronomy and start like asking the question, do we need this right?

1:26:47 Is this inspired? But Jesus quotes from it. Sure. How do we, how do we wrestle with that? Good question. Do we want to do that right now, or do you have other questions too? We can either do that one the the other question I'd have is if, if we're going to follow the the documentary hypothesis, what do we trust in the New Testament in the Old Testament, right, Because it does seem to cast and, and look, I want to give I, I, I would be remiss without saying that Mormonism has baked into it, so to speak, a distrust of the Bible, right, Because Joseph says we believe the Bible as long so far as it's translated, correct, right, which would lend to this idea, right.

1:27:32 And then my next question is heard what we were talking about earlier. Nephi seems to have some problems with what's. Going on in Jerusalem with the Jews. But when he goes out to the new world and they build a temple, they build it like unto the one in Jerusalem, say if it's made out of wooden, not stone, right? So how do we wrestle with those things? Those are my big three questions here. OK, so if I if I recall correctly, the Book of Mormon also quotes. From Deuteronomy too. OK, so it seems as if the Nephites and Christ didn't.

1:28:15 Think the whole thing was bad. Oh, OK. And so and that goes back to like the criticisms, the modern criticisms of the documentary hypothesis, which is an old idea at this point that over 100 years old is they're like, well, was it really for concise like complete documents that then got stitched together? Or was there a lot of redactors over multiple periods of time and different traditions that all intersected and multiple redactors kind of trying to fit them together. And so maybe Deuteronomy wasn't just like, oh. We get let's. Let's conspire with, you know, to have Josiah institute this whole book and add this whole thing that didn't exist before into the Canon. Maybe it was a version of something that already existed. OK.

1:29:05 And so there's going to be some stuff that is older and therefore more trustworthy if you want to take that idea. Or from a philosophical standpoint, maybe they could just got some things. Right too, which complicates the issue, but like, OK if there's some good. Theology in there, you know, broken clocks, right, twice a day kind of a thing. Maybe I don't know, right. You know, then why not use it? So the yeah, some of the, I don't recall which Nephite prophets, but they quote, they quote it. Christ quotes it in the Book of Mormon when he talks about it's in 3rd Nephite 11 I believe where he talks about or Moses made that prophecy that you know there will come one like unto me, the Lord your God will raise up a prophet like unto me. Do what he says.

1:29:54 And if you don't, you'll be cut off from among the people, right. That's a prophecy that we find in Deuteronomy. But like, did it exist somewhere else before the Deuteronomic reforms? Gotcha. You know, so if Christ is quoting something that. If the Book of Mormon prophets are quoting something. Is it the reforms that they're supporting by quoting it or are? They just quoting from. The true part, the true parts, right? And Jonah Barnes. He's pretty fun. He's been on board. Radio and probably Stick and Joseph. I don't know if he actually has been on Stick and Joseph, but he's got a book called, he's got two books out now, but one's called Key to the Keystone, which is where he's comparing Apocrypha to the Book of Mormon.

1:30:39 OK and stuff, right? The keystone of our religion. And he talks about how he thinks the the, I don't know if it was in the book or on the podcast, but he talks about how he thought perhaps the original version of Deuteronomy was what we call either the apocalypse of no, that's not the right one. The Assumption of Moses or the Testament of Moses has two names. Same thing. We know that something called. The Assumption of Moses exists. Because of a letter. Written in Latin in like the 1st century identifies it and people are quoting from it. We just don't have or we have, we have that and then we have a fragment of it in line, OK, That we're, and we're able to identify it because of where it's quoted in other places, right. Got you.

1:31:30 It's a fragment. We don't have how it ends. OK, but it takes a lot of the Deuteronomy context. But it's different. OK, but Deuteronomy is where Moses. Dies. Right, you follow me so far. I am, but we don't have the end. Of the testament slash. Assumption of Moses. But the thought is that the Assumption of Moses is not just like Dave. I assume you, you know, had eggs for breakfast this morning. It's not that kind of assumption. It's he's assumed into heaven, right? So why is it called that when the Book of Mormon also says? Oh, by the way. Moses was taken back into heaven and he never died.

1:32:13 I see. And so was it possible that the assumption of Moses? Was the original. Deuteronomy Jonah thinks so interesting, you know, and then that later that was changed. That was another thing that was changed, you know, So the Bible now says Moses died, which is one of the biggest fights against us with the out of God doctrine is, you know, the Bible says Adam died, right? I said, well, the Bible says Moses died too, but the Book Mormon says he did, right? That's a good point. OK. All right. How do you make sense of of Nephi building a temple like unto the one at Jerusalem if he's really got problems with what's going on there? I'd imagine that at that point there would have been some temple practices that would have been compromise as well, right? Maybe.

1:33:00 I mean, so they build a temple and they pattern after what they knew. And maybe we, we don't get the whole run now, we don't have the priestly source of the Book of Mormons saying these are all the details and the laws of the sacrifices and how like how they're prescribed like we do in the Bible, right? That's not in the Book of Mormons. So we don't know like what they did and what they might have picked or left out if there were problems like that. We know they weren't Levites. They were still doing sacrifice right? But they weren't Levites. But also against Deuteronomy. They built a temple outside Jerusalem, and not only that, they built at least two in Deuteronomy.

1:33:45 No, in in America, right? The right. Right, right. OK. Yeah, yeah, because Deuteronomy, the Deuteronomic history says Jerusalem. 'S the only place and. And then he fights actually. So 3 because they build one in Nephite, they build one in Zahra Hamlet, and they build one in Bountiful. So not only one, they build 3 outside of Jerusalem against this idea of the of Josiah's reform saying only have a temple in Jerusalem. Yeah, there's a rub again, right? Yeah. So they did not take that seriously. Because I mean, you could. Have. Let's say they did consider on a level, oh, there's supposed to be 1 cultic place of, you know, one Nexus of worship. Therefore, you know, we're going to build 1. But because we're not in Jerusalem anymore, we have to build it where we are.

1:34:32 Therefore we can just justify building outside Jerusalem. We're but we're going to have one, right? But they don't do that. They have two at least concurrently with Zarahemala and Bountiful. Right, at least. So they're not right. They're not even following the pattern of the old world, right? Interesting. Yeah, but as far as architecture and stuff, I don't. Know if any of that was corrupt? So I couldn't. Tell you that there that there's no reason they couldn't build after the manner of Solomon's temple as far as architectural designs, I have 0 issues with that So let me ask this question and then because I think this is the big. One if the. Documentary hypothesis is true. How do we trust anything in the Old Testament? So my lodestar and my keystones are. The Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith, OK, you know, and then other.

1:35:28 Prophets too, and so that's an interesting thing. Too, because this is this is the paradigm here is do you trust? Which do you trust more scripture or revelation? And that's also been a rough constantly in our own tradition, right? Sure, you know, for example, the LDS church, in my opinion, goes way off the rails with follow revelation and these are the dead prophets. And I'm like, no, listen to scripture when I talk to an LDS person, you know, or, or previous prophets, you know, at that level, you know, like, but they just follow the modern guy, follow the modern guy, modern revelation Trump's all right. And so that's a that's a problem.

1:36:08 But here I am saying there's a revelation. Trump Scripture, you know, Or the apparent. The appearance of. Scripture, well, maybe because maybe some of it hasn't been transmitted faithfully, right? So what can you be sure about? I'm pretty sure about. Joseph Smith's calling. As a prophet, right, And the Book of Mormon. And so if you can use those as a square, I'm a Carpenter. So if you want to square everything else to that and see how it fits, I think it's a good place to start. Gotcha, so let let me. Back to the scripture thing, that's even a low determined Mormonism though, right? And let me explain.

1:36:51 What would someone call these? The word of God. Scripture. Scripture, right? I don't think that's the correct. Term and let me explain why. Yeah, it's Canon, right? It's Canon. It's not scripture Canon. Is what you're going to find in your. Quad right. But Mormonism suggests that scripture is anything, not suggests. Mormonism says scripture is anything that is moved upon by the Holy Ghost, by right, by God's servants, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost. So therefore I. Would suggest that a lot of what's in the Journal of Discourse is a scripture, right? Show the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. I would say that's pretty darn sure Scripture. And so we got this idea of of I'm not a fan of Sola Script Torah, right?

1:37:40 Because we see the fruits of that. We see the fruits of that as well. And frustrating. Yeah. And so it does seem like. You have to have. A very healthy balance if if you're going to not tip to one too far to one side or the other, I would agree. You know, for example, you mean you need to read it right? You're going to need. To read for yourself, Yep, and make up your own. Oh, make up your own mind. Don't let anyone else tell you right? You know you can listen, but like, go study. For yourself and find. Out that it's between you and the Lord and the inspirations of the Holy Ghost at that point. But yeah, you have this debate, man.

1:38:21 It's been everywhere. Like there's a anecdote that gets told like, you know, Brigham Young and Hiram. I think Brigham Young tells the story how Hiram got up in one meeting and said the scriptures, the scriptures, the scriptures. And then Joseph called on Brigham to speak and he said, well, I wouldn't give a damn for the scriptures if it weren't for living prophets as well. And then Hiram, Hiram got up after him. So, well, yes, of course, I meant the living oracles too, you know, kind of, you know, that's so interesting. It is interesting. And then how would we make sense then? If the documentary. Hypothesis is true.

1:39:01 How would we make sense of Joseph Smith going through the Bible and not? Making many revisions. To Deuteronomy or. Any of those. Any of those right now the Pearl of great price is interesting in. That I think that's a. Revision of Genesis, right? And and so that one I would say, OK, there's your revision there. But he, he, he touches way more on like Matthew than he ever does any of these other books that seem to be in question. So there's two schools of thought in Mormonism regarding the Joseph. Smith Translation And some people think it was done and some people don't. And I lean in the camp that it was not done yet. OK.

1:39:44 And you do have a revelation in the Doctrine of Covenants where the Lord is told or the Lord tells Joseph to switch his efforts on Old Testament and start doing him. And so it was in his his work on the Old Testament was interrupted at a certain level. I don't actually recall where where he was when when he switches, but that could help illustrate that idea of why he didn't touched on Deuteronomy. As much. Interesting because he was told to shift focus to New Testament and then he was going to, from what I read, go back through. In Nauvoo. But he died before he could get back to Bible translations. OK, OK. So let me ask.

1:40:29 You this, is there any other linchpin or or big things here? That we didn't go over that you feel like we should. No, there's not. But the recap is, you know, to me, it's not so much like. Is the documentary hypothesis true? As much as this gives us this theory, this hypothesis gives us valuable tools to investigate our own religion and to say, hey, OK, there are maybe some. Contradictions here. This doesn't have to break my faith because there's answers here that, OK, there's this person saying this thing about God, this person saying this thing about God, like, OK, where is the truth?

1:41:15 And you're able to say, oh, there are different perspectives. Or, oh, that's why the Book of Mormons. Says this versus the Bible and it doesn't break you, you know, and so it's not so much as like, is this original idea of the documentary hypothesis true? The the minutiae of that don't matter to me so much as in like, do we need to find E? Do we need to find Jay completely? You know, I don't think that that's important at all. But the idea, I think, is more honest and interesting that the Bible could be compared to the Book of Mormon. Like we covered as. An anthology of many different records in a breachment, an abridgement. Yeah.

1:41:59 The difference being Mormon and Moroni are honest and vocal and it's just one, right? Two guys and then we don't know how many are on the other side. We don't know if they were inspired. All the time. Well, I think we can say that they weren't right because Joseph. Smith does say. Yeah, We believe the Bible in as far as it's translated, correct. And what does he say in the King fault discourse? A Jew with no authority out of that in there, Right? Right. You know, when he talks about how Elohim, you know, and that that first grammatical phrase with Elohim creating the world, right, right. And how it should be plural and all that. And he says a Jew with no authority added that in there, you know, interesting. And so, yeah, no, it so to me, you know the book. Of Mormon has this Providence.

1:42:46 Like that we're kind of, we're kind of promised and taken on faith that that their tradition was more secure, their transmission was more secure than the Bible's was. But beyond that, why wouldn't it be made in the same way as an anthology or abridgment, right? Right. And how much, Moses? Played in that is anybody's guess, yeah. Or, you know, some people think Ezra was the the last redactor, the main. Redactor of the Old Testament, you know, when they come back from captivity, from Babylon and they're trying to get their heads on, you know, after being in Babylon for 70 years and they're trying to figure things out, trying to get back to what they were before, but no one remembers, you know, right?

1:43:29 Or you have all these different memories. Right, good stuff. So it's not. Something that has to break your face. It's something that. You can work with within. Mormonism, I think it that's a bolster and I think it illustrates the reasons. Why Mormonism seems to differ from sectarian Christianity and traditional Judaism? Yeah, 'cause this is not a Mormon concept. The documentary is not hypothesis, it's not a Mormon concept, but it supplements our theology and our history and our narrative very well, I think, especially with Why does Lehi believe in a Satan as a fallen Angel? Why does Nephi have divine feminine imagery?

1:44:10 You know, when that was frowned upon, you know, by Orthodox Jews, You know, to me, that answers very important questions. Those are important questions to the, the cosmology that Joseph Smith revealed to us, right? You know, those are the fundamental things, right? That God has a family. He's not alone. You know that's. Fundamental for what we become, right? Yeah. It's fascinating stuff, man. Well, dude, thanks for doing this. Yeah, no problem at all. All. Right, we'll have to catch up. And do another one soon. Hope so. All right, all right. See you. Everyone bye everybody. Listening to the Mormon.