Lyle Fletcher has suggested (personal communication, 29 September 2004) that the word back is missing from the text here and that it should read as “that thereby men may be brought back into the presence of the Lord”. 𝓞 is extant for that part of the text from the end of thereby to the beginning of the first the, and it clearly lacks the word back. So if the original text had the back, it must have been omitted during the dictation of the text. Other passages, including a nearby one in verse 17, could be used to support this conjectural emendation:
But there is one other case that does not have the back:
In this passage, 𝓞 is not extant for “I might not be brought to”. But there is no room in the lacuna for back after brought except by supralinear insertion.
For two other expressions where back is implied but not stated, see under Mosiah 28:17 and Alma 58:24. In all these cases, including Helaman 14:15, we follow the earliest textual sources in determining whether back is actually in the text. Thus back will not be added here in Helaman 14:15.
Summary: Maintain the original reading in Helaman 14:15 without the word back in the expression “that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord”; usage elsewhere in the text shows that back is optional for the expression “to be brought (back) into the presence of the Lord”.