I should also add that of course the pre vs. post exile isn’t absolute. It’s not like ideas simply disappeared. (Thus the who documentary hypotheses where there are competing interests – especially between J & P) So later texts like 1 & 2 Jeu or the Pistas Sophia have a greater YHWH and lesser YHWH (or Iao) which is pretty similar to some conceptions of Christ. (Again Mosiah 15 is a classic text)

Regarding Melvin, my brain is a little foggy from allergies but wasn’t his point more about a distinction between visions and more chance based divination: Lots, straws, perhaps even the Urim & Thummim in the popular scholarly view of its OT form. (As opposed to the traditions at say Qumran that saw it having letters signified)

I need to refresh my memory on the other angel stuff he discussed. I just don’t remember I’m ashamed to say. My memory from the primary texts was that there was a *lot* similar in Nephi’s vision with 1 Enoch and 3 Enoch including some of the geography. (I had a ton of notes on this from college I sadly lost in a basement flood)

I am inspired by Nephi’s response to his father’s teachings, which can be found, among other places, in 1 Nephi 2:16:

“I, Nephi, … having great desires to know of the mysteries of God, wherefore, I did cry unto the Lord; and behold he did visit me, and did soften my heart that I did believe all the words which had been spoken by my father.”

That is what I take away from your thoughts here, and from what Lehi demonstrated and Joseph Smith taught: constant and continued revelation and communication with God through the Spirit is possible, and can become a way of life for those who have a great desire and are willing to ask, seek, and knock with diligence and in faith. And I think the best reason to have this desire and to seek for this way of life is to be more greatly aided in the work of the Lord–building families, serving the Lord, seeking personal progression and sanctification.

[Wow, I was just going to write a short response here saying thank you for your thoughts, and now it seems to have become a novel.] Thanks for the opportunity to think about this.

While perhaps it’s disrupting the texts too much, the original form of D&C 84 has sons of Moses = high priest and sons of Aaron as priests. That later became a bit more muddled. (See this by W. V. Smith for instance) Comparing and contrasting D&C 84 (especially the original form of the text) to Alma 12-13 is quite interesting though.

Likewise a lot of the later Jewish talk of Melchizedek is interesting relative to Alma 12-13. (Admittedly most is well into the common era and thus not necessarily indicative of much around 600 BCE)

Not mentioned in our discussion of chapter 1 either is the strong parallel of Lehi with Moses. “There came a pillar of fire and dwelt upon a rock before him.” Of course the pillar of fire went before the Israelites while leaving Egypt. It was fire at night and a cloud in the day. In Ezekiel’s vision (1:27) we get the allusion to this as well.

Finally keeping with Alma 12-13 we shouldn’t forget 11 where what starts all this is Zeezrom’s sophistry on God as father and son and his appearance. (11:35) This hearkens us to Mosiah 15 where we have what very much appears to be a Merkabah text such as those naming Metatron or the lesser YHWH. It’s this context that Alma then mentions the mysteries of God with the explicit mention of ritual (13:8) which (to me at least) suggests Alma 13 should be read in light of Mosiah 15’s quoting and midrasnhic expansion on Isaiah 53. Now Isaiah 53 is one of the controversial quotations since it’s part of deuterio-isaiah but it’s interesting seeing the use. Just as the Son of God comes because he’s made the Father, Mosiah sees this of the prophets as well (Mosiah 15:11-13) “and are not the prophets, every one that has opened his mouth to prophesy…I say unto you that they are his seed.” Interestingly a common Jewish interpretation that gets taken up in the mystic tradition is that this is about Moses. (Or for Isaiah 53:5, Elijah, at least in the Zohar)

Again using later texts that might be misrepresenting what’s going on around 600 BCE. Still it’s very interesting that we have these texts paralleling merkabah texts (and especially 1 Enoch and 3 Enoch) that pop up here and then Nephi’s later vision. My sense is that all these visions, these parts of deuteroIsaiah, Mosiah 14-15, and Alma 11-13 are tied together.

Interestingly too while Metatron is usually seen as a raised up Enoch he’s often also associated with Moses. By the Rabbinical era Matatron isn’t see as a lesser YHWH but a greater Moses. In some texts it’s even Enoch as Metatron who gives Moses the Law.

Finally getting back to deuteroIsaiah, there are allusions to it in Nephi and Lehi’s visions in the wilderness. (Say compare Nephi in 1 Ne 10:8 to Isaiah 40:3 which of course gets taken up by Mark as being about John the Baptist)

Just raise this because it seems to me the problem of deuteroIsaiah in the Book of Mormon is very much caught up with this prophetic tradition of Ezekiel Lehi is caught up with in 1 Ne 1 and the merkabah tradition.

But that’s obviously getting a lot of conclusion from an awful little and circumstantial evidence. So I wouldn’t take it too seriously. Yet a long question of the text is how priesthood works with the Nephites given the lack of levites.

Great question. I always assumed Lehi’s reading here referred to the heavenly literature, but I’m not sure why it would need to be. I really do think that Lehi and Ezekiel were drinking similar water.

My question with regard to Laman is more about how Laman experienced things at the time — assuming the young Nephi was similar to the one portrayed (quick to tout personal revelation), did Laman experience this as an undermining? Lehi’s authority in the context of an exodus is not merely a matter of his patriarchy, but also his priestly and prophetic authority. Nephi’s claim as the fourth son is weak; but his claim on account of revelation in this dramatic exodus that shook up everything familiar in their lives might well have been seen as a genuine threat.

Interesting thoughts with regard to Merkabah literature and the quote from Haggigah.

First does Nephi portray Lehi as in “constant communion” with the heavens? He portrays him has having had a lot of visions and dreams but I don’t get the constant part. I take 16 more as suggesting that the large plates most likely had a lot more Lehi in them while these plates just deal with Nephi. How much of that is what Nephi wrote and how much is an expansion during the translation process to explain to Joseph why this is so different from the missing 116 pages seems unclear.

I do note that Nephi/Lehi does tend to follow the more apocalyptic literature style of that era.

Someone in the other thread noted the issue that Zedekiah is himself set up by Babylon as a conquest. Yet we know that merely a few years later Zedekiah rebels leading to the complete destruction. Some people at this point are already in exile. Likewise there are already other prophets including Jeremiah prophesying.

An interesting question is Lehi reading things in verse 14. What does this mean? Are other prophets words like Jeremiah or perhaps even Ezekiel already being passed around in a written form? Or is this more the apocalyptic reading of texts in heavens?

Going a tad outside the text the whole interpretation of dreams is quite interesting. Clearly this is an important motif in the Torah as we have it today. We really don’t know what form it was in for Nephi. Even when Nephi quotes the OT I’m always a little wary, due to the translation process, how much of what we had is the text as Nephi had it and how much is a quotation from the KJV to mark the quote but perhaps distorting the original underlying text as the KJV is quoted in its place. (It’s good enough for reading of course, but for close readings there’s that disruption we have to worry about)

The question of Merkabah literature and Nephi/Lehi is a good one. Most of our apocalyptic texts of this sort date to several centuries [i]after[/i] Nephi. So it’s perhaps a tad dangerous using those to analyze Nephi. Of course we do know that some things are set up as type settings. (Say Joseph’s dream in Genesis where Nephi clearly is alluding to his own life according to the pattern of Joseph’s relationship with his brothers)

With merkabah property there’s an interesting question of history. Typically it’s dated to 100 BCE or perhaps elements a century or so earlier although there are outliers who dispute that. Merkabah is typically seen as being influenced by apocalyptic visions in Ezekiel or even parts of Isaiah. Yet in the Book of Momron we have very Merkabah like texts. This vision of Lehi in chapter 1 is one but many argue Mosiah 15 is as well. Since Merkabah is inspired by Ezekiel and Ezekiel is a contemporary of Lehi the issue isn’t quite as big a deal as it appears. But the parallels are quite interesting given particularly the parallels of Nephi/Lehi’s vision with 1 Enoch.

As to Laman, I alluded to this in the other thread a bit. I think Nephi is using the story of Joseph and his brothers as a type setting to set up his relationship with Laman. The question is whether he sees that pattern not just in his later life but also when the events are transpiring. If he does see Laman as akin to the brothers who wished to kill Joseph it might be understandable why Laman is upset.