INTERPRETER

A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship

Volume 42 • 2021

The Interpreter Foundation

Orem, Utah

THE INTERPRETER FOUNDATION

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Daniel C. Peterson, President

Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Vice President of Special Projects

Steven T. Densley Jr., Executive Vice President

Kristine Wardle Frederickson, Vice President

Jeffrey D. Lindsay, Vice President

Noel B. Reynolds, Vice President

Shirley Smith Ricks, Vice President

Allen Wyatt, Vice President of Operations

MANAGEMENT

Kent Flack, Treasurer

Jeffrey D. Lindsay, Co-Editor

Deidre Marlowe, Manager of Peer Review

Deborah Peterson, Secretary

Tanya Spackman, Manager of Editorial Services

Allen Wyatt, Managing Editor

BOARD OF ADVISORS

Kevin Christensen

Brant A. Gardner

Louis C. Midgley

George L. Mitton

Gregory L. Smith

Ed Snow

Ted Vaggalis

CONTRIBUTING EDITORS

Robert S. Boylan

Benjamin I. Huff

Jennifer C. Lane

David J. Larsen

Ugo A. Perego

Stephen D. Ricks

Lynne Hilton Wilson

Mark Alan Wright

BOARD OF EDITORS

Matthew L. Bowen

David M. Calabro

Craig L. Foster

Taylor Halverson

Benjamin L. McGuire

Tyler R. Moulton

Martin S. Tanner

Bryan J. Thomas

A. Keith Thompson

John S. Thompson

LEGAL ADVISORS

Preston Regehr

Scott Williams

INTERPRETER ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Larry Ainsworth, Chairman

Rob Haertel, Vice-Chairman

DONOR RELATIONS

Jann E. Campbell

TYPESETTING

Timothy Guymon

EDITORIAL CONSULTANTS

Eden Buchert

Daniel Evensen

Jolie Griffin

Don Norton

Julie Russell

Kaitlin Cooper Swift

Elizabeth Wyatt

MEDIA & TECHNOLOGY

Richard Flygare

Mark Johnson

Steve Metcalf

Tyler R. Moulton

Tom Pittman

Alan Sikes

S. Hales Swift

Victor Worth

THE INTERPRETER FOUNDATION

© 2021 The Interpreter Foundation. A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution — NonCommercial — NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.

ISSN 2372-1227 (print)

ISSN 2372-126X (online)

Mission Statement

Supporting The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints through scholarship.

The Interpreter Foundation supports the Church in the following ways:

- Promotion: We provide tools to encourage and facilitate personal learning by study and faith, and disseminate accurate information to the public about the Church.

- Explanation: We make the results of relevant scholarship more accessible to non-specialists.

- Defense: We respond to misunderstandings and criticisms of Church beliefs, policies, and practices.

- Faithfulness: Our leadership, staff, and associates strive to follow Jesus Christ and be true to the teachings of His Church.

- Scholarship: Our leadership, staff, and associates incorporate standards of scholarship appropriate to their academic disciplines.

The Interpreter Foundation is an independent organization that supports but is not owned, controlled by, or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The material published by the Interpreter Foundation is the sole responsibility of the respective authors and should not be interpreted as representing the views of The Interpreter Foundation or of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

This journal compiles weekly publications. Visit us online at InterpreterFoundation.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS

“All Can Partake, Freely”

Daniel C. Peterson vii

Working out Salvation History in the Book of Mormon Politeia with Fear and Trembling

Alan Goff 1

The Pleading Bar of God

Royal Skousen 21

Subtle Hebraic Features in the Book of Mormon

Amanda Colleen Brown 37

Poesy and Prosody in the Book of Mormon

Robert F. Smith 41

Prolegomena to a Study of the Egyptian Alphabet Documents in the Joseph Smith Papers

John Gee 77

Record-Keeping Technology among God’s People in Ancient and Modern Times

Richard E. Turley Jr. and Stephen O. Smoot 99

Fantasy and Reality in the Translation of the Book of Abraham

John Gee 127

Tree of Life, Tree of Healing

John Tvedtnes 171

The Inclusive, Anti-Discrimination Message of the Book of Mormon

David M. Belnap  195

The Book of Mormon as a Resurrected Book and a Type of Christ

George L. Mitton 371

Coming Down and Bringing Down: Pejorative Onomastic Allusions to the Jaredites in Helaman 6:25, 6:38, and Ether 2:11

Matthew L. Bowen 397

Polygamists and Political Activists: The Unlikely Marriage in Pioneering the Vote

Hanna Seariac 411

The Handclasp, the Temple, and the King

Matthew B. Brown 421

“ALL CAN PARTAKE, FREELY”

Daniel C. Peterson

Abstract: The Interpreter Foundation welcomes faithful ideas, insights, and manuscripts from people of all backgrounds. In this brief essay, I share some that were recently shared with me regarding Lehi’s vision of the tree of life, as recorded in 1 Nephi 8. Among other things, Lehi seems to have been shown that the divine offer of salvation extends far beyond a small elite. As Peter exclaims in the King James rendering of Acts 10:34, “God is no respecter of persons.” Other translations render the same words as saying that he doesn’t “play favorites” or “show partiality.” The passage in James 1:5 with which the Restoration commenced clearly announces that, if they will simply ask, God “giveth to all men liberally.”

A few weeks before my sitting down to write this introduction, I received a couple of emails from a relative. Among other things, they contained several ideas that had arisen from his recent reading of 1 Nephi 8. I intend to briefly share one or two of those observations here. I do so for three principal reasons:

- My relative preferred to remain anonymous and to have me write up his observations.

- They were quite interesting to me, and I think they may interest other readers.

- They illustrate the fact that thoughtful readers of the scriptures from all backgrounds can arrive at fascinating insights; no membership in any sort of guild of professional scholars of religion is required.[1]

This last is an important point directly related to the nature, mission, and function of the Interpreter Foundation and, specifically, to its flagship periodical, Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship. While, like almost all other serious academic journals, Interpreter employs a rigorous process of peer review to evaluate articles submitted to it, the focus of such review is on the content and suitability of those submissions and not at all on the degrees or the academic status of the authors. In other words, we welcome article proposals from any and all, and no particular academic certificate or field of specialization is required. We obviously can’t guarantee acceptance of particular articles, but we’re delighted to receive them. And I personally believe that a wide variety of backgrounds in authors, which will almost inevitably yield a wide variety of perspectives, is likely to generate a richer and more varied profusion of insights.[2]

But now, on to some of what my relative noticed and passed on to me:

Quite a few years ago, I published a rather lengthy article regarding Nephi’s vision of the tree of life, which is recorded in 1 Nephi 11, one of the best-known passages in the Book of Mormon. Nephi’s vision expands upon the vision or dream that had been received just a few days earlier by his father, Lehi, and that is recorded in 1 Nephi 8.[3]

And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me: Look! And I looked and beheld a tree; and it was like unto the tree which my father had seen; and the beauty thereof was far beyond, yea, exceeding of all beauty; and the whiteness thereof did exceed the whiteness of the driven snow.

And it came to pass after I had seen the tree, I said unto the Spirit: I behold thou hast shown unto me the tree which is precious above all.

And he said unto me: What desirest thou?

And I said unto him: To know the interpretation thereof (1 Nephi 11:8‒11)

Because Nephi wanted to know the meaning of the tree that his father had seen and that he himself now saw, we would expect “the Spirit” to answer Nephi’s question. But instead, Nephi is first shown a young virgin and then, after an interval, sees the same virgin holding a child in her arms. And he is told that she is “the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh” (1 Nephi 11:18).

Then “the Spirit” asks Nephi the question Nephi himself had posed only a few verses before: “Knowest thou the meaning of the tree which thy father saw?” (1 Nephi 11:21).

Strikingly, although the vision of Mary seems irrelevant to Nephi’s question — for the tree is nowhere mentioned in the angelic guide’s response — Nephi himself now replies that, yes, he knows the answer (1 Nephi 11:22).

But how has Nephi come to this understanding?

What struck me was the suddenness of his recognition that the tree represented something divine, an aspect of deity, although nothing in the text itself explains anything of the sort. The specific character of the connection between God and the tree is opaque to modern readers.

In fact, I argued, his vision seems to reflect a meaning of the “sacred tree” that is unique to the ancient Near East and in Israelite history, specifically, to the period before the Babylonian captivity — Nephi’s own era. This can be fully appreciated only when the ancient Canaanite and Israelite associations of that tree are borne in mind. In fact, a representation of such a tree stood within the temple at Jerusalem during the time of Lehi.

The inclusion in 1 Nephi 11 of an authentically pre-exilic religious symbol that could scarcely have been derived by a New York farm boy from his Bible, I contended, strongly suggests that the Book of Mormon is indeed an ancient historical record in the Semitic tradition. What Nephi “read” from his symbolic vision was culturally colored. That vision, I said, reflects a meaning of the “sacred tree” that is unique to the ancient Near East.

Writing to me in the light of my earlier argument, my relative suggests that, just as Nephi’s prior understanding helped him to recognize the interpretation of the symbol of the tree of life, Lehi too, in the account of his vision, somehow recognized the tree of life as a representation of the divine without ever having been told that this was so.[4]

With the exception of his own rather desperate prayer for mercy (see verses 8‒9), there is no mention of anything explicitly religious from the moment in 1 Nephi 8 when Lehi follows the angel and finds himself in a dark and dreary waste (verse 7) until he completes the sharing of his vision in verse 35.[5] There is no mention of God, or the Lord, of heaven or hell. Yet we are told in verse 36 that, because Laman and Lemuel refused to come to the tree, Lehi “feared lest they should be cast off from the presence of the Lord.” Although he was given no apparent instruction to connect the two, Lehi plainly associated the tree of life with the presence of the Lord.

Implicitly, his very choice of words suggests precisely that:

When he describes “a strait and narrow path, which came … even to the tree by which I stood” (20), we cannot help but think of Matthew 7:13‒14, which, in the King James Version, reads as follows:

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

And the consequences of diverging from the “strait and narrow path” are grievous, indeed:

And I saw numberless concourses of people, many of whom were pressing forward, that they might obtain the path which led unto the tree by which I stood.

And it came to pass that they did come forth, and commence in the path which led to the tree.

And it came to pass that there arose a mist of darkness; yea, even an exceedingly great mist of darkness, insomuch that they who had commenced in the path did lose their way, that they wandered off and were lost. (21‒23)

It seems that Lehi’s fear for his sons Laman and Lemuel, mentioned in verse 36, implies that true worship as he understood it included or could have included a symbol of the tree of life that stands in the presence of the Lord. In terms of the ancient Israelite temple, that would place it in or near the Holy of Holies. And this coheres nicely with the British biblical scholar Margaret Barker’s observation that a “true” version of the Menorah — in the form or shape of an almond tree — stood in or near the Holy of Holies of the temple in Jerusalem before the reforms of King Josiah and others removed and changed some of the sacred temple symbols.[6]

My anonymous relative also suggested another line of thought that had occurred to him in connection with 1 Nephi 8: Plainly, as noted above, Lehi associated the tree he saw in his vision with the presence of the Lord. Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that in making that association, he was also linking it with the symbolic tree in or near the Holy of Holies of the temple.

Modern Latter-day Saints might profitably consider some of the elements of Lehi’s dream:

- He finds himself in “a dark and dreary wilderness” (4), “a dark and dreary waste” (7).

- Then he sees a “a man … dressed in a white robe” (5), clearly an angel, whom he follows (6).

- Thereupon, he prays: “And after I had traveled for the space of many hours in darkness, I began to pray unto the Lord that he would have mercy on me, according to the multitude of his tender mercies” (8).

- His prayerful appeal for mercy and deliverance seems to allow him to escape the lonely, dreary world in which he had been wandering: “And it came to pass after I had prayed unto the Lord I beheld a large and spacious field” (9). It is in this new realm, larger and lighter, that he sees the tree that is at the focal point of his vision:

And it came to pass that I beheld a tree, whose fruit was desirable to make one happy.

And it came to pass that I did go forth and partake of the fruit thereof; and I beheld that it was most sweet, above all that I ever before tasted. Yea, and I beheld that the fruit thereof was white, to exceed all the whiteness that I had ever seen.

And as I partook of the fruit thereof it filled my soul with exceedingly great joy; wherefore, I began to be desirous that my family should partake of it also; for I knew that it was desirable above all other fruit. (10‒12)

In his vision, Lehi reached the tree while in mortality, and he called to his family members, hoping they would also come and partake of its fruit with him (11‒12). Most of them eventually did so (16). In arriving at the tree, they arrived at what Lehi considered, symbolically speaking, to be the presence of the Lord (36).

On the assumption made above, this might suggest that, in Lehi’s mind, they had effectively arrived, again in symbolic form, at the Holy of Holies of the temple — a place that, while sacred, existed by and for mortals.

We know the temple and temple worship were important to Lehi and his family. This is shown by the action taken by his son and prophetic successor Nephi shortly after Lehi’s death:

And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine. (2 Nephi 5:16)

Nephi patterned his temple architecturally after Solomon’s, which suggests that — in line with the modern architectural dictum of Louis Sullivan that “form follows function” — it was also patterned after Solomon’s temple in terms of its liturgy or ritual.

And this in turn suggests that the Nephite temple also had a high priest who entered the Holy of Holies on behalf of his people. Most likely this was Nephi himself, who would have succeeded his father Lehi in that respect as well as in his role as leader of the community and as prophet. But please note also that, in the visions of Lehi and Nephi, the tree is accessible to all if they will only follow the path that leads to it. This points to one of the most obvious ways in which modern temple ordinances differ from the rituals of the ancient Jewish temple as they appear in the sources: All, and not merely a priestly elite (let alone only a single chief priest), are invited to enter symbolically into the presence of the Lord as a foretaste of a real entrance in the world to come.

There is, I think, rich food for thought in these ideas. There are topics to be considered, evaluated, and perhaps elaborated. I’ve shared only a portion of what my relative sent to me, but even so, I like the concluding paragraph of the relevant email:

About the observation in 1 Nephi 8, I’m excited to see something so subtle suddenly appear with a whole new dimension, which is also ridiculously implausible for Joseph Smith to have deliberately crafted and remained silent about. You’d think that Joseph and his fellow conspirators who wrote the Book of Mormon, having deliberately woven and layered so many historical and linguistic nuances into its pages, would have pointed them out to their gullible followers to boost their influence, since that is what a religious mountebank, by definition, seeks. Craft a chiasmus and not find some way to use it for advantage, but allow it to go unnoticed, unmentioned, and unglorified? Not exactly the sign of a fraudulent egotist, but of someone unaware.

I appreciate my relative’s kindness in sharing such stimulating, thought-provoking insights with me, although I would have liked him to lay them out himself. I’m grateful, too, for and to all those who have produced the articles and reviews in this issue of Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, and who have prepared them for publication. Almost all of them labor without any financial reward. I’m especially appreciative of Allen Wyatt and Jeff Lindsay, who ensure that this production continues as it has week after week after week. I also express my thanks for everybody else who is involved with the Foundation. (Many of them — necessarily omitting our peer reviewers, who are anonymous as a matter of policy — are listed on pages ii–iii of the present volume.) Without the time and the effort and the financial support offered by a large number of generous people who owe us literally nothing, the Interpreter Foundation would cease to exist.

Daniel C. Peterson (PhD, University of California at Los Angeles) is a professor of Islamic studies and Arabic at Brigham Young University and is the founder of the University’s Middle Eastern Texts Initiative, for which he served as editor-in-chief until mid-August 2013. He has published and spoken extensively on both Islamic and Mormon subjects. Formerly chairman of the board of the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) and an officer, editor, and author for its successor organization, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, his professional work as an Arabist focuses on the Qur’an and on Islamic philosophical theology. He is the author, among other things, of a biography entitled Muhammad: Prophet of God (Eerdmans, 2007).

1 . My relative, as it happens, holds a doctorate in engineering from a program consistently ranked among the top ten in the United States. But engineering is obviously quite a distinct field from archaeology or biblical studies, and he works in private industry rather than in academia.

2 . I think, in this context, of an article that I recall reading many, many years ago — but that, unfortunately, I was unable to locate in time to use in this essay — about a shepherd (in the United Kingdom, if I’m not mistaken). A part of what led to his eventual conversion to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints involved his noting some feature in the relationship between sheep and shepherd as mentioned in the Book of Mormon that struck him as authentic and deeply significant. I don’t even recall precisely what the feature was, but I do remember realizing that, given my own background, it was something that I myself would never, ever, have noticed without having it pointed out to me in his article.

3 . See Daniel C. Peterson, “Nephi and His Asherah: A Note on 1 Nephi 11:8-23,” in Davis Bitton, ed., Mormons, Scripture, and the Ancient World: Studies in Honor of John L. Sorenson (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998), 191–243.A derivative and much shorter piece — much less satisfactory to its author — is Daniel C. Peterson, “Nephi and His Asherah,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 9/2 (2000): 16–25, 80–88, https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1253&context=jbms.

4 . In a private communication to me on 23 January 2021, Allen Wyatt points out that “If the understanding of the tree of life is a cultural understanding, then one would expect Laman and Lemuel to understand it, as well. I think it significant, therefore, that of all the questions they asked Nephi, the answer Nephi gave to ‘What meaneth the tree which he saw?’ (1 Nephi 15:21) was the very shortest answer given by Nephi: ‘And I said unto them: It was a representation of the tree of life’ (1 Nephi 15:22). All the other answers required much more explanation on Nephi’s part, but this one required only 9 words, and they understood.”

5 . References to 1 Nephi 8 will occur hereafter within parentheses, in the main body of the text, by verse alone.

6 . See, for example, Margaret Barker, The Great High Priest: The Temple Roots of Christian Liturgy (London and New York: T. & T. Clark, 2003), 244; Margaret Barker, The Older Testament: The Survival of Themes from the Ancient Royal Cult in Sectarian Judaism and Early Christianity (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2005), 230; Margaret Barker, The Mother of the Lord: The Lady in the Temple (London and New York: Bloomsbury T. &. T. Clark, 2012), 1:64-65. My thanks to Kevin Christensen for his help in locating these references when I was nowhere near a library.

WORKING OUT SALVATION HISTORY

IN THE BOOK OF MORMON POLITEIA

WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING

Alan Goff

Review of James E. Faulconer, Mosiah: A Brief Theological Introduction (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2020). 135 pages. $9.95 (paperback).

Abstract: The Maxwell Institute for the Study of Religion has released another book in its series The Book of Mormon: Brief Theological Introductions. This book by James E. Faulconer more than ably engages five core elements of the book of Mosiah, exploring their theological implications. Faulconer puzzles through confusing passages and elements: why is the book rearranged so that it isn’t in chronological order? What might King Benjamin mean when he refers to the nothingness of humans? And what might Abinadi mean when he declares that Christ is both the Father and the Son? The most interesting parts of the introduction to Mosiah are those chapters that sort through the discussion of politics as both Alma_1 and Mosiah_2 sort out divine preferences in constitutional arrangements as the Nephites pass through a political revolution that shifts from rule by kings to rule by judges. Faulconer asserts that no particular political structure is preferred by God; in the chapter about economic arrangements, Faulconer (as in his analysis of political constitutions) asserts that deity doesn’t endorse any particular economic relationship.

My kingdom is not of this world.

John 18:36

I believe in God, but I detest theocracy. For every Government consists of mere men and is, strictly viewed, a makeshift; if it adds to its commands “Thus saith the Lord,” it lies, and lies dangerously.

C.S. Lewis, “Is Progress Possible”

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Isaiah 55:8‒9

Behold, great and marvelous are the works of the Lord. How unsearchable are the depths of the mysteries of him; and it is

impossible that man should find out all his ways. And no man knoweth of his ways save it be revealed unto him;

wherefore, brethren, despise not the revelations of God.

Jacob 4:8

James Faulconer has authored another in the Maxwell Institute’s series The Book of Mormon: Brief Theological Introductions; his subject: the book of Mosiah. The examination is admirable in drawing deep exegetical insights from Mosiah despite the study’s brevity. I’ll quibble with Faulconer about passages he could have engaged; disagree with some readings; and extend some interpretations when my readings correspond with Faulconer’s but call for more elaboration, but make no mistake that Faulconer has done a commendable job of highlighting important theological elements of Mosiah, themes and passages readers often read over casually without drawing out the deeper meaning present.

Brief introductions such as this are in vogue among publishers. Oxford University Press has the “very short introductions” series that highlights authors, countries, nuclear weapons, various philosophies, even improbable topics such as fire and teeth. Perhaps the best-known series of this type is the “for Dummies” series published by Wiley. (A book about theology for dummies would seem a confusion of audience: “learning made easy,” asserts the publisher, as if learning is as easy as switching from baking cookies to doing no-bake cookies.) The Pelican Book imprint (Penguin) attempted from 1937 to 1984 to educate the British populace on economics, science, literature, and history — usually introduced by the adjective popular — and was revived in 2014 with subjects such as parenting, Marxism, the Anthropocene, and argumentation. Cambridge University Press does short introductions to management. MIT Press does the Essential Knowledge series with such topics as hate speech, phenomenology, contraception, and quantum entanglement.

In all these book series, the word that consistently pops up in promotional material is accessible. Much more specialized publishers produce brief introductions to topics in mathematics, psychology, science, and other subject areas. Something about contemporary Western cultural conditioning trains readers to demand brevity (think of CliffNotes and Sparknotes summaries rather than the laborious- but- rewarding work of reading War and Peace or Heart of Darkness cover to cover, and do I understand correctly that the Quibi streaming service broadcasts complete scripted and unscripted programs lasting between seven and ten minutes?) Even Bollywood movies have reduced their average run time from three hours to half that to match modern attention spans (and generate more ticket sales in the same amount of screen runtime).

Returning to the book at point, let me summarize the book first (mingling some brief regrets about elements of Mosiah that Faulconer didn’t address) while mixing in some issues and concepts I believe call for more detailed engagement. Perhaps some publisher will commit to a Book of Mormon: Deep Theological Engagement series which will permit Faulconer more far-reaching and sustained exploration.

Introduction

Faulconer’s book makes no claims to comprehensiveness or definitiveness; brevity doesn’t permit such possibilities. Faulconer works well within the constraints of the book series. The Introduction lays out the five themes the book develops, which happen to be the five numbered chapters of this book: (1) why Mosiah has the peculiar, nonchronological structure it has; (2) despite discussing good and bad government and leaders, Mosiah warns against the reader’s too-human tendency to conflate particular forms of government, policies, or leaders with God’s will (Mosiah “is not a tract about good government; if anything, it is an argument against mixing religion with politics” [9]); (3) when King Benjamin asserts that his listeners should keep in mind their own nothingness, Faulconer explains what that nothingness might mean to Benjamin; (4) what might Benjamin mean when he asks “Are we not all beggars?” with the implicit answer that we are. The point is not about our socio-economic status but rather to impress on the listener/reader the human place in the divine economy and the consequences of remission of sins. The last numbered chapter (5) takes up the confusing issue in Mosiah 15:1‒5, which can be interpreted as a passage asserting a trinitarian relationship in the Godhead between the Father and Son. The discussion in this chapter is as close as the book gets to doing systematic theology.

The Introduction is representative of the book generally as a model of compositional clarity and simplicity in writing. I can and will lament that Faulconer doesn’t address some issues or raise some questions, always recognizing that the small physical format (5″ by 8″) and page limit (150) as specified by what the series editors impose as strict limits on the concerns Faulconer could take up. An example of a topic I would have liked considered is the name of the book. The content could have led to its being called the book of Abinadi or the book of Benjamin (for surely each is more prominently featured than Mosiah_2 is), but it is the book of Mosiah. The Hebrew root m-s-h is the stem of the word we read in English as messiah (often transliterated as mashiach). Of course, Mosiah has that same m-s-h/y-s-h base (vowels in the biblical text are post-biblical, so vowel notation in the written form of the Hebrew Bible is somewhat speculative; the Hebrew name Mosiah means “savior”). The word straightforwardly means “anointed,” but usually with the alternate translation of “to save,” in the nominal form “savior,” or “the Lord saves or delivers.” Surely the name of the book has something to do with the theological themes and the salvation history written into the narrative: (a) Benjamin’s people hear the word of salvation, which hearing changes their life trajectories, (b) the Limhi and Alma_1 groups are saved/ delivered from bondage to Lamanites, (c) Alma_2 and the sons of Mosiah_2 are saved from sin and debauchery, and (d) the reunified Nephite and Mulekite groups undergo a political revolution from leadership by kings to leadership by judges in an attempt to save the polity from a repetition of King Noah’s ruinous reign.

Chapter 1: Why This Structure?

Faulconer accepts the consensus view that Mosiah was the first portion of the Book of Mormon we read that Joseph Smith dictated. After Martin Harris lost the first manuscript, Smith resumed translation from the large plates of Nephi (apparently from the narrative juncture where he left off), dictated Mosiah through to Moroni, then went back and filled in the earlier part by translating First Nephi through the Words of Mormon from the small plates. This is known as the Mosiah-first theory of Book of Mormon composition. The book of Mosiah itself has some chronological problems to work out. When we read the book of Mosiah we often don’t grasp that the reading order is not the chronological order of events recounted in the book.

The book of Mosiah itself is fragmentary, and Faulconer asserts that structure becomes theme. The Lehite group fragments into Nephites and Lamanites, Mosiah_1 leaves the original land of inheritance to settle in Zarahemla, Zeniff separates to return to the land of Nephi, which colony divides into those led by Limhi and Alma_1 . By the end of the book, these divisions are nullified as the remaining Nephites are reunited in Zarahemla. Similarly, Faulconer reads the text of Mosiah as itself fragmented.

The events in Mosiah have been disassembled like an anagram puzzle and reassembled in a different order than the chronological timeline. The chronology would have the following trajectory (13‒17):

1. The chronological book of Mosiah would start in Mosiah 9 with Zeniff leading a group to recolonize the land of Nephi and continue through the ministry and death of Abinadi and subsequent capture of the Limhi group by Lamanites. (The implication here is that the main Nephite group at Zarahemla doesn’t experience the Noah/Abinadi confrontation except as it is recounted after the fact.)

2. The Alma_1 group flees from King Noah’s army to find refuge in Helam and is soon brought into Lamanite bondage.

3. Benjamin delivers his address and transfers the kingship to Mosiah_2. Benjamin then dies. (The implication here is that the Zeniff group — or their parents — were present to hear or read Benjamin’s speech in Zarahemla about 75 years before Zeniff recolonizes the land of Nephi.)

4. Mosiah_2 sends Ammon and a search party to find the Zeniff group. Under Limhi, the Zeniff group escapes Lamanite bondage by returning to Zarahemla.

5. Alma_1’s group escapes Lamanite bondage in their exodus to Zarahemla. Alma becomes high priest over all the Nephites and Mulekites at Zarahemla.

6. Younger Nephites — including Alma_2 and the sons of Mosiah_2 — rebel, are converted, and prepare to preach to the Lamanites.

7. Mosiah_2 translates the Jaredite record retrieved under the auspices of Limhi.

8. Mosiah_2 leads a political revolution that transforms the government from kingship to judgeship. The reign of the judges commences when Alma_2 becomes the first chief judge. Mosiah_2 and Alma_1 die.

The main element moved out of chronological order is number 3: King Benjamin’s speech has been moved to the beginning of the book of Mosiah. Readers infrequently understand that the death of Abinadi and conversion of Alma_1 occur some seven decades before Benjamin’s speech, and Alma_1’s splinter group converges with the Zarahemla main body of Nephites just four years after that speech (17). Faulconer notes that the rearrangement of Mosiah is intentional, and the structure conveys a large part of the book’s theological and political message, although the reader may miss the point by being confused about the timeline. The reorganization of the content places a focus on government at the center point in the narrative. The first section (chapters 1‒16) builds a comparison of a good king (Benjamin) with a bad king (Noah). The second half (chapters 17‒29) develops a discussion of good government and bad government (again with an example of good kingship, Mosiah_2’s, with bad kingship cited as a stumbling block, Noah’s) with a focus on administrative structure.

The book’s emphasis on government results from the divisions in Nephite society. Benjamin’s speech reacts to fragmentation; Mosiah_2’s constitutional change in leadership structure attempts to solve the problem of disunion. Despite modeling five good kings (Mosiah_1, Mosiah_2, Benjamin, Zeniff, and Limhi), the example of one bad king and his deliberate cultivation of division among the people causes Mosiah_2 to urge constitutional change. But even after governmental transformation, the political and religious fragmentations continue as the false doctrine of Nehor (Alma 1) and attempted coup d’état by Amlici (Alma 2) demonstrate (to go slightly beyond the narrative Faulconer restricts himself to) the theme. “Benjamin’s answer to the question of unity, the answer with which the book of Mosiah begins, is repentance and keeping covenant rather than a form of government” (24). Religious conversion is the answer to faction: politics isn’t (in fact, politics is most often a root cause of division). Although Benjamin’s sermon results in unity, the solution must be found anew, at least in every generation. Absent the change of heart that comes with religious transformation, cardiac divisions remain. Even after Mosiah_2’s political reforms, Nehor attempts a religious revolution and Amlici attempts a political reversion to kingship (Alma 2:1 ties Nehor to Amlici); Alma needs to resign the chief judgeship to engage in religious revival (Alma 4) and the resulting reunification of Nephite hearts. Place your faith in God by whose grace hearts can change, is the theme, and don’t devote yourself to utopian political schemes, partisan institutions, or politicians. The book of Mosiah’s major theme is this: don’t make the mistake of believing governments can save souls. Mosiah_2 is the last of the Nephite kings and Alma_2 the first of the Nephite chief judges; but Alma_2’s resignation from the judgeship just four chapters into the book of Alma points to the limits of politics if conversion of hearts and minds is the object and design of our existence.

Chapter 2: Good Kings and Bad Kings:

The Futility of Politics, the Necessity of Atonement

Faulconer’s analysis of Mosiah’s structure continues with his discussion of politics in chapter 2. Mosiah’s governmental reform enacts change from kingship to judgeship. This discussion is appropriate, for the book of Mosiah is the Book of Mormon politeia as much as 1 Samuel 8‒12 (often included in such description is Deuteronomy 17:14‒20) is frequently called the biblical politeia; those biblical passages anticipate and enact political transformation from judgeship to kingship; the first part of the Deuteronomistic History (Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel) are as concerned with leadership of the Israelites by judges as the rest of that history is about leadership by kings (2 Samuel to 2 Kings). Robert Alter and Richard B. Hays have pioneered readings of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament which demonstrate the complexity and ubiquity of allusion in those texts. Alter notes the constant state of allusion present in the Hebrew Bible, a form of textuality resulting from the intellectual process of the writers and their views of history: he refers to “the paramount importance of intrabiblical allusion for ancient Hebrew writers”;[1] and a foundational element for that intertextuality is the Hebraic belief that historical events repeat over and over in patterns of apostasy, exoduses, and divine deliverance repeating prototypes, archetypes, and models from the past. Hays notes the same for the New Testament: “If we want to understand what the New Testament writers were doing theologically — particularly how they interpreted the relation of the gospel to the more ancient story of God’s covenant relationship to Israel — we cannot avoid tracing and understanding their appropriation of Israel’s Scriptures.”[2] Hebraic literature constantly alludes to other portions of the biblical text, and the reader who doesn’t explicitly read for such connections misses a large part of the meaning; much work needs to be done in exploring Book of Mormon intertextuality with the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, and portions of the Nephite scripture itself that precede the passage doing the alluding.

What is true of biblical textuality is also the pattern of Nephite scripture, which puts itself in constant typological relationship with the portions of the Hebrew Bible the Lehi group brought with them to their promised land and additional biblical content revealed to the Nephite group. To understand what the Book of Mormon politeia attempts to teach its readers one must understand what the biblical politeia taught its Nephite readers. Jim Faulconer and David Gore[3] correctly read the posture of Mosiah, which doesn’t put the divine stamp of approval on forms of government. In other words and using contemporary contexts and an updating of the scriptural text used throughout the interpretive history of the Bible called typology with its type/antitype structure, God is not a Republican or Democrat, Tory or Labourite, free-market capitalist or socialist (and each of these ideologies and parties can and do easily become idols of the cave). These are human institutions and arrangements constructed and peopled by fallible humans with spotty records and histories, each with an admixture of good and evil; and those who assert a divine mandate for their preferred political structures, factions, or stances don’t understand the divine discontent with not only the clay pot made by the potter’s hand but the potter as human clay made by divine hands (Jeremiah 18:1‒12) (this is not a form of political relativism in which all political and economic structures are equal [equally good or equally bad] in some way, but like the pigs who are all equal while some are more equal than others, some institutions are more evil than others, and comparison of political and economic systems requires a granular examination of ways in which systems are better and worse in different aspects than others). God’s work requires constantly building up and breaking down, planting and pulling up, consecrating and desecrating what humans have fashioned, misshapen, and mangled:

O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them. (Jeremiah 18:6‒10)

The divine-human interaction is one of God executing one plan, only to have humans mess it up after a single or a few generations, requiring a reset with one divine Groundhog Day repetition after another.

Genesis has the divine plan beginning with Adam and Eve’s imposing stringent requirements on the humans (vegetarianism, comity between humans and animals), but by chapter 6 human society has devolved into violence and sin, in just two generations. Noah is a second Adam (both iterations are gardeners, each receives the same command to multiply and fill the earth, each is given a fresh new earth to populate), but this time the animals fear humans, for animal flesh joins plants as human food (Genesis 9:1‒7). The violent tendencies humans manifest toward each other, beginning with Cain, now have a different potential outlet, for post-deluge humans can kill animals for food (antediluvian animals were sacrificed, but not eaten). The God of Genesis wants to bless all humanity, but the violence and corruption to which humans are prone in the primeval period causes God to wipe the slate clean and start over again with Noah and his descendants. That tactic soon results in post-deluge violence and division comparable to Cain’s murder of Abel (after which Cain founds the first city with a polity based on coercion and brutality) with the Tower of Babel and the prototypical municipality’s project of constructing a tower high enough to permit the storming of heaven and overthrowing of God. St. Augustine saw Cain’s murder of Abel and Romulus’s murder of Remus as paradigmatic for all human societies: violence and murder are the foundation of the city of man. One common definition of government among political scientists today is that organization which can make plausible claims to a monopoly on the use of violence in a society.

An aspect of the narrative in Mosiah calls the reader to see the biblical Noah as a new Adam, but also King Noah as a new Noah (and, therefore, a new Adam also). Having migrated to a new land under Zeniff, King Noah’s father, King Noah repeats the biblical Noah’s act of planting a vineyard and imbibing the wine to his shame (Genesis 9:20‒21), “And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent”). Similarly, King Noah “planted vineyards round about in the land; and he built wine-presses, and made wine in abundance; and therefore he became a wine-bibber and also his people” (Mosiah 11:15). Noah is the type, King Noah the antitype.

God’s plan C in the sublunary working out of the divine design is to covenant with Abraham and his offspring that all of humanity might be blessed. The genesis story shows God dumbing down expectations of humans to see what formal social arrangements are best adapted to human nature and human weakness, for human benefit. This is how the reader ought to view the biblical and Book of Mormon politeia narratives, both instances of God planting crops and pulling up weeds once humans are exiled to the lone and dreary world of politics and economics; God is not locked-in to kingship or judgeship, parliamentary or presidential democracy, authoritarianism or anarchy, merchantilism or feudalism. Plan D narrows the focus to a subset of Abraham’s seed. The initial plans with Adam and Eve and later with the Noachide laws encompass all of humanity. Then focus fastens on Abraham and his posterity. That plan then narrows to Jacob and his offspring. Moses and the Mosaic covenant represent another divine attempt create a pattern among the Israelites so the whole world of humanity might witness the divine power and love. After exiles and conquests, the Jews are the remnant of earlier chosen people.

That is why when the people ask for a king as do all the nations in 1 Samuel 8‒12, both Samuel and God are disappointed, but God still acquiesces to the popular will. The Israelites aren’t satisfied with charismatic judges who are sent by God when circumstances become dire (usually under military threat from Philistines or other neighbors) but want leadership that is dynastic, reliable from generation to generation rather than reliance on God to raise up a judge/deliverer (with some of these judges a mosiah or savior is sent: Judges 6:14‒15, 36‒37; 7:71 Samuel 7:8; 9:16 regarding Gideon, Samuel, and Saul as saviors) in a crisis. Samuel, the last of the judges, resists the voice of the people, viewing it as a rejection of him rather than of God, but God urges him to grant the people’s desire: “Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them” (1 Samuel 8:7). God then instructs Samuel to articulate the “manner of the king”: corvee labor, appropriation of property, confiscation of one-tenth of the people’s agricultural and pastoral goods, impressing sons and daughters into the king’s service (and the rest of the books of Samuel and Kings demonstrate the realization of these consequences, especially under Solomon), and the concentration of political power in the king’s household, along with the potential for despotism that results; that is why of King Noah the book of Mosiah notes that he taxed one-fifth of all the people’s goods; the Book of Mormon alludes to Samuel’s “manner” of the king to show that Noah is twice as rapacious as the kings of Israel and Judah are predicted to be (Mosiah 11:3). This “manner” of the king can be viewed as legislation: Samuel warns the people what the institutional arrangements will be once they have a king, as all the nations do. Yet the Israelites insist: “but we will have a king over us” (1 Samuel 8:19).

The book of Mosiah wants to ensure that readers catch the comparison between Samuel (the last Israelite judge who institutes kingship) with Mosiah_2 (the last Nephite king who institutes judgeship) by providing allusive references between the two. As Mosiah_2 possesses seer stones to translate the Jaredite record, the account assures the reader these are antique devices, for “whosoever has these things is called a seer, after the manner of old times” (Mosiah 28:16), presumably divination tools that extend deep into the biblical past. The reader is also alerted by being told the relationship between a seer and a prophet. When Limhi asks Ammon if anyone can translate the Jaredite record, Ammon notes that Mosiah_2 has stated “that a seer is greater than a prophet” (Mosiah 8:15), because “a seer can know of things which are past, and also of things which are to come” (Mosiah 8:17); Mosiah_2 is soon going to embark on structural governmental reform, just as Samuel did. When the first king of Israel is about to be revealed to Samuel the prophet and Saul goes in search of the lost asses, we are similarly told the relationship between a seer and a prophet: Saul’s servant urges Saul to ask the local prophet (Samuel) where the asses are, for “he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer” (1 Samuel 9:9).

The Book of Mormon politeia is in constant allusive dialogue with not just 1 Samuel 8‒12 and Deuteronomy 17 but the entire Deuteronomistic History (Joshua through 2 Kings), which also explores the nature and quality of leadership (a dialogue I won’t have space to explore in this review). Faulconer notes the relevance of biblical engagements with politics and how that discussion is carried out in the Book of Mormon in relation to the Israelite records the Nephites brought with them. “The Bible, however, not only is concerned with the fact that a wicked king is likely to oppress the people and to be difficult to overthrow. It also shows a direct correlation between good rulers and good people as well as between corrupt rulers and bad people” (31‒32). Except Faulconer doesn’t refer to First Samuel to make this point but to Isaiah 32:1‒8.

As Faulconer notes, the political content of Mosiah depends on comparison of good kings (Benjamin and Mosiah_2 in particular) with wicked King Noah. Noah believes he is above the people he rules, making up his own rules and laws for himself and his sycophants, that the power of armies and institutions can keep a polity together; but Noah doesn’t realize that politics and power can’t unify the people: “Noah believes that power, his power, can prevent these differences, and he trusts that it will” (35). But it is Benjamin’s approach, not Noah’s, that brings a society together: “When it comes to the creation of unity, now as well as in the eternities, politics is futile, unable to bring about the end it desires” (42). That doesn’t mean people should eschew politics, just realize its limitations. “To say that politics is futile is to say that there is no particular politics of righteousness: politics is futile for the purpose of making people good, but not for organizing them to live better lives” (42‒43). Politics can make good people bad, but it can’t make bad people good. “No politics will make us good. We must already be good independent of our politics. So there are Christians in politics, but Christianity does not imply any particular politics: not a monarchy, not judges, not a Confucian state, neither American-style democracy nor European-style social democracy” (43).

The Deuteronomistic History has lots of kings to choose from, but it also highlights for comparison good and bad kings. For the Northern Kingdom the paradigmatic evil kings are abundant: Jeroboam (who introduced idol worship) and Ahab (both syncretistic, greedy, and murderous) stand out. The Southern Kingdom of Judah has an archetypal evil king (Manasseh) and two good kings: Josiah and Hezekiah. Just three kings into the Israelite experiment with kingship, the United Kingdom even had one king who is both the paradigmatic good and evil king: Solomon is the wise and righteous king early in his reign and the syncretistic king later in his reign who likely served as the chief model of what kings should not do in Deuteronomy 17’s Law of the King.

In the transition from judges to kings, God shows the people choosing badly and lays out the consequences, but God acquiesces to the request despite Samuel’s objections. At least when those Nephites who followed Alma_1 in fleeing from Noah are foolish enough to desire a king like all the nations they have known (“the people were desirous that Alma should be their king,” Mosiah 23:6), the never-past-and-not-to-be-featured king persuades the people to rescind their desires, citing evil King Noah as an example of the potential, bad consequences, referring to his own experience and desire rather than attributing the leadership arrangement to God, for “I say unto you [not thus saith the Lord] it is not expedient that ye should have a king” (Mosiah 23:7). Similarly, when Mosiah_2 urges the people to transition from kingship, he doesn’t attribute the institutional change to God’s command but to his own prudential judgment: “I command you to do these things, and that ye have no king” (Mosiah 29:30); Alma_1 urges the people to choose wisely and “trust no man to be a king over you” nor trust no man to be your teacher, minister, president, or governor “except he be a man of God, walking in his ways and keeping his commandments” (Mosiah 23:13‒14). Alma_1 permits himself to be consecrated high priest at this point and later selected as chief judge, but he too well understands the all-too-human capacity for abuse of power after the fall. Or, as Faulconer explains the matter, “Understanding the futility of politics means recognizing what good politics can do — help us organize ourselves productively and efficiently — and especially what it cannot do, make us good” (43).

The theological message the reader should take away from the two politeias is that certain foundational events are universal because human nature and the unfolding of the divine plan are general. They repeat time and again. The premises of such recurrence are that (1) God is in charge of the universe and history and (2) repetitions are built into the system so that one can look backward or forward in time to see the divine blueprint unfolding. So the modern reader should see not only Mosiah_2 and Alma_1 looking back to see their situation as a repetition of biblical times past, but we should even find in the twenty-first century that circumstance, human fallenness, and political happenstance repeat themselves, for we contemporary readers want as much as the ancient Israelites or ancient Nephites to be like all the nations.

This split vision of seership looks to the past and the future simultaneously. Mosiah doesn’t endorse any particular governmental structure, but the book condemns corrupt and abusive government no matter the form and endorses good government that promotes the interests of the populace rather than serving the welfare of elites. In portraying a tyrant-king, the Book of Mormon repeats an archetype found commonly in the Old Testament, the ancient Near East, and virtually everywhere and everywhen (even today). King Noah is the archetype of bad government in the Book of Mormon, evidenced by explicit corruption and self-dealing while living high at the taxpayers’ expense (making the Zeniff/Noah/Limhi line a monarchic generational and dynastic burden on the people, while failing — as Faulconer points out all politics do — to make people better). Noah engaged in the following worst practices of governance. He

- built opulent buildings to show off wealth and power to the populace (Mosiah 11:8, 13);

- sent his brown-shirted troops to suppress his own dissenting people when they protested his rule (Mosiah 18:33; 19:1‒2);

- surrounded himself with corrupt sycophants and yes-men, even requiring the people to flatter their dear leader and his cabinet-full and basket-full of priests (Mosiah 11:7);

- coveted riches (Mosiah 11:14);

- like any narcissist, served his own selfish interests rather than the public good (Mosiah 29:23; 19:8);

- boasted in an illusory or short-lived strength over enemies and divided people rather than bringing them together (Mosiah 11:19);

- engaged concubines, harlots, and whores (Mosiah 11:2, 14);

- threatened to use violence to retain political office when challenged (Mosiah 14:4‒7);

- further nurturing his edifice complex, built a tall tower (the putatively tallest tower in the principal city) to surveil his people and his enemies (Mosiah 11:12);

- placed a heavy taxation burden on his people to support iniquity without paying any taxes himself (a tax burden of 20% of their income) (Mosiah 11:3);

- planted vineyards for wine production and drove his people to drink (Mosiah 11:15);

- put himself above the law: “it is not expedient that we should have a king; for thus saith the Lord: Ye shall not esteem one flesh above another, or one man shall not think himself above another” (Mosiah 23:7), nor above the law when holding a position of power;

- like wicked autocrats everywhere (that is, all autocrats) appointed his cronies and sycophants to governmental positions by “chang[ing] the affairs of the kingdom” (Mosiah 11:4), firing the previous priests and appointing new counselors in his own image (Mosiah 11:5), and spreading corruption throughout the body politic from the top down: “For behold, he has his friends in iniquity, and he keepeth his guards about him; and he teareth up the laws of those who have reigned in righteousness before him; and he trampleth under his feet the commandments of God; And he enacteth laws, and sendeth them forth among his people, yea, laws after the manner of his own wickedness; and whosoever doth not obey his laws he causeth to be destroyed; and whosoever doth rebel against him he will send his armies against them to war, and if he can he will destroy them; and thus an unrighteous king doth pervert the ways of all righteousness” (Mosiah 29:22‒23);

- caused the people to suffer, for as Mosiah_2 enumerates just a few of the disadvantages, plagues and divisions that result from having a wicked potentate rule over them: “And he also unfolded unto them all the disadvantages they labored under, by having an unrighteous king to rule over them; Yea, all his iniquities and abominations, and all the wars, and contentions, and bloodshed, and the stealing, and the plundering, and the committing of whoredoms, and all manner of iniquities which cannot be enumerated — telling them that these things ought not to be, that they were expressly repugnant to the commandments of God” (Mosiah 29:35‒36).

Having had one close call and narrow escape from tyranny and bondage under King Noah (the type of the evil ruler), the Nephites had the prudence when another putative king came along (just five years after Mosiah_2’s reforms went into effect) attempting to overthrow self- governance, the people’s voice came against making Amlici king (Alma 2:7), whose wickedness drove him and his followers to reject the voice of the people and attempt a coup d’état by force. It is neither coincidental nor accidental that usurpers who would be kings (Amlici and Amelickiah), long before explicit kingmen emerge in the narrative, were led by those whose name has their aspirations nominalized (the root word m-l-k means “king” in Hebrew). Those who supported Amlici’s kingly bid in an election failed, and they proceeded to extra-constitutionally consecrate Amlici king and use force to overturn the will of the people (Alma 2:7‒10), which would be comparable today to supporting a King Noah despite such a king’s having been straightforwardly rejected in a reelection campaign. These repetitions over long time spans teach the reader that history repeats itself and that God acts through not only repetitions of wicked rulers but also through deliverances from such would-be or has-been kings.

The lesson Mosiah_2 wants the Nephites to learn (and contemporary readers today) is that one evil ruler can negate the work of many good rulers, and structural safeguards such as institutional arrangements cannot in the absence of a righteous populace when constitutional guardrails are constantly under pressure to ensure against populist or elitist authoritarianism. It is, says Mosiah_2 , uncommon for the majority to choose unrighteously, but common that a minority of the popular vote might select unrighteously (Mosiah 29:26), “And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you” (Mosiah 29:27). The Israelites unwisely rejected God from being their king in order to be like all the nations; the Zeniffites imprudently appointed Noah to succeed Zeniff as king, and he “did cause his people to commit sin, and do that which was abominable in the sight of the Lord. Yea, and they did commit whoredoms and all manner of wickedness” (Mosiah 11:2) because they did not learn the lesson from past repetitions of tyranny and oppression.

Exegesis of such recurrences in scripture is theological if we believe that God’s mighty acts of salvation repeat themselves over time, for we will want to know how humans have dealt with God and God has dealt with humans in the past. “For he that diligently seeketh shall find; and the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the Holy Ghost, as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the course of the Lord is one eternal round” (1 Nephi 10:19); and those lessons learned by saints of former days are relevant to saints of latter days, because we humans, all too human as we are, are prone to repeat mistakes from past lessons unlearned, which require divine intervention along patterns witnessed in bygone times. King Noah’s greed, arrogance, corruption, lawlessness, narcissism, and selfishness are not how proper kings should act, and therefore neither kingly nor unpresidented [sic] in the history of national leadership. Cyrus is not the type repeated over time and historical circumstances, nor the antitype to be learned from today. King Noah is.

Chapter 3: Salvation as Creation from Nothing: Mosiah 4:1‒12

Faulconer spends two chapters examining portions of Benjamin’s speech, parts that may puzzle readers. Faulconer performs the exegetical work that theology often does to clarify a sacred text. After giving his sermon and seeing the congregation recognize their own carnal and fallen state while pleading for the grace of God, Benjamin further urges them that “if the knowledge of the goodness of God at this time has awakened you to a sense of your nothingness, and your worthless and fallen state” (Mosiah 4:5), the audience should embrace the right view of their place in the cosmos. This troubles some readers who have an exalted view of humanity and its place as divinities in embryo to think of humanity as “nothing.” Faulconer makes a case that “nothing” here means not worthless or nonexistent (as in creation ex nihilo: “creation out of nothing”) but as “no-thing,” meaning indeterminate or unformed matter. The restoration tradition doesn’t adhere to the notion of creation out of nothing, but God’s creative act is to take chaotic, formless matter and organize it much as a potter would at the wheel.

Commonly in his speech, Benjamin uses the simile that humans are like the dust of the earth out of which God shaped the created order we now live in. But even dust obeys the divine command. “Implicitly, Benjamin moves from the formlessness of dust prior to our creation to the form we receive as sons and daughters of Adam and Eve in relationship with God” (50). Faulconer’s reading connects Benjamin’s dust and creation to the creation account in Genesis, because Adam and Eve were also created out of the dust of the earth. We too are formless until we are shaped and created, spun out of dirt into a workable vessel; the listeners see themselves as “even less than the dust of the earth” (Mosiah 4:2) because they are responding directly to Benjamin’s words that “Ye cannot say that ye are even as much as the dust of the earth; yet ye were created of the dust of the earth; but behold, it belongeth to him who created you” (Mosiah 2:25). The audience and the readers don’t belong to themselves but to God, who created them out of dust. “Benjamin is thinking analogously about human beings: having been created from formlessness by the Father, we have lowered ourselves to formlessness again through sin” (56). The goal of Benjamin’s sermon is to have the audience and the reader be re-formed and re-shaped by becoming new creatures.

Chapter 4: Are We Not All Beggars? Mosiah 4:12‒28

In Chapter 4 Faulconer notes the effects of Benjamin’s sermon on its audience, the effects it might have on the reader of Mosiah. Faulconer lists 12 such effects, most of them tied into obligations of service. One of the consequences is that a Zarahemla audience should result in people experiencing this rebirth. “These actions are among the ways that those whose sins have been remitted will imitate their Redeemer in service” (62). Benjamin articulates these outcomes not as commandments but as the products of having sins remitted. The first cluster of results has to do with spiritual depth: we will rejoice, be filled with God’s love, retain a remission of sins, and grow in knowledge God and his works; Faulconer articulates all of these as not just individual virtues but one’s affecting the community (63‒66). The next cluster of follow-on results impact family and community: teaching children and dealing justly with neighbors. Another cluster focuses on succoring those who need our help. Faulconer singles out the three classes of people affected by these obligations that we naturally fulfill after our hearts are changed: the rich, the poor, and the beggar, the only passage in which the word beggar is used in the Book of Mormon. Since Benjamin’s speech is a call to a changed heart that produces service, the implication is that we have a duty to serve the beggar. “Benjamin is not arguing for social change. He neither says nor implies that having a society with both rich and poor is a problem. Nor does he say that it isn’t. The existence of all three social classes that he mentions creates an obligation of economic redistribution for each of the top two classes, but Benjamin says nothing about what kind of political or economic system (if any) his thinking leads to” (72). Just as particular political systems are for humans to work out in the mangle and muddle of principle and practice, so too are the economic systems humans attempt to realize a better society and not divinely directed, enacted, or endorsed.

Chapter 5: God Himself Shall Come Down

One can see in Maxwell Institute promotional material published by The Church News about the series the sensitivity to the notion that we in the restoration tradition don’t do theology, but we do do doctrine. “That term can scare some people off, but all we mean by ‘theology’ is a more considered and reflective meditation on the scriptures and their implications,” says Terryl Givens: “Theology just means ‘God talk,’ ‘God discourse.’ … So theology is a way of trying to be more introspective and contemplative about our faith in rigorous ways. … Rigor is one of the hallmarks of this series; it’s not about erudition or sophistication, or academic training or language. It’s just about thinking harder about gospel things.”[4] Faulconer grapples in the fifth chapter with the question of how to understand in Abinadi’s theology how Jesus can be considered both the Father and the Son while concurrently members of the Church of Christ are doctrinally committed to the notion that members of the Godhead are distinct and separate personages.

One can discern from the fact that Faulconer feels the need to define the word “Trinitarian” for the general audience he aims to reach (83) that he has a nonspecialist audience in mind. Faulconer parses the context and syntax of the passage (Mosiah 15:1‒5) to clarify the meaning. The theological problem of Christology — the problem Faulconer addresses: how can Christ be both divine and human — has a long history in the Christian tradition (90), and the Nephites at various times also grappled with the problem (89). Abinadi’s is the first reference to the condescension of Christ in the chronological structure of the Nephite record. In a literal deus ex machina, Christ comes among men and takes humanity upon himself yet remains divine. An angel visits Benjamin and explains that Christ is all of three beings: the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, and the Creator. The various roles and aspects don’t exclude the possibilities of others. Yet, even though this doctrine was taught to the Nephites throughout the time covered by the Book of Mormon (including among the Jaredites), “that it needed to be taught over and over again suggests that people found it difficult to believe” (99), just as we do also. After a close exegesis of the relevant passages which the reader would be better served to read directly from Faulconer than have me summarize, “the upshot is that aspects of these verses can be read in Trinitarian terms, as some have suggested, but they need not be” (105). For Faulconer, Mosiah 15 is not a discourse about the being or ontology of the Godhead nor a discussion about their relationship to each other. It is merely Abinadi’s explanation of what it means for God to come to earth tabernacled in flesh and blood and become mortal (109).

This brief theological discussion of Mosiah (rightly, I think, as Faulconer asserts, the most complex book in the Book of Mormon) ends with a brief conclusion which reminds the reader that the book of Mosiah is a “fragmentary book about a fragmented people … obsessed with the question of unity” (112), which can be achieved only through the grace of the atonement clothed in the garments of service. The book of Mosiah tries as hard as Benjamin and Mosiah_2 to unify the readers’ hearts and minds, from the opening to the book of Mosiah to the closing chapter. Even in the middle, another of the fragmented Nephite groups is told by Alma_1 how to move forward in faith and service: “And he commanded them that there should be no contention one with another, but that they should look forward with one eye, having one faith and one baptism, having their hearts knit together in unity and in love one towards another” (Mosiah 18:21). The gospel and the atonement might make a new creation of us, and out of many, one.

Alan Goff is a legal proofreader and editor who has taught in various universities, including 21 years at DeVry University in Phoenix. He publishes about the literary and historical aspects of scripture in the restoration tradition, along with the historiography of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and historical theory. He received a baccalaureate degree with a double major in English and political science from Brigham Young University, along with master’s degrees in both those disciplines from BYU. He received his doctorate in humanities from the State University of New York (SUNY) at Albany.

1 . Robert Alter, The World of Biblical Literature (New York: Basic Books, 1992), x.

2 . Richard B. Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005), 27.

3 . David Charles Gore, The Voice of the People: Political Rhetoric in the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2019).

4 . Grace Carter, “Maxwell Institute Series Helps Readers See the Book of Mormon Through New Eyes,” Church News, May 7, 2020, https://www.thechurchnews.com/living-faith/2020-05-07/maxwell-institute-book-of-mormon-brief-theological-introductions-183308.

THE PLEADING BAR OF GOD

Royal Skousen

Abstract: Royal Skousen’s essay shed light on enigmatic references in Jacob 6:13 and Moroni 10:34 to “the pleasing bar of God.” After establishing that the term “pleading bar” is an appropriate legal term, he cites both internal evidence and the likelihood of scribal errors as explanations for why “pleasing bar,” instead of the more likely “pleading bar,” appears in current editions of the Book of Mormon.

[Editor’s Note: Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article is reprinted here as a service to the LDS community. Original pagination and page numbers have necessarily changed, otherwise the reprint has the same content as the original.

See Royal Skousen, “The Pleading Bar of God,” in “To Seek the Law of the Lord”: Essays in Honor of John W. Welch, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson and Daniel C. Peterson (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation, 2017), 413–28. Further information at https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/to-seek-the-law-of-the-lord-essays-in-honor-of-john-w-welch-2/.]

Near the end of his life, the prophet Nephi referred to the day of judgment and declared that we, the readers of the Book of Mormon, will stand face to face with him before the bar of Christ: “and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar and ye shall know that I have been commanded of him to write these things / notwithstanding my weakness” (2 Nephi 33:11). Similarly, the standard LDS and RLDS editions state that the prophets Jacob and Moroni will also meet us when we stand before “the pleasing bar” of God to be judged:

Jacob 6:13

finally I bid you farewell

until I shall meet you before the pleasing bar of God

which bar striketh the wicked with awful dread and fear

Moroni 10:34

and now I bid unto all farewell

I soon go to rest in the paradise of God

until my spirit and body shall again reunite

and I am brought forth triumphant through the air

to meet you before the pleasing bar of the great Jehovah

the Eternal Judge of both quick and dead

The problem in these two passages is that the word pleasing does not really work as a descriptive adjective for “the bar of God.” For the righteous, the day of judgment at the bar of God may well be pleasing, but not for the wicked, as Jacob himself says in Jacob 6:13: “which bar striketh the wicked with awful dread and fear.”

Christian Gellinek (who studied law at the University of Göttingen in Germany) has suggested that the difficult reading “the pleasing bar of God” can be readily resolved if we replace the word pleasing with pleading – that is, Jacob and Moroni will meet us before “the pleading bar of God” (personal communication, 25 September 2003). Phonetically, the words pleading and pleasing are nearly identical. Oliver Cowdery (or perhaps Joseph Smith, when he dictated these two passages to Oliver) was completely unfamiliar with the legal expression pleading bar and twice substituted the more familiar word pleasing for pleading, despite the difficulty of referring to the bar of God as pleasing.

Part of the argument for “the pleading bar of God” relies on the evidence from the manuscripts that at least Oliver Cowdery and maybe even Joseph Smith (as he dictated the text) tended to replace unfamiliar vocabulary with words they were familiar with, even if the resulting phraseology did not always make much sense. In every case, there is considerable phonetic similarity between the words that were mixed up:

weed (O, P) instead of reed (1830 and all subsequent editions)

1 Nephi 17:48

and whoso shall lay their hands upon me shall wither

even as a dried reed

bosom (O, P) instead of besom (1830 and all subsequent editions)

2 Nephi 24:23 (Isaiah 14:23 in the King James Bible)

and I will sweep it with the besom of destruction

wrecked (P, all early editions, and all RLDS editions) instead of racked (1879 and all subsequent LDS editions)

Mosiah 27:29

my soul was racked with eternal torment

arrest (O, P, 1830 edition) instead of wrest (1837 and all subsequent editions)

Alma 13:20

behold the scriptures are before you if ye will wrest them

it shall be to your own destruction

Alma 41:1

for behold some have wrested the scriptures and have gone far astray because of this thing

drugs (O, P) instead of dregs (1830 and all subsequent editions)

Alma 40:26

and they drink the dregs of a bitter cup

fraction (O, P) instead of faction (1830 and all subsequent editions)

Alma 58:36

behold we fear that there is some faction in the government

Some of these earliest readings will work: “wither even as a dried weed”, “my soul was wrecked”, “the drugs of a bitter cup”, and “there is some fraction in the government.” Yet in each case the phonetically similar word introduced into the printed editions works much better and more consistently with usage in the English language. Relying on Oliver Cowdery’s excessively elevated and ornate writing style in the eight letters he wrote to W. W. Phelps and published in the Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate from October 1834 through October 1835, one might deduce that Oliver would never have made such mistakes. But the evidence from the Book of Mormon manuscripts (dating from 1829, more than five years earlier) directly contradicts such an assumption. Oliver’s language ability undoubtedly improved over the years. To be sure, the 1830 typesetter exceeded Oliver’s language abilities at the time of the printing of the 1830 edition. Note that the 1830 typesetter is the one responsible for correcting most of these misinterpreted phrases, but not all: even he left unchanged “my soul was wrecked” and the two references to “arresting the scriptures.” Also note that in this last example Oliver twice accepted the same implausible phraseology, namely, “to arrest the scriptures” (in Alma 13:20 and Alma 41:1) instead of the correct “to wrest the scriptures.” In a similar way, Oliver could have twice misinterpreted the phrase “the pleading bar of God” as “the pleasing bar of God” (in Jacob 6:13 and Moroni 10:34).

And these are not the only conjectural emendations that reject a workable but strange reading in the manuscripts, as in the following examples from 1 Nephi (all of which are extant in the original manuscript):

earliest reading (in O)

emended reading

1 Nephi 7:1

that might raise up seed

that they they might raise up seed

1 Nephi 7:22

offer sacrifice and offer burnt offerings

offer sacrifice and burnt offerings

1 Nephi 12:1

and beheld the land / the land of promise

and beheld the land of promise

1 Nephi 17:53

but I will shock them

but I will shake them

1 Nephi 18:15

they had much swollen exceedingly

they had swollen exceedingly

(Oliver Cowdery himself made the first three of these emendations when he copied the text from O into P; I am responsible for the fourth one, while Joseph Smith made the last one in his editing for the 1837 edition.) When we compare each of these earliest readings with usage elsewhere in the Book of Mormon text as well as in the King James Bible or more generally in the English language, including Early Modern English, we discover that these earliest extant readings are probably not the original readings, even though these earliest readings will, in some sense, work. Each of these are discussed in volume 4 of the critical text, Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon (Provo, Utah: The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, Brigham Young University, 2004–2009).

One could argue that “the pleasing bar of God” is perfectly fine and should be left alone. Yet this phraseology is inconsistent with respect to the many references to being judged at “the bar of God” found throughout the Book of Mormon text. I repeat them here because it is important to realize that none of these passages refer in a positive way to the day of judgment, although to be sure the judgment itself may be positive for the righteous who have truly repented of their sins:

negative

2 Nephi 33:15

for what I seal on earth shall be brought against you

at the judgment bar

Jacob 6:9

know ye not that if ye will do these things that the power of the redemption and the resurrection which is in Christ will bring you to stand with shame and awful guilt before the bar of God

Alma 5:22

how will any of you feel if ye shall stand before the bar of God having your garments stained with blood and all manner of filthiness

neutral

2 Nephi 33:11

and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar

Mosiah 16:10

even this mortal shall put on immortality and this corruption shall put on incorruption and shall be brought to stand before the bar of God to be judged of him according to their works whether they be good or whether they be evil

Alma 11:44

but all things shall be restored to its perfect frame as it is now or in the body and all shall be brought and be raigned before the bar of Christ the Son and God the Father and the Holy Spirit – which is one Eternal God – to be judged according to their works whether they be good or whether they be evil

Alma 12:12

and Amulek hath spoken plainly concerning death and being raised from this mortality to a state of immortality and being brought before the bar of God to be judged according to our works

Mormon 9:13–14

and they shall come forth both small and great and all shall stand before his bar being redeemed and loosed from this eternal band of death which death is a temporal death and then cometh the judgment of the Holy One upon them and then cometh the time that he that is filthy shall be filthy still and he that is righteous shall be righteous still

Moroni 10:27

for ye shall see me at the bar of God

There is nothing here to suggest anything inherently pleasing about the bar of God. And this holds, as already noted, for the two cases of pleasing bar in the current text. One passage is negative, the other neutral:

negative

Jacob 6:13

finally I bid you farewell until I shall meet you before

the pleasing bar of God which bar striketh the wicked

with awful dread and fear

neutral

Moroni 10:34

and now I bid unto all farewell I soon go to rest in the paradise of God until my spirit and body shall again reunite and I am brought forth triumphant through the air to meet you before the pleasing bar of the great Jehovah the Eternal Judge of both quick and dead

The first example comes after a long passage (Jacob 6:5–12) in which Jacob warns the unrepentant of God’s coming judgment.

Turning to other passages that refer to the day of judgment, often called “the last day”, whether standing before God or, more specifically, at his judgment seat, we find only neutral references to the place of judgment. If one has repented, then the day of judgment will be favorable, even glorious, for the righteous (as in 2 Nephi 9:46, cited below). But even in those passages, there is the implication of a negative judgment reserved for those who have not repented; there are no references to “the pleasing judgment seat of God.” Here is a sampling of the language from these additional passages:

1 Nephi 10:21

wherefore if ye have sought to do wickedly in the days of your probation then ye are found unclean before the judgment seat of God

2 Nephi 9:46

prepare your souls for that glorious day when justice shall be administered unto the righteous – even the day of judgment – that ye may not shrink with awful fear that ye may not remember your awful guilt in perfectness

2 Nephi 28:23

yea they are grasped with death and hell and the devil and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God and be judged according to their works

Jacob 3:10

and also remember that ye may because of your filthiness bring your children unto destruction and their sins be heaped upon your heads

at the last day

Mosiah 3:23–24

and now I have spoken the words which the Lord God hath commanded me ... they shall stand as a bright testimony against this people at the judgment day whereof they shall be judged every man according

to his works

Mosiah 27:31

yea every knee shall bow and every tongue confess before him yea even at the last day when all men shall stand to be judged of him ... then shall they confess who live without God in the world that the judgment of

an everlasting punishment is just upon them

Alma 5:18

or otherwise can ye imagine yourselves brought before the tribunal of God with your souls filled with guilt and remorse having a remembrance of all your guilt yea a perfect remembrance of all your wickedness yea a remembrance that ye have set at defiance

the commandments of God

Alma 11:43

and we shall be brought to stand before God knowing even as we know now and have a bright recollection of all our guilt

Alma 12:15

we must come forth and stand before him in his glory and in his power and in his might majesty and dominion and acknowledge to their everlasting shame that all his judgments are just

Alma 36:15

O thought I / that I could be banished and become extinct both soul and body that I might not be brought to stand in the presence of my God

to be judged of my deeds

Alma 39:8

but behold ye cannot hide your crimes from God and except ye repent they will stand as a testimony against you at the last day

Alma 41:3

and it is also requisite with the justice of God that men should be judged according to their works and if their works were good in this life and the desires of their hearts were good that they should also at the last day be restored unto that which is good

Helaman 8:25

and even at this time instead of laying up for yourselves treasures in heaven ... ye are heaping up for yourselves wrath against the day

of judgment

3 Nephi 26:4

and even unto the great and last day when all people and all kindreds and all nations and tongues shall stand before God to be judged

of their works

Mormon 7:6–7

whereby man must be raised to stand before his judgment seat ... whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto them to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom

There is one positive example that refers to those who have charity at the day of judgment:

Moroni 7:47

but charity is the pure love of Christ and it endureth forever and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day it shall be well with them

Yet even here there is the question of what will happen to those who lack this pure love of Christ.

There are a few cases that refer to an individual prophet standing before the Lord at the day of judgment. In these cases, the prophet’s work on earth will be vindicated because he has made sure that he has warned the people as the Lord commanded him, thus cleansing himself from the people’s blood (that is, guilt) at the day of judgment:

2 Nephi 9:44 [Jacob speaking]

behold I take off my garments and I shake them before you I pray

the God of my salvation that he view me with his all-searching

eye wherefore ye shall know at the last day when all men shall be

judged of their works that the God of Israel did witness that I shook

your iniquities from my soul and that I stand with brightness before

him and am rid of your blood

Jacob 1:19 [Jacob speaking]

and we did magnify our office unto the Lord taking upon us the responsibility answering the sins of the people upon our own heads if we did not teach them the word of God with all diligence wherefore by laboring with our mights their blood might not come upon our garments otherwise their blood would come upon our garments

and we would not be found spotless at the last day

Mosiah 2:27 [king Benjamin speaking]

even so I at this time have caused that ye should assemble yourselves together that I might be found blameless and that your blood should not come upon me when I stand to be judged of God of the things whereof he hath commanded me concerning you

Ether 12:38

and now I Moroni bid farewell unto the Gentiles yea and also unto my brethren whom I love until we shall meet before the judgment seat of Christ when all men shall know that my garments are not spotted with your blood

This language is also used by the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon (Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris):

3 witnesses statement

and we know that if we are faithful in Christ we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men and be found spotless before the judgment seat of Christ and shall dwell with him eternally in the heavens

Finally, there is one prophet, Enos, who has already been assured that his day of judgment will be a positive experience:

Enos 1:27

and I rejoice in the day when my mortal shall put on immortality and shall stand before him then shall I see his face with pleasure and he will say unto me: come unto me ye blessed there is a place prepared for you in the mansions of my Father

Otherwise, references to the day of judgment avoid referring to it as a pleasing event, for either us or the Judge, unless we have repented.

In the Book of Mormon text, we thus have a strong and consistent image of the day of judgment as a trial before God, either at the bar of God or before his judgment seat. Nor is there any reason from the text itself to assume that these references to the bar of God or to his judgment seat are merely figurative or metaphorical. Note, in particular, the use of the legalistic word arraign (originally raign in the Book of Mormon text) in Alma 11:44: “and all shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ.” Also note the judicial term tribune in Alma 5:18: “can ye imagine yourselves brought before the tribunal of God.” And the legal interpretation should also be applied to the proposed “the pleading bar of God.” The term pleading here does not refer to making a plea for mercy. The word pleading refers to making one’s case in court (originally oral, now written) and neutrally refers to the arguments and evidence both for and against a person. (See the earliest definitions in the Oxford English Dictionary for the noun pleading as well as for the verb plead and the noun plea.)

Another legal aspect to the judgment of God is found in two separate statements in the Book of Mormon – namely, that Christ’s twelve apostles in Jerusalem and the twelve Nephite disciples or ministers will play some role in judging the house of Israel:

1 Nephi 12:8–10

and the angel spake unto me saying behold the twelve disciples of the Lamb which are chosen to minister unto thy seed and he saith unto me thou rememberest the twelve apostles of the Lamb behold they are they which shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel wherefore the twelve ministers of thy seed shall be judged of them for ye are of the house

of Israel and these twelve ministers which thou beholdest shall judge thy seed

Mormon 3:18–19

yea behold I write unto all the ends of the earth yea unto you twelve tribes of Israel which shall be judged according to your works by the twelve whom Jesus chose to be his disciples in the land of Jerusalem and I write also unto the remnant of this people which shall also be judged by the twelve whom Jesus chose in this land and they shall be judged by the other twelve whom Jesus chose in the land of Jerusalem

Here the references to the twelve apostles judging the twelve Nephite ministers imply that the judgment being referred to is individual, not collective. Although the specific role of the twelve in that judgment is not spelled out, it is clearly referred to. One should not automatically dismiss the idea that the twelve may play a role in the day of judgment.

The Book of Mormon often refers to the day of judgment as occurring before the judgment seat of God (12 times), as in “that ye may be found spotless at the judgment seat of Christ” (from the title page of the Book of Mormon). Interestingly, references to the bar of God in the Book of Mormon are restricted to the day of judgment, while the judgment seat as a place of judgment is also used to refer to secular governing (45 times), as in the statement that Kishcumen “murdered Parhoron as he sat upon the judgment seat” (Helaman 1:9). There is biblical evidence in support of being secularly judged before the judgment seat (11 times in the New Testament), as in Pilate’s judgment of Christ in Matthew 27:19: “when he was set down on the judgment seat / his wife sent unto him.” The use in the Book of Mormon of “the bar of God” seems real enough even though it may not represent an ancient system of judgment (unlike the references to the judgment seat).

Now let us turn to the question of external evidence for the phrases “the pleasing bar of God” and “the pleading bar of God.” One thing is quite clear: in judicial contexts there is irrefutable linguistic evidence for pleading bar but none thus far for pleasing bar (except in the current Book of Mormon text). To be sure, there is evidence for pleasing bar alone, as in “the most aesthetically pleasing bar in Wanchai” and “a visually pleasing bar at the side of the screen” (gleaned from <www.google.com>). Of course, these examples are not evidence for pleasing bar in judicial contexts.

There are two Internet citations that refer to a 17th-century English courtroom, now a museum, in Fordwich, England (near Canterbury). This courtroom dates from the time of Charles II. The citations clearly identify what the pleading bar is:

“Report on Fordwich Trip” in Kent Message “Extra”, 10 September 1999 <www.powell-pressburger.org>, accessed on 23 October 2003:

The tour ended at the town hall. Mr. Tritton said: “That was the most interesting part of the day. The people who made the film reproduced the court room back at their studio. They had the jury bench, the pleading bar, everything, right down to the smallest detail of King Charles II’s coat of arms.”

At the head of the stairs, Sgt. Bassett ducks under a beam inscribed ‘Love and honour the truth.’ In real life the court’s pleading bar, where prisoners stood while on trial, is at the head of the stairs. It does not obstruct anyone entering the room, nor bear an inscription – though the motto ‘Love and honour the truth’ is prominent under King Charles II’s Coat of Arms, displayed on the ceiling above the panelled rear wall.

The Fordwich Town Hall website (updated on 23 July 2003), <www.canterbury.gov.uk>, accessed on 23 October 2003:

On the first floor is the Court Room where all criminal cases in Fordwich were tried until 1886. The accused would stand flanked by the Town Constables, at the “pleading bar” situated at the head of the stairs. (Hence the expression “prisoner at the bar”). The Judge or chief magistrate was the Mayor for the time being and he sat in the chair at the north end of the room, flanked by six Jurats on each side, seated on the “bench.” The Mayor’s seat and bench together with the paneling are early Tudor in origin.

One could dismiss these citations to pleading bar as somehow errors, especially since they do not come from legal documents dating from the 1600s. Yet the expression pleading bar does exist in literary references that do date from the early 1600s (found on Early English Books Online <eebo.chadwick.com> and on Literature Online <lion.chadwyck.com>, 24 January 2014). In the first citation, there is no doubt that the whole passage refers metaphorically to a courtroom:

John Harington, Orlando Furioso in English heroical verse (second edition, 1607), book 27, stanza 46, lines 369–72:

If you deny my claim, here I will prove it,

This field the court, this list my pleading bar,

My plea is such, as no writ can remove it,

My judge must be the sequel of the war.

(Here list specifies an area set aside for jousting or other combat.) The second citation is found in a play that was apparently written no later than 1634:

John Webster, Appius and Virginia, act 5, scene 1

Fortune hath lift thee to my Chair,

and thrown me headlong to thy pleading bar.

(In these two examples as well as the following ones, I have regularized the spelling.) Of particular interest here is the evidence that John Webster was no novice in legal matters. Scholars have argued that he was admitted to the Middle Temple (one of the English courts of law) on 1 August 1598. Moreover, he is considered the primary author of a play that deals with legal issues, The Devil’s Law Case; or, When Women go to Law, the Devil is full of Business (published in 1623). Thus it is not surprising that there is a metaphorical reference to pleading bar in his play Appius and Virginia, first published in 1654 (after Webster’s death) and attributed to Webster (the title page refers to Webster as the sole author, although he may have had collaborators, a common-enough practice even today). For further discussion of Webster’s possible legal background, see Clifford Leech, John Webster: A Critical Study (New York: Haskell House, 1966).

Now, one may claim that the expression pleading bar cannot be found in the judicial records dating from Early Modern English. This may be so – although there are a lot of legal records to be checked, most of which have never been electronically transcribed. There might be a good reason why the term is missing from legal records – namely, legal records refer to the specifics of cases, not to the structure of the courtroom, neither to its furniture nor to the placement of that furniture. The claim that pleading bar does not exist in judicial records is meaningless unless one has already established that in general there are references in those records to the courtroom structure and its furniture. More likely, the expression pleading bar would appear in histories commenting on specific cases, or in literary works that use the term metaphorically, as we have seen. Here are three more examples in the later 1600s and early 1700s from historical and literary sources, but in judicial contexts, found 24 January 2014 on Early English Books Online <eebo.chadwyck.com> and on Literature Online (<lion.chadwyck.com>):

Thomas Philipot, A Brief Historical Discourse of the Origin and Growth of Heraldry (London, 1672), page 52

the Bridge that led to their Court of Judicature, the Septa or Pen that shut it in and enclosed it, the Diribitorium or partition, that like a pleading Bar separated it and the Cista or Chest wherein the Praetor treasured up the public Records

Henry Killigrew, Select Epigrams of Martial Englished (London, 1695), epigram 20 (to Julius Martialis), page 114

We’d never know the Powerful in the State,

Within their Courts, as do their Statues, wait;

At the vexatious Pleading-Bar attend,

But all our Time, in Books and Converse spend

Nicholas Rowe’s translation of Lucan’s Pharsalia (London, 1718), book I, lines 497–99

While ’t was allowed me, Caesar to defend,

While yet the pleading bar was left me free,

While I could draw uncertain Rome to thee

Stanford Carmack has also provided (8 January 2015) this plural example from Early English Books Online:

Thomas May’s translation of Virgil’s Georgics Englished (1628), page 61

The pleading bars another doth admire

I have also found an example of the expression pleading bar in an actual legal source dating from the 1600s. In 2006, with the kind help of Frank Kelland, a reference librarian at the Howard W. Hunter Law Library at Brigham Young University, I located such an instance of the expression pleading bar – namely, in the Law Notes Collection deposited in the Department of Special Collections, the Kenneth Spencer Research Library, at the University of Kansas. These 17th-century notes are written in the secretary script, a court-derived script common in the 16th and early 17th centuries; for a description of the script, see D. C. Greetham, Textual Scholarship: An Introduction (New York: Garland, 1994), pages 201–202, 248–49. These notes have the manuscript number MS P367 and are identified as a quire of 12 leaves containing a list of headings written in English for the most part and with notes below each heading written in “Law French.” The bibliographic citation states that “each heading is followed by a number of phrases – legal apothegms, definitions, judgements – each with a citation either to a statute or to what is apparently a page number. Crowding and blanks indicate on-the-spot compilation.” The word apothegm here refers to “a short, pithy, and instructive saying or formulation” (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, 2003). And at the top of the 8th leaf, we have a heading with the phrase “Pleading bar & trav’s.” The last word, trav’s, is Law French for travers and means ‘denial in pleading’; for that term, see J. H. Baker, Manual of law French, 2nd edition (Hants, England: Scolar Press, 1990), page 207. Thus the heading is equivalent to “pleading bar and denial.” On the 12th leaf, the date is given as “21 Ja. 15” (that is, 21 January 1615). The University of Kansas bibliographer states that this quire “may have been tipped into a printed book.” In other words, the quire seems to have served as an index for an unidentified law book, especially since the headings are arranged alphabetically and the reference citations were added as they were found in the book. The law book itself was probably in French.

One could argue that in this index the expression pleading bar is not fully nominal, but rather the word pleading is being used as a gerund or present participle. (In modern legal texts, there are, for instance, expressions like “pleading bar of statute of limitation”, “to raise this pleading bar”, and “the mediaeval pleading bar or defense of election of remedies.”) Even so, I have been able to find two examples of the fully nominal pleading bar dating from the late 1800s and early 1900s, both found (24 January 2014) on Google Search <books.google.com>. The first is from a religious book published in 1887 in Ashland, Ohio, by the Brethren Publishing House, that explicitly refers to a courtroom setting in Lewistown, Pennsylvania:

Julia A. Wood, My Northern Travels: The Results of Faith and Prayer, page 75:

Attended the Teachers’ Institute, held three days in the court-house at Lewistown. The floor of that building was constructed upon the inclined plane order. No obstructed views. Its ventilation, most scientifically planned, was apparently easily operated by an occasional pull of a cord hanging against the wall, adjacent to the pleading bar. A purifying plan, worthy of adoption.

And the second example is in a book published in 1908 in London by William Heinemann, and it comments on the Mormons by citing the phraseology of Moroni 10:34, not as “the pleasing bar” but as “the pleading bar.” Here the author appears to be citing some Mormon church leader:

Guy Theodore Wrench, The Grammar of Life, page 202

The Mormons maintain: ‘That we do bring this doctrine, and that it is true, is the testimony we now give, and which we will meet before the pleading bar of the Great Jehovah, the Eternal Judge of both quick and dead.’

Either the author realized that pleasing bar was an error for pleading bar and consciously substituted the correct reading – or he accidentally made the change, being familiar with the judicial term pleading bar. This relatively modern use of pleading bar (from about a century ago), although rare, may explain the more recent use (dating from 1999 and 2003) of the expression pleading bar in online reports of the centuries-old courtroom, now a museum, in Fordwich, England. Minor instances of this phraseology may have continued simply because local people have continued to remember the correct name for the bar the defendant stood before when his case was being heard.

Thus the linguistic use of pleading bar as a legal term is established, but that is not the relevant issue here. Rather, the issue is whether the original Book of Mormon text referred to “the pleasing bar of God” or to “the pleading bar of God.” Internal evidence from the text argues for “the pleading bar” in both Jacob 6:13 and Moroni 10:34. There is nothing especially pleasing about the final day of judgment, nor the odd reference to the “bar of God” as pleasing. Scribal errors and mistakes in understanding explain why Oliver Cowdery (and perhaps Joseph Smith) may have thought the phrase was “the pleasing bar.” Moreoever, we can find infrequent but persistent references in legal contexts to “the pleading bar”, from around 1600 to the present. For me, pleading bar makes perfectly good sense in the Book of Mormon text; pleasing bar does not. The Book of Mormon critical text accepts the conjectured phraseology “the pleading bar” in both passages.

Royal Skousen has had academic appointments at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, the University of Texas at Austin, and Brigham Young University. He has also been a visiting professor at the University of California at San Diego, a Fulbright scholar at the University of Tampere in Finland, and a research fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, The Netherlands. He has published three books on exemplar-based approaches to language description, including Analogical Modeling of Language (1989). Recent work has concentrated on quantum computing of analogical modeling; his three most important papers on Quantum Analogical Modeling (QAM) are available on arXiv.org.

Since 1988, Skousen has been the editor of the Book of Mormon Critical Text Project. He has published 11 books thus far, including facsimile transcripts of the original and printer’s manuscripts, a complete critical text analysis of the Book of Mormon (with the goal of restoring the original text), and most recently a two-volume history of the grammatical editing of the Book of Mormon. In 2009, he published with Yale University Press the definitive scholarly text of this scripture, The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text. And in 2015, the Joseph Smith Papers published a two-volume set of photographs of the printer’s manuscript, along with a modified version of his facsimile transcription of the printer’s manuscript of the Book of Mormon, edited by him and Robin Jensen.

SUBTLE HEBRAIC FEATURES IN THE BOOK OF MORMON

Amanda Colleen Brown

Review of Donald W. Parry, Preserved in Translation: Hebrew and Other Ancient Literary Forms in the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book; Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2020). 171 pages. Hardback, $19.99.

Abstract: Donald W. Parry combines a lifetime of insights about the Old Testament and Book of Mormon into one volume. Written for a non-academic audience, this book provides a glimpse into some of the Book of Mormon’s literary complexities that originate from Hebrew grammar and style.

Mark Twain “once quipped that if Joseph Smith had left ‘and it came to pass’ out of the Book of Mormon, the book would have been only a pamphlet” (103). Twain’s disparaging comment, while witty, did not account for the fact that the English translation he mocked was exceptional Hebrew. The Book of Mormon employs “and it came to pass” within its proper narrative context, and the poetic sections of the Book of Mormon employ the phrase less frequently, aligning with Semitic narrative structure rules (104). This insight is one of hundreds Dr. Donald W. Parry provides in his book on Hebraisms in the Book of Mormon, written for a non-specialized audience (xv).

Bringing a career’s worth of insights to both the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon, Parry claims that “The Hebrew elements discussed in this volume can enhance the readability of the Book of Mormon and heighten our understanding and appreciation of ancient scripture” (xxii). For conservative readers of the Book of Mormon who are interested in how the study of the language can enhance their scripture study, Parry’s perspective will capture interest.

In this volume, Parry explains literary features of Semitic language such as chiasmus, theme words, symbolic action and prophetic curse, and idea-amplifying plurals, and spotlights the contributions of prophets, Latter-day Saint scholars, and Hebrew Bible scholars alike. He also explains the structure and limitations of Hebrew narrative and poetry through examples from popular passages that resonate with readers. He synthesizes linguistic principles, language development, and secondary literature on the topic while consistently creating relevance that will resonate with a non-expert reader. He most effectively achieves this through demonstrating how the theological meaning of beloved passages changes when its contextual grammatical structure is accounted for.

Where appropriate, Parry highlights the differences between English and Biblical Hebrew grammar to show the purposeful creation of phrasing in the Book of Mormon. At the end of each chapter, he discusses a particular principle’s structure, how scholars use it to reconstruct the past, and what it can add to an individual’s reading. More than grammar, Parry’s analysis illuminates the text by forcing a slower reading — a reading focused on parallels, similarities between the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon, repeated themes in a passage, etc.

Openly admitting that without the autograph (original record), a certain amount of conjecture will always exist when deconstructing the Book of Mormon’s translation, Parry overcomes this monumental obstacle by analyzing the genre, grammatical structure, and individual words employed by the book’s writers, redactors, and translators, and compares these features to Hebrew grammar and style. For instance, in discussing numerical parallelism, Parry comments that the Old Testament employs this construction more than the Book of Mormon authors. He suggests this is because there are several entirely poetic books in the Old Testament (e.g. Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes) while narrative dominates the Book of Mormon, making this feature inconsistent with the book’s genre (36, 37).

Had the book addressed the effect of King James English (and its literal translation of the Hebrew and Greek texts) on English’s development, I would have felt more at ease with all of Parry’s conclusions. While there are countless instances in which the King James Version failed to adequately convey the original Hebrew construction the Book of Mormon preserved in translation, a clearer delineation between the two, especially in the beginning chapters, would have situated and clarified more of the book’s conclusions.

The book concludes with accounts of several early Church converts’ experiences with the Book of Mormon, reminding the reader that the believer’s interaction with the text far outweighs an academic knowledge of the text. While I believe that scripture should be read devotionally by academic and believer alike, this book’s merit undeniably lies in the fact that many of the forms discussed are undetectable in the KJV and require extensive academic training in Semitic grammar to notice. Without a translator, a non-academic person’s access to these insights is virtually impossible. It is wise to read this book with scriptures in hand, so as to have the full references in context.

Amanda Colleen Brown holds a MA in Bible and the Ancient Near East from The Hebrew University at Jerusalem, where she focused on Akkadian, Modern Hebrew, and Israelite popular religion as it relates to women’s narratives. She previously graduated from Brigham Young University with a bachelor’s degree in Ancient Near Eastern Studies. She is also passionate about a variety of dance styles, literature, and travel.

POESY AND PROSODY IN THE

BOOK OF MORMON

Robert F. Smith

Abstract: Robert Smith makes the case that “poetic art in the Book of Mormon is highly developed” — you just need to have the eye to recognize it. Though many readers are aware of the stunning examples of chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, thanks to the pioneering work by John W. Welch, fewer are acquainted with the other important forms of parallelism that pervade the text, often placed strategically to highlight the importance of a particular passage. Smith also shows why apocalpytic texts, sometimes thought to originate at a later period, can be found, for example, in the first chapter of the Book of Mormon.

[Editor’s Note: Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article is reprinted here as a service to the LDS community. Original pagination and page numbers have necessarily changed, otherwise the reprint has the same content as the original.

See Robert F. Smith, “Poesy and Prosody in the Book of Mormon,” in “To Seek the Law of the Lord”: Essays in Honor of John W. Welch, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson and Daniel C. Peterson (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation, 2017), 429–67. Further information at https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/to-seek-the-law-of-the-lord-essays-in-honor-of-john-w-welch-2/.]

It has often been said that there is no real poetry in the Book of Mormon—no real English poetry, that is.

Hugh W. Nibley[1]

Poetic art in the Book of Mormon is highly developed. We can see this clearly despite our having to read it in translation and despite the lack of poetic presentation in most published sources. Of course, not all the Book of Mormon is poetic. Most of it is prose narrative and much of it is oracular narrative, as is also true of major portions of the Bible.

A characteristic of Book of Mormon poesy, which it has in common with classical Hebrew poetry, is orality. It bears the marks of oral composition not only in the visions and declamations of Lehi (presumably written down for him then or later by Nephi, just as Baruch took dictation from Jeremiah)[2] but also in the formulaic, symmetrical, and sometimes lyric poetry found elsewhere in the Book of Mormon.

The writers and final editor of the Book of Mormon have sometimes chosen to use or place poetry strategically within the overall prose structure, inserting poetry at emotional or spiritual high points,[3] just in the way that a composer has a vocalist break into an aria at the appropriate moment in an opera.[4] Note, for example, how Nephi inserts poetic, parallel phrases at 1 Nephi 8:2 in order to introduce a narrative account of his father’s dream-vision:

I have dreamed a dream;

*םולח יתמלח

or, in other words,

I have seen a vision.

ןוזח יתיאר

This parallel pair is well-known in Hebrew from Joel 2:28 (MT 3:1),[5] and I have therefore applied the likely biblical Hebrew translation immediately opposite. Interestingly, at both Numbers 12:6 and Daniel 4:9, where the same root words appear, the Massoretic Hebrew text (MT) breaks into a brief poem, while the author of Acts (Luke) likewise inserts the same poetry of Joel into his prose narrative account (Acts 2:17–21). Nothing odd or unaccountable here, although it is also worth pointing out (following the late William F. Albright) that “the prophets were originally called rōʼîm, ‘diviners’ (1 Sam. 9:9),” from Hebrew rōʼe, a synonym of ḥōzîm, from Hebrew ḥōzê, both of which are normally translated “seers”[6] (cf. 2 Sam. 24:11), and both of which are likely the root words used by Father Lehi in the second line of his announcement of his dream-vision, which in hypothetical Hebrew *rāʼîtî ḥāzôn means “I have seen a vision.”[7]

The placement of that poetic announcement is strategic in that the allegorical visions of Lehi and Nephi (1 Ne. 8:1–15:36) are complementary and are the chiastic focus of the entire book of 1 Nephi.[8] Moreover, the first-person visions and narrative of the Small Plates of Nephi (no doubt true also for the lost Book of Lehi) are paralleled by the first-person narrative accounts of Mormon and Moroni at the conclusion of the Book of Mormon in an overall vision-fulfillment pattern. Both were used to frame the third-person narrative accounts of the books of Mosiah through 4 Nephi, thus forming a kind of triptych or overall ABA pattern.[9] This pattern is centered on the Atonement at Alma 34:12–13, which is the focus of the extraordinarily beautiful chiasm at Alma 34:8–17,[10] at the physical center of the book.

Poetry is also placed architectonically by the editor at 3 Nephi 9:20–28:18—a chiasm centering on the ascent of the Lord in 18:39–19:1, i.e., Isaiah 52:8–10 is used there as a flanking device (at 16:18 and 20:40), just as it was used in the book of Mosiah (chapters 12 and 15) to flank the center there.[11] David P. Wright commented on the direct parallel or inverse chiastic parallel structuring in the Book of Mormon and defined it as an integral part of the nature of the book.[12] Wright notes, “That the Book of Mormon has a style which involves parallelism and repetition is not [an] imposition upon the text. And [Wade Brown] does not go too far in trying to see these structures throughout the entire book. They really are there.”[13] As we shall see, parallelism is only one aspect, even if the key aspect, of the poetic art employed within both the Bible and the Book of Mormon, along with a host of other rhetorical features woven into a grand tapestry by master editor(s).

Biblical Poetry

Adhering to the text on the Brass Plates of Laban, Nephi quotes directly from Isaiah 2:2–4 (2 Ne. 12:2–4; Micah 4:1–3). I have laid the Book of Mormon version out as poetry below and placed the Hebrew of the Massoretic Isaiah text in the right-hand column for comparison:

And it shall come to pass in the last days,

םימיה תירחאב היהו

When the mountain of the Lord’s house

הוהי־תיב רה היהי ןוכנ

Shall be established in the top of the mountains,

םירהה שארב

And shall be exalted above the hills,

תועבגמ אשנו

And all nations shall flow unto it.

:םיוגה־לכ וילא ורהנו

And many people shall go and say,

ורמאו םיבר םימע וכלהו

“Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain

of the Lord,

הוהי־רה־לא הלענו וכל

To the house of the God of Jacob;

בקעי יהלא תיב־לא

And he will teach us of his ways,

ויכרדמ ונריו

And we will walk in his paths;

ויתחראב הכלנו

For out of Zion shall go forth the law,

הרות אצת ןויצמ יכ

And the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.”

:םלשורימ הוהי־רבדו

And he shall judge among the nations,

םיוגה ןיב טפשו

And shall rebuke many people;

םיבר םימעל חיכוהו

And they shall beat their swords into plow

shares,

םיתאל םתוברח ותתכו

And their spears into pruning hooks

תורמזמל םהיתותינחו

Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,

ברח יוג־לא יוג אשי־אל

Neither shall they learn war any more.

:המחלמ דוע ודמלי־אלו

The systematic use of parallel couplets or bicola (distichs) here is typical of Isaiah and Micah and many other biblical prophets. It is a classic example of what is known as parallelismus membrorum or “parallelism of members.”[14] Grant Hardy found such parallel poetic structure useful in laying out and analyzing 3 Nephi 22:4 (= Isa. 54:4):

‘Fear not, for thou shalt not be ashamed;

ישובת אל־יכ יארית־לא

neither be thou confounded,

ימלכת־לאו

for thou shalt not be put to shame;

יריפחת אל יכ

for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth,

יחכשת ךימולע תשב יכ

and shalt not remember the reproach of thy youth,

and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.’15

:דוע־ירכזת אל ךיתונמלא תפרחו

The line in italics, which is essential to the poetic balance, is not to be found in the Printer’s Manuscript, the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, nor in the Massoretic Text (MT) of Isaiah, which is much later than the Brass Plates of Laban, but was restored in the 1837 and subsequent editions of the Book of Mormon, perhaps on the basis of the Original Manuscript, which no longer exists for that section. Royal Skousen thinks that the line was mistakenly added by the 1837 typesetter through dittography.[15] The line may have been lost anciently from the Massoretic Text because of a simple mistake in scribal copying known as homoeoarcton in which errors are introduced because a line has the same beginning as a subsequent line and is inadvertently skipped. The same scribal error was possibly made by Oliver Cowdery for the Printer’s Manuscript.

Another poetically meaningful restoration (which Hugh Nibley saw as a “way of clarifying” the text[16]), presented below in italics, was made by Joseph in the 1840 edition of the Book of Mormon at 1 Nephi 20:1 (Isa. 48:1),

Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob,

בקעי־תיב תאז־ועמש

Which are called by the name of Israel,

לארשי םשב םיארקנה

And are come forth out of the waters of Judah.

ואצי הדוהי יממו

Or out of the waters of baptism,

Which swear by the name of the Lord,

הוהי םשב םיעבשנה

And make mention of the God of Israel,

וריכזי לארשי יהלאבו

Yet they swear not in truth,

תמאב אל

Nor in righteousness.

הקדצב אלו

Nevertheless, they call themselves of the holy city,

וארקנ שדקה ריעמ ־יכ

But they do not stay themselves upon the God

of Israel,

וכמסנ לארשי יהלא־לעו

Which is the Lord of Hosts,

Yea, the Lord of Hosts is his name.

ומש תואבצ הוהי

Italics here indicate the English cola (stichs) which are absent from the Massoretic Hebrew text. A variety of explanations might be given for this, but at the very least balance is here restored to two sets of bicola. For as the late William F. Albright pointed out many times, losses are more common than glosses.[17] Moreover, in the first instance, a similar phrase related to baptism occurs in Testament of Levi 18:7,

And the glory of the Most High shall burst forth upon him,

And the spirit of understanding and sanctification

shall rest upon him [in the water ἐν τῶ ὓδατι].[18]

Parallelismus Membrorum

The systematic use of repetitive parallelism of members (with stylistic variation) in ancient Hebrew, Canaanite, and Egyptian poetry is well-known and long studied,[19] and is clearly a major feature of the Book of Mormon. Unfortunately, since the Book of Mormon has generally been printed in double-column pages with a focus on citation of chapter and verse, the power of poetic scansion has been lost on most readers. The fact of parallelism therein is most readily seen in specialized, scholarly publications on the Book of Mormon.[20] Thus, only those who diligently search frequently find isolated parallels embedded in prose narrative biblical text,[21] as well as at Jarom 3 in the Book of Mormon,

the hardness of their hearts,

and the deafness of their ears,

and the blindness of their minds,

and the stiffness of their necks.

Or at Jacob 3:1,

Look unto God with firmness of mind,

And pray unto Him with exceeding faith.

Some examples of more sustained poetic use of parallelism in the Book of Mormon can be excerpted from the Psalm of Nephi, found in 2 Nephi:

4:17c My heart sorroweth because of mine flesh

My soul grieveth because of mine iniquities

4:20 He hath led me through mine afflictions in the

wilderness

And he hath preserved me upon the waters of the

great deep

4:26b Why should my heart weep

And my soul linger in the valley of sorrow

And my flesh waste away

And my strength slacken because of mine afflictions?

4:27a And why should I yield to sin because of my flesh?

Yea why should I give way to temptations?

4:28 Awake my soul

No longer droop in sin

Rejoice O my heart

And give place no more for the enemy of my soul

4:32a …my heart is broken

And my spirit is contrite

Similarly at Alma 5:40,

Whatsoever is good cometh from God,

And whatsoever is evil cometh from the Devil.[22]

And 1 Nephi 4:3,

The Lord is able to deliver us,

even as our fathers,

And to destroy Laban,

even as the Egyptians.

Parallelism is also used in larger units, as with the tricolon at 1 Nephi 19:9,

They scourge him,

and he suffereth it,

And they smite him,

and he suffereth it,

Yea, they spit upon him,

and he suffereth it,

Since the “chief characteristic of Hebrew poetry in the Bible is balance or symmetry, commonly called parallelism,”[23] the consistent appearance of parallelism as the controlling feature of Book of Mormon poetry is not at all remarkable. Indeed, some of the above examples are actually part of even more complex and magnificent poetic structures typical of the Bible (which we discuss below), and frequently partake of the same parallel word pairs common to Hebrew (and Ugaritic) poetry,[24] e.g., in light of 2 Nephi 4:32a (above), note Psalm 34:18,

The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart;

And saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.

and the chiastic parallel in hymnal epic dialect in Job 28:2,

Iron from ore is taken,

חקי רפעמ לזרב

(barzel mē'āpār yuqqāḥ)

and from smelted rock, bronze.

השוחנ קוצי ןבאו^26

(wĕ’eben yāṣûq nĕḥûšâ)

Numerical Sequences

In other cases, the word pairs may be formulaic or progressive numerical sequences,[25] as in 1 Nephi 4:1, which alludes to the David and Goliath topos in 1 Samuel 18:7, 29:5,[26]

Then why not mightier than Laban and his fifty,

Yea, or even than his tens of thousands?

Compare similar progression at Mosiah 11:19, Alma 3:26, 60:22; compare Ugaritic Aqhat tablet 3 (CAT 1.19), 1:42–44, “Seven years is Baal absent, |Eight, the Rider of Clouds,” or in The Epic of Baal tablet 1 (CAT 1.1 III), IV:2–3, “From a thousand acres, |ten thou[sand hectares,]” or in tablet 3 (CAT 1.3), V:24, “Across a thousand acres, |a myriad of hectares,” or as in Psalm 91:7, “A thousand shall fall at thy side, |and ten thousand at thy right hand” (1 Sam. 18:6–7); or Psalm 84:10, “How much better is one day in your Court, than a thousand in the Cemetery!”[27] “Commanders of thousands, |and commanders of hundreds” (1 Sam. 22:7; 1 Macc. 3:55); cf. also “Five…hundred” |”hundred…ten thousand” (Lev. 26:8).[28] The same sequential phenomenon occurs in ancient Egyptian, as in Book of the Dead spell 125, “in the second hour of the night, in the third of the day.”[29]

Climactic Tricola, Tetracola, and Beyond

Ordinary tricola (tristichs) can be found, as displayed above from 1 Nephi 19:9 (as laid out by Grant Hardy in his 2003 Reader’s Edition of the Book of Mormon). There are likewise extraordinary, beautiful, chiastic tricola in the Hebrew Bible, such as the one at Genesis 1:27, which has a well-balanced 4:4:4 Hebrew stress accent metric pattern:

And God created man in his image,

ומלצב םדאה־תא םיהלא ארביו

In the image of God created he him,

ותא ארב םיהלא םלצב

Male and female created he them.32

םתא ארב הבקנו רכז

However, the climactic forms are even more interesting. In Ugaritic epic,[30] in ancient Egyptian,[31] and in the Hebrew Bible,[32] we frequently find climactic tricola,[33] tetracola, etc. Note the following examples of climactic tricola in Egyptian from the Tomb of King Intef (Papyrus Harris 500), as translated by Miriam Lichtheim:[34]

vi,5–6 Those who built tombs,

Their places are gone,

What has become of them?

vi,7 Their walls have crumbled,

Their places are gone,

As though they had never been!

An example from Psalm 106:21–22 is instructive (NRSV), following an offset introductory line (in which the proposed etymology of the name Mosiah is to be found):

They forgot God, their Savior

(םעישומ “their Savior”; Môšîˁām)

Who had done great things in Egypt

(םירצמ “Egypt”; Miṣrāyîm)

Wondrous works in the land of Ham

(םח “Ham”; Ḥām)

And awesome deeds by the Red Sea

(ףוס־םי “Red Sea”; Yam-Sûf)

Thus, it should be no surprise that we find the same phenomenon in the Book of Mormon. In 2 Nephi 26:15, for example, in the midst of midrashic exposition on Isaiah 29:3–12,[35] we find a nice climactic tricolon:

The words of the righteous shall be written,

And the prayers of the faithful shall be heard,

And all those who have dwindled in unbelief shall not be forgotten!

The first two cola here provide direct parallel statements, while the final, climactic colon (the one with the highest apparent syllable count) is antithetically parallel. We can find another example of a climactic tricolon at 3 Nephi 8:13 (cf. Isa. 40:4), as laid out by Donald Parry:

And the highways were broken up,

And the level roads were spoiled,

And many smooth places became rough!

Another climactic tricolon (which Donald Parry terms a “progression”) appears embedded in a larger poem, at 1 Nephi 2:20bc:[36]

And shall be led to a land of promise;

Yea, even a land which I have prepared for you;

Yea, a land which is choice above all other lands!

A set of twin climactic tricola again à la Donald Parry (united by antithetical parallelism) is to be found in Alma 9:28, and can be laid out as follows:

If they have been righteous,

they shall reap the salvation of their souls,

according to the power and deliverance of Jesus Christ;

And if they have been evil,

they shall reap the damnation of their souls,

according to the power and captivation of the Devil![37]

At Jacob 3:11, another couple of climactic tricola follow a call to repentance:

O my brethren, hearken unto my word:

Arouse the faculties of your souls,

Shake yourselves that ye may awake from the slumber of death,

And loose yourselves from the pains of Hell!

That ye may not become angels to the Devil,

To be cast into that lake of fire and brimstone,

Which is the second death!

Such climactic tricola are regularly encountered in ancient Ugaritic narrative poetry, as at the beginning of the Epic of Kirta tablet 1 (CAT 1.14), I:7–9, which also contains a numerical progression:[38]

7 bt / [m]lk.itbd The house of a king has perished:

8 dšbʿ / [a]ḫm.lh. A house with seven brothers,

9 tmnt.bn um / Even eight mother’s sons!

Another Ugaritic example is from the obverse of The Birth of the Gracious Gods tablet (CAT 1.23):[39]

9 yzbrnn.zbrm.gpn May vine-pruners prune him,

10 yṣmdnn.ṣmdm.gpn. May vine-binders bind him,

11 yšql.šdmth / km gpn May they trim his tendrils like a

vine.

Not only are these basic parallel features characteristic of ancient Hebrew[40] and Canaanite poetry but also they are expanded there and in the Book of Mormon into climactic tetracola, as for example in 2 Nephi 33:6:

I glory in plainness;

יתפב ללהתמ ינא

I glory in truth;

תמאב ללהתמ ינא

I glory in my Jesus,

יתעושיב ללהתמ ינא

For he hath redeemed my soul from Hell!

לואשמ ישפנ לאג יכ

I have placed my own hypothetical Hebrew translation opposite so as to display the stable syllable-count (8-8-9-8) and accentual count (3-3-3-3) used in a hypothetical original form.[41] In this case, I have not used the prosaic particle ʼet ־תא (object indicator) nor the pronoun “he” אוה—though the tetracolon would remain climactic simply based on obvious intensification of meaning.

As Wilfred Watson has pointed out, the Bible features a climactic pentacolon at Proverbs 1:26–27:[42]

I also at your calamity will laugh,

I will mock when panic strikes you,

When like a storm panic strikes you,

And your calamity like a whirlwind will come,

When comes upon you distress and anguish!

And we can find another climactic pentacolon, this time in Middle Egyptian, again in the Tomb of King Intef, as translated by Miriam Lichtheim:[43]

vi,7–9 None comes from there,

To tell of their state,

To tell of their needs,

To calm our hearts,

Until we go where they have gone!

We also find remarkably well-balanced twin climactic tricola at the center of an inclusion at Psalm 93:2–5 (as translated by the late Mitchell Dahood):[44]

verse 3

The floods have lifted up, O Lord,

הוהי תורהנ ואשנ

The floods have lifted up their voice,

םלוק תורהנ ואשנ

The floods lift up their roaring!

םיכד תורהנ ואשי

verse 4

More (majestic) than the thunders of mighty waters,

םיבר םימ תולקמ

More majestic than the waves of the sea,

םי־ירבשמ םירידא

Majestic on high is the Lord!

הוהי םורמב רידא

Such intensification can also be seen in the climactic tricolon at Psalm 18:9 (KJV 18:8 = 2 Sam. 22:9), following Adele Berlin’s translation:[45]

Smoke went up from his nostrils;

רפאב ןשע הלע

From his mouth came devouring fire;

לכאת ויפמ־שאו

Live coals blazed forth from him!

ונממ ורעב םילחג

More ambitious still is the complex chiastic and climactic format in Psalm 137:5–6 (New Jerusalem Bible translation),

If I forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand wither!

May my tongue remain stuck to my palate if I do not keep you in mind,

if I do not count Jerusalem the greatest of my joys.

We find a similar, parallelistic phenomenon in Classical Arabic. Several examples are noted by Michael Sells, as in the long one at Qur’án sura 89:1–6—the climax is the destruction of the people of ˁAd who failed to heed the words of the Prophet Hud:

wa l-fajr

By the dawn

wa layalin ˁašr

By the nights ten

wa š-šafˁi wa l-watr

By the odd and the even

wa l-layli ida yasr

By the night as it eases away

hal fi dalika qasamun li di hijr

Is there not in that an oath for the thoughtful mind?

a lam tara kayfa faˁala rabbuka biˁad?

Don’t you see what your lord did with ˁAd?

Early Meccan suras frequently swear an oath by the signs of creation, as here.[46]

Paired Tricola

Jeff Lindsay has called attention to a possible case of a double-duty colon[47] in the midst of paired tricola at 2 Nephi 4:34:

O Lord, I have trusted in thee,

And I will trust in thee forever.

I will not put my trust in the arm of flesh;

For I know that cursed is he that putteth his

trust in the arm of flesh.

Yea cursed is he that putteth his trust in man

or maketh flesh his arm.

Other of Lindsay’s examples are unconvincing. However, he does correctly point out that paired tricola are a known feature of biblical Hebrew poetry.[48]

Chiasmus – Distant Parallelism

Another type of repetitive parallelism common in the Bible is chiasmus, which is characterized by inverse or mirror imagery, sometimes at a distance. We have already seen several instances, inter alia, above. Such inverse parallelism can be employed on a relatively small scale, as at 1 Nephi 22:2:

They were made manifest unto the prophet,

By the voice of the Spirit:

For by the Spirit

Are all things made known unto the prophets,

And at Alma 50:14, with geographical significance:

And they also began a foundation for a city

Between the city of Moroni

And the city of Aaron,

Joining the borders of Aaron

And Moroni;

And they called the name of the city, or the land, Nephihah.

2 Nephi 1:5–7 provides a compact example of this rhetorical figure at the next level:

5 A Notwithstanding our afflictions

B we have obtained a land of promise

a land which is choice above all other lands

a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me

should be a land for the inheritance of my seed

C yea the Lord hath consecrated[49] this land unto

me and to my children forever

D and also all they which

should be led out of other countries by the

hand of the Lord

6 E Wherefore I Lehi prophesy according to

the workings of the Spirit which is in me

D that there shall be none come into this land

save they should be brought by the hand of the

Lord

7 C wherefore this land is consecrated unto him

whom he shall bring

B and if it so be that they shall serve him according

to the commandments which he hath given it

shall be a land of liberty unto them

A wherefore they shall never be brought down into

captivity

Much larger concentric or ring structuring (chiasm) can be applied at the literary narrative level, as for the ABA triptych of the entire book of Mosiah, in which the Benjamin section (A) is contrasted with the Noah section (B) and reinforced by the Abinadi section (A’).[50]

Used on both a large and small scale,[51] chiasmus has been so widely discussed by proponents and detractors of the Book of Mormon[52] that some fail to realize that it is merely one rhetorical figure among many which can be found in both Bible and Book of Mormon. However, when properly analyzed, chiasmus can exhibit quite a distinctive and useful structure in disclosing the meaning and intent of the section or pericope involved, and this is well-understood by most biblical scholars—and by most scholars of the ancient Near East in general.[53]

Progressions

Donald Parry calls attention to several very interesting parallelistic progressions, stair steps, or gradations in both Bible and Book of Mormon—some ascending or descending, and some climactic. They share common methods of anadiploid chaining which cleverly lead from one related item to the next, often with allegorical meaning, as in Isaiah 51:10–11a, 63:1–6; Hosea 12:3–6; Psalms 19:7–9, 121:1b–2a;

3 Nephi 9:31–38, 29:12; Mormon 9:12–13; and Moroni 8:25–26, 10:21–23.[54] For example, here is Joel 1:4:

That which the palmerworm hath left hath the locust eaten;

And that which the locust hath left hath the cankerworm eaten;

And that which the cankerworm hath left hath the caterpillar

eaten.

Lyric Poetry: Song

As we have already seen above, the Psalm of Nephi (2 Ne. 4:15–35) makes full use of parallel cola. It is also the best example of the lyric form in the Book of Mormon.[55] The ABAB tetracolon in verses 21–22 (following Donald Parry) is characteristic:

He hath filled me with his love,

even unto the consuming of my flesh.

He hath confounded mine enemies,

unto the causing of them to quake before me.

The next bicolon (verse 23) could be added for intensification, as noted by Richard Rust:[56]

Behold, he hath heard my cry by day,

and he hath given me knowledge by visions in the nighttime.

Classical Arabic poetry exhibits a similar structure, as in the following rhyming tetracolon by Ibn Malek Ibn e’Rakaa of Damascus (8th century AD):

If before she herself wept, love for Sada had caused my tears to flow,

I should have lightened my heart before repentance (choked it);

But she wept first, her tears excited mine,

The merit, I cried, belongs to the predecessor.[57]

The Lyric-Elegiac Qaṣida-Introduction

Very quickly, following the opening scenes of the Book of Mormon in Jerusalem, we find the clan of Lehi-ben-Manasseh in a completely different, ancient Arabic environment—which Hugh Nibley threw into such stark relief with his Lehi in the Desert over a half-century ago.[58] Among the myriad Arabic components of this environment, which Nibley used to interpret the strange actions of the members of that clan, there was the naṣib, the pastoral and paradisiacal archetype of the pre-Islamic ode, or qaṣida[59]—which later took on such importance in Classical Arabic poetry and literature (including the Thousand Nights and a Night).[60] Here is an example mourning the loss of Valencia, excerpted from a poem by Ibn ˁUmayrah al-Makhzumi of 13th century al-Andalus, Spain:

4 O mountain of water-sated verdure, like none I knew,

How time’s ill turns of fortune slighted your spring.

5 And O you people that I love—but events now exact

That I stand alone, apart from those who merit love[61]

Were we to follow the hints contained in that Classical Arabic tradition, i.e., going by a typical oral declamation at the Abbasid court of the Caliph in old Baghdad, we might imagine a dramatic scene in which Lehi stood grasping his staff or bow solidly planted on the ground before him as he stared at his encampment and declaimed his lyric naṣib to his eldest sons (1 Ne. 2:9–10):

And when my father saw that the waters of the river emptied

into the fountain of the Red Sea,

he spake unto Laman, saying:

“O that thou mightest be like unto this river,

continually running into the fountain of all righteousness!”

And he also spake unto Lemuel:

“O that thou mightest be like unto this valley,

firm and steadfast and immovable in keeping the

commandments of the Lord!”

Later in the book, at the other pole of the book-length chiasm of 1 Nephi (deliberately placed for maximum poetic effect, and again using parallelism of members), we find the antiphonal and elegiac response[62] to Lehi’s apparent naṣib in a tricolon quoted from Isaiah 48:18 (1 Ne. 20:18):

O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments!

Then had thy peace been as a river,

And thy righteousness as the waves of the sea.

The lesson here is primarily addressed by Isaiah (or his school) to the disobedient of Judah who could have avoided the consequences of Exile by the Chaldeans/ Neo-Babylonians (verses 19–22), but is secondarily applicable also (with particular force) to some disobedient members of the clan of Lehi, who have gone into a separate exile, for they liken all Scripture unto themselves (1 Ne. 19:23, 2 Ne. 6:5, 11:2,8).

Poetry in Midrash and Apocalyptic

Midrash is part of that likening process, and is specifically the exegesis or interpretation of a holy text, along with application to the situation in life (Sitz im Leben) of those making that interpretation, and it can be found taking place already in Deuteronomy, Ezekiel, and Habakkuk, i.e., quite early.[63] Above, we have seen a climactic tricolon in 2 Nephi 26, in the midst of a midrash on Isaiah 29 (midrash can be found throughout 2 Ne. 26–27). We can also find a kind of progressive or climactic parallelism combined with a midrash on Isaiah 52:7 in Mosiah 15:15–18, in the words of Abinadi:

And O how beautiful[64] upon the mountains were their feet!

And again, how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet

of those that are still publishing peace!

And again, how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet

of those who shall hereafter publish peace,

yea, from this time henceforth and forever!

And behold, I say unto you, this is not all.

For O how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet

of him that bringeth good tidings,[65]

that is the founder of peace,

yea, even the Lord, who has redeemed his people;

yea, him who has granted salvation unto his people;

Apocalyptic

That apocalyptic texts can be found in 1 Nephi 8–14,[66] and elsewhere in the Book of Mormon, is likewise not an indicator of late development. As part of his early work on the FARMS Book of Mormon Critical Text Project, Grant Hardy noted that 1 Nephi 1 contains the pillar of fire, heavenly book, mystery of God, and prophecy (in an angelic vision), which are likewise to be found in Revelation 10:1–11.[67] Such parallels may be quite useful. And as noted by John W. Welch in his 1986 BYU Book of Mormon Symposium paper, the motifs in both 1 Nephi 1 and Revelation 10 are among the normal items to be expected as part of a prophetic call in the Classical Israelite period[68] and later.[69]

Portions of the visions recounted in 1 Nephi 8–14 can likewise be compared with the book of Revelation, though undoubtedly for the same reasons as just mentioned, i.e. the chiastic manner in which Nephi lays the visions out is another pattern of rhetorical importance. Claims that apocalyptic is a late literary genre, and so must be anachronistic in the Book of Mormon, ignore the sage observations of scholars like the late Frank Moore Cross, Jr.: “The origins of the apocalyptic must be searched for as early as the sixth century BC”[70] Thus, not only are Second Isaiah, and Isaiah 24–27 (the so-called Isaianic Apocalypse), 34–35, all from no later than the 6th century BC, but (according to Cross), “the mythological lore of Ugarit will be increasingly important for apocalyptic studies. One thinks of the superb paper of J. A. Emerton, ‘The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery.’”[71]

The origins of apocalyptic, it seems, must now be sought for at least as early as the second millennium BC, and perhaps earlier, according to the 1984 University of Oslo dissertation of Helge S. Kvanvig,[72] especially comparing Daniel 7 with the Akkadian “Vision of the Nether World.”[73] The arguments for the transmission of major apocalyptic traditions from such early times down to the time of Joseph Smith have been dealt with elsewhere, and will not concern us here.[74]

Proverbs—The Wisdom Tradition

The wisdom tradition in the Book of Mormon is also early, and a very early origin is likewise evident for the Wisdom tradition in Israel, as noted by John Bright:

Personified Wisdom has nothing essentially Hellenic about it, but stems ultimately from Canaanite-Aramean paganism, being attested in the Proverbs of Ahiqar (about sixth century). The text of Prov., chs. 8;9, must go back to a Canaanite original of about the seventh century with roots in still earlier Canaanite lore.[75]

This ought to be of some interest, since (as noted by Margaret Barker) the Book of Mormon clearly participates in the proverbial Wisdom tradition,[76] e.g., at 2 Nephi 2:11–29 (see below on the “Two Ways”), Jacob 4:10, Mosiah 8:20–21, Alma 3:27, Ether 12:26, etc.[77] Indeed, the pre-exilic Israelite Wisdom tradition focused upon esoteric temple rites, much of which Barker has insisted, was carefully removed from the Hebrew Canon by the revisionist Deuteronomistic School.[78] I will leave that issue for a separate discussion.

However, aside from the tradition of personified Wisdom (ḥokmâ) qua Holy Spirit in biblical usage, there was also the centrality of mȝˁt, “Truth, Justice, Order, and Righteousness,” in the Egyptian wisdom tradition,[79] along with the more generic, didactic and sapiential sense of wisdom: Noteworthy among the latter are the profound and powerful bicola in 2 Nephi 2:25 (abbc),

Adam fell that men might be;

And men are, that they might have joy.[80]

Alma 40:8,

All is as one day with God,

and time only is measured unto man.

Alma 34:32,

For behold,

This life is the time for men to prepare to meet God;

Yea, behold,

The day of this life is the day for men to perform

their labors.

The clever chiasm in Moroni 7:11,

A bitter fountain cannot bring forth good water,

Neither can a good fountain bring forth bitter water.

And Mosiah 2:17, which consciously labels itself as wisdom,

That ye may learn wisdom

That ye may learn that

When ye are in the service of your fellow beings,

Ye are only in the service of your God.

Mosiah 8:20b–21, presents feminine Wisdom in climactic fashion,

For they will not seek Wisdom,

Neither do they desire that she should rule over them.

Yea, they are like a wild flock which fleeth from the

shepherd,

And scattereth, and are driven, and are devoured by the

beasts of the forest!

And Alma 37:35, which likewise consciously labels itself as wisdom,

O remember, my son,

And learn wisdom in thy youth;

Yea, learn in thy youth

To keep the commandments of God.

Egyptian religious poetry consists of many hymns and prayers which may entail any of these sapiential characteristics. Jan Assmann argues that such “poems share the spirit of personal piety which dominates late Egyptian Wisdom Literature, exemplified in the Wisdom of Amenemope”[81] (ANET^3 421–24; COS 1.47), which we mention immediately below.

Several of the Ten Commandments, which were on the Brass Plates of Laban and which appear in Mosiah 12 and 13, are very similar to advice in ancient Egyptian wisdom compilations, as in the Instruction of ˁAnkhsheshonqy 6/6: “Serve your father and mother that you may go and prosper” (Exod. 20:12, 1 Ne. 17:55, Mosiah 13:20), and 6/10 “Do not set your heart upon the property of another” (Exod. 20:17, Mosiah 13:24). Indeed, much of what passes for Israelite wisdom can often be traced to ancient Egypt, e.g., Proverbs 22:17–23:11 is heavily dependent upon the content and structure of the Egyptian Instruction of Amenemope, and is even specifically referred to in the Syriac, LXX Greek, Qumran Hebrew, and qeri of Proverbs 22:20 “thirty sayings of admonition and knowledge” (NRSV; Amenemope had thirty chapters). Psalm 1, and Jeremiah 17:5–8 are likewise dependent on the Instruction of Amenemope (ANET 421–24; COS 1.47).[82] Note also the Instruction for Merikare 99 (COS 1.35), “For as you do, so it will be done to you,” where we find the same wise counsel as in 3 Nephi 14:2 (Matt. 7:2):

For with what judgment ye judge,

Ye shall be judged;

And with what measure ye mete,

It shall be measured to you again.[83]

In other cases we have very archaic Wisdom from the East (Arabia), such as that of Lëmû’ēl of Massā’ in Proverbs 31:1–9, or (as we see immediately below) the rumination at Job 14:1–2, in characteristic 3+3 meter:

Man that is born of a woman,

Is of few days, and full of trouble.

He cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down;

He fleeth also as a shadow, and continueth not.

However, “the most striking verbal similarity occurs in a Mesopotamian text, the Gilgamesh Epic (ANET, 72–99,503–07)” (COS 1.132), as well as in the Babylonian Theodicy (ANET, 601–04; COS 1.154), the Dialogue between a Master and His Slave (ANET, 600–01; COS 1.155), and I Will Praise the Lord of Wisdom (ANET, 596–600; COS 1.153), all of which have specific parallels with Ecclesiastes.[84]

Of even greater importance is the river and tree of Life motif as a stock exemplar of wisdom in both Bible[85] and Book of Mormon,[86] particularly at Proverbs 3:18, 11:30, Psalm 1, and 2 Nephi 2:11–29 (Lehi’s Opposites), as part of the early Doctrine of the Two Ways,[87] while Divine Wisdom and the Law are the source of life eternal and the Spirit, which are symbolized by spring water (living water).[88] Note the Community Rule Scroll from Qumran Cave 1 (1QS 4:21–22):

God…will purify…him with the Holy Spirit

Will sprinkle upon him the spirit of truth

Like waters for purification from all abominations.

And some striking lines from Ethiopic Enoch (1 Enoch 48:1):

In that place I saw the fountain of righteousness,

Which does not become depleted,

And is surrounded completely by numerous fountains

of wisdom.

Moreover, Wisdom is the Holy Spirit in Proverbs 8, Wisdom of Solomon 7–8, and Ecclesiasticus 24 (Ben Sira).[89]

Not incidentally, the “Two Ways” (life & death, good & evil) was likewise an integral part of ancient Egyptian theology,[90] as well as significant at Qumran and in intertestamental literature (apocrypha & pseudepigrapha).[91]

To find more such material, one ought to take careful note also of the powerful homilies (sermons) which can be found in Mosiah 1–5 (a combined New Year, covenant renewal ceremony, pilgrimage festival of ingathering, and coregency ritual), Alma 5, and Moroni 7—all of which include poetry.

Poetry Using Typologies, Metaphors, Similes,

Allegories, Parables, and Puns

Richard Rust and Donald Parry have explained in short compass the typologies (type–antitype) in 2 Nephi 11:4, and Mosiah 13:31,[92] but these are merely hints of things to come, as suggested by Rowan Greer and then Northrop Frye in a biblical context:

We cannot read Luke’s infancy narratives without being reminded of the story of Sam.’s birth. Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount is clearly meant to take us to a new Sinai. The miraculous feeding of the multitude in the wilderness harks back to the manna miracle in the wilderness, as John 6 makes explicit. Behind Christ hover the figures of Adam, Abraham, Moses, and David. . . . the Hebrew Scriptures become a type of Christ, foreshadowing him and his work, or an allegory in which the letter of Scripture points toward the timeless truths explicitly defined in the New Testament writings. John 3:14 treats Moses’ lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness (Num. 21:9) as a type of Christ’s exaltation on the cross. Matthew 12:39ff. (cf. Matt. 16:4) treats Jonah’s three days in the belly of the whale as a type of Christ’s three days in death, but Luke 11:29ff. interprets Jonah as a sign of repentance. 1 Peter 3:21 understands the deliverance of Noah as a type of Christian baptism. And in Galatians 4, Paul interprets the story of Abraham’s two children in a partly typological partly allegorical fashion to argue for the incorporation of the Gentiles into God’s people.[93]

This typological way of reading the Bible is indicated too often and explicitly in the New Testament itself for us to be in any doubt that this is the “right” way of reading it—“right” in the only sense that criticism can recognize, as the way that conforms to the intentionality of the book itself and to the conventions it assumes and requires.[94]

Not just the garden and Tree of Life (along with path and river) are rendered allegorically and typologically, but other agricultural metaphors are rendered particularly well in the Book of Mormon. Exilic Israel and the Israel of the Restoration are, for example, each compared to an olive tree in Jacob 5 (a long parable, with interpretation in Jacob 6).[95] While the human soul expands in Alma 5:9–14, it is the word of God in Alma 32:28–34 (which Rust & Parry term an “extended metaphor”) compared to a seed which begins to grow as it is cultivated, first swelling and sprouting, and finally leading to full flowering of the soul in whom it was planted, bringing enlightenment and understanding. Such metaphors, similes, and allegories are quite common biblically,[96] and extra- biblically,[97] and they play an essential part in the composition and understanding of poetry (and epistemology) in the Book of Mormon. Rust and Parry note the simile curse in Abinadi’s denunciation of King Noah at Mosiah 12:10–11.[98] Jacob’s Blessing in Genesis 49 includes alliterative punning at verse 19, which is reminscent of the best etymology for Book of Mormon Gaddianton-robbers:[99]

Gad will be raided by raiders,

(Gad gĕdûd yegûdennû)

ונדוגי דודג דג

And he will raid at (their) heel(s).

(wĕhûʼ yāgud ˁaqeb[am])

בקע דגי אוהו

Wordplay (paronomasia), which takes various forms in the biblical tradition,[100] is difficult to establish in a translated text for which the original is inaccessible, but it is clear that punning (which was exceedingly popular in ancient Egypt as well) does take place in the Book of Mormon. Pedro Olavarria and David Bokovoy have noted the puns on the name Zarahemla “Seed of compassion” at Mosiah 9:2 and 3 Nephi 3:24, based on KJV use of the word “spared; compassion” (ḥml) there and at 1 Samuel 15:9. We also have instances of metonymic naming, such as that of Zeezrum (hypothetical Hebrew *Ze-ezrum, “That-Ezrum-Guy; Silverman,” following a suggestion of Ben Urrutia), the “Money-man,” or “Mister-Silver,” bearing as he does the name of a type of Nephite silver-measure, the ezrum, for which the otherwise inexplicable digression on weights & measures in Alma 11 makes sense, as well as Antionah (a chief ruler in Alma 12:20), possibly meaning “That-Gold-Guy; Goldman; Money-man,” similarly based on the Nephite gold-measure, the antion (Alma 11:19).[101] The two puns thus apparently frame the explanatory digression into Nephite weights & measures as part of an ABA triptych. The same sort of thing can be found in the book of Isaiah, in a section quoted in the Book of Mormon (Isa. 5:8–25; 9:7–10:4) in which the Emmanuel Booklet of 6:1–9:6, and/or the Denkschrift – Isaianic Memoirs of 6–8, at first appear to be intrusive, since this central material separates two perfectly matched poems, with a double inclusio of Seven Woes (deliberately concluded at 10:1), and thus giving us an unexpected, but deliberate overall ABCDCBA chiastic structure.[102]

Other examples of wordplay can be found elsewhere in the Book of Mormon. In his opening lines (1 Ne. 1:1), for example, Nephi appears to exhibit a play on the sound of his likely Egyptian name, nfy “Captain; Wind; Sail,” and nfr “good,”

I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents,

We see these plays on just such words in the Egyptian story of The Eloquent Peasant, for example, at B1 305,[103]

That goodness should be good is good indeed.

nfr nfrt nfr rf

Other puns may be based on various Book of Mormon place-names, including Jershon, “Place of Inheritance,”[104] Nahom, “Place of Rest, Comfort,”[105] and perhaps one may also see dual Hebrew word-play between the theophoric place-name Ammonihah, “Ammon-YHH; My- Kinsman-is-the-Lord,”[106] and its diabolical alternative designation, “Desolation of Nehors” (Alma 16:11), owing to their knowing rejection of the Gospel (Alma 1:12–16, 8:9–25, 15:15), and sinning against great “light and . . . knowledge” (Alma 9:19). Compare this to the esoteric, temple-centered pun in Daniel, “Horrifying Abomination,” תוממש תצרחנ (Dan. 9:27); םמושמ ץוקשה (Dan. 11:31, 12:11 “abomination that maketh desolate”), in which Hellenizing Jews went along with the sacrilege of King Antiochus Epiphanes’ requiring observance of pagan rites, and putting up the pagan image of Baal-Shamem “Lord of Heaven” (=Olympian Zeus) on the Jewish Temple altar in Jerusalem—the once and future “Abomination of Desolation,” τὸ βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως (Matt. 24:15; cf. 1 Macc. 1:54, 6:7, and 2 Macc. 6:2). Note the marked contrast in each case.

The Upshot

In light of all the poetic beauty, depth, diversity, and power of the Book of Mormon, what is the upshot? It is that many of those not accepting the divine origin of the book have now actually admitted and openly announced that, even if it is in their opinion unhistorical, apocryphal, and fictional, the Book of Mormon is yet a “sacred text” which makes “a powerful statement of humanity’s worth in a world where human worth is everywhere questioned,”[107] and does indeed include visions and sermons of “beauty and brilliance,” in a variety of literary genres including “parables, poetry, hyperbole, psalms, historical verisimilitude,”[108] and chiasmus. This is a compelling legacy of the modern scholarship assaying and extolling the literary value of the Book of Mormon, which has not only brought considerable respect to the book from outside the LDS faith,[109] but which has been accompanied by some very sophisticated analysis and exegesis of the text.[110]

The cornucopia of ancient Near Eastern parallels and insights which 1 have presented here suggests that we should continue to seek Chabad in the Book of Mormon, i.e., wisdom, understanding, and knowledge (ḥokmâ, bînâ, daˁat = CHaBaD), through pre-exilic Israelite poetry (and other ancient Near Eastern poetry), since this will surely lead us to something much deeper and more esoteric.

Robert F. Smith is an alumnus of BYU and has had advanced training in archaeology and Near Eastern languages at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, UCLA, and CalState University, Long Beach. He was the first editor of the FARMS Book of Mormon Critical Text Project (1979–1987), and most recently presented a paper on “The Preposterous Book of Mormon: A Singular Advantage,” lecture, August 8, 2014, at the annual FairMormon Conference, Provo, Utah, online at

http://www.fairmormon.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/PREPOSTEROUS-BOOK-OF-MORMON.pdf. He is currently a member of Grandview Stake.

1 Hugh Nibley, “Lehi in the Desert,” Improvement Era 57, (July 1950): 556 = Lehi in the Desert/The World of the Jaredites/There Were Jaredites, Collected Works of Hugh Nibley: Volume 5 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1988), 91.

2 See Frank Moore Cross, “Toward a History of Hebrew Prosody,” in Fortunate the Eyes That See: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Seventieth Birthday, ed. Astrid Beck et al. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 303, on Jeremiah; he also compares 2 Kings 3:15, in which a prophet requests a minstrel before prophesying. Cf. Neum, the extra-biblical prophet quoted in 1 Ne. 19:10, which is identical with Hebrew něʼūm “visionary utterance, oracle; decree” (Gen. 22:16, Num. 24:3, 2 Sam. 23:1, Prov. 30:1, Ps. 36:2, Ezek. 36:23).

3 As demonstrated by S. Kent Brown, “The Prophetic Laments of Samuel the Lamanite,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 1, no.1 (Fall 1992):163–80.

4 One thinks of musicals such as “Les Parapluies de Cherbourg” and “The Sound of Music,” but the discriminating theater-goer or film buff can supply many other such examples.

5 See also Gen. 37:5–10, 41:15; Judg. 7:13: Job 4:13, 7:14, 33:14–15: Jer. 23:25–32, Dan. 1:17, 2:3; Acts 2:17 (Joel 2:28); Kirta Epic, tablet 1, VI:31–32; Mitchell J. Dahood, “Ugaritic-Hebrew Parallel Pairs,” in Ras Shamra Parallels: The Texts from Ugarit and the Hebrew Bible, ed. Loren R. Fisher (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1972), 1:192. I disagree with Grant Hardy’s analysis as presented in his Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader’s Guide (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 37, citing John Bright, Jeremiah, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1965), 153.

6 William F. Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan: A Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths (New York: Doubleday, 1968), 215.

7 The closely related terms dream and vision are typical of repetitive parallelism. Theodor H. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), 182–84. The form this might take in the Egyptian composition of the books of Lehi and Nephi is not addressed herewith.

8 John W. Welch, “A Study Relating Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon to Chiasmus in the Old Testament, Ugaritic Epics, Homer, and Selected Greek and Latin Authors,” (Master’s Thesis, Brigham Young University, 1970), 150–53; John W. Welch, “Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon,” BYU Studies 10, no. 3 (Autumn 1969): 82, reprinted in Noel Reynolds, ed., Book of Mormon Authorship: New Light on Ancient Origins (Provo, UT: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1982), 33–52; John W. Welch, “Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon,” in Chiasmus in Antiquity: Structures, Analyses, Exegesis, ed. John W. Welch (Hildesheim: Gerstenberg, 1981), 199–200.

9 Steven L. Olsen, “Prophecy and History: Structuring the Abridgment of the Nephite Records,” Journal of Book of Mormon Scripture 15, no. 1 (2006):18–29, 70–71. Naturally, the book of Lehi likely fit the same pattern.

10 Gordon Thomasson (pers. comm.), but there are other suggestions. See also, Royal Skousen, “How Joseph Smith Translated the Book of Mormon: Evidence from the Original Manuscript,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 7, no. 1 (1998): 31; Richard Rust, Feasting on the Word: The Literary Testimony of the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1997), 219–49; Terryl L. Givens, “The Book of Mormon and Dialogic Revelation,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 10, no. 2 (2001):

23–25.

11 See Welch, “A Study Relating Chiasmus,” 150–51, 170 and “Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon,” 82.

12 David P. Wright, “Review of The God-Inspired Language of the Book of Mormon: Structuring and Commentary,” FARMS Review of Books 1, no. 1 (1989): 10–17.

13 Wright, “Review of The God-Inspired Language of the Book of Mormon,” 10.

14 Andreas Wagner, ed., Parallelismus Membrorum, OBO 224 (Fribourg and Göttingen: Academic Press and Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007).

15 Grant Hardy, ed., The Book of Mormon: A Reader’s Edition (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003), 535, 671.

15 Royal Skousen, The Critical Text of the Book of Mormon, vol. 4: Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon, parts 1–6 (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2004–09), 6:3484.

16 Hugh Nibley, Since Cumorah, Collected Works of Hugh Nibley: Volume 7 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book), 6.

17 Jack Lundbom, Jeremiah: A Study in Ancient Hebrew Rhetoric (Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1975), 47 cites the example of the loss of two cola from Jer. 20:17–18; Nibley, Since Cumorah, 23, citing William F. Albright and David N. Freedman, “The Continuing Revolution in Biblical Research,” Journal of Bible and Religion 31 (1963): 112.

18 R. H. Charles, The Greek Versions of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908), 63; see note in James H. Charlesworth, ed., Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 vols. (Doubleday, 1985), 1:795, based on Isa. 11:2, Matt. 3:16, Mark 1:9–10, and John 1:31–33.

19 See, for example, the late Mitchell Dahood’s important coverage of “repetitive parallelism” in his Psalms 1–50, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1966), passim; Mitchell J. Dahood, “Introduction,” in Ras Shamra Parallels, 3:i.; Alan Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 1957), 24c; Margaret Murray, Egyptian Religious Poetry (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1980), 50; James Henry Breasted, Development of Religion and Thought in Ancient Egypt (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1912), 96–97; Adolf Erman, Literature of the Ancient Egyptians: Poems, Narratives, and Manuals of Instruction, from the Third and Second Millennia B.C., trans. Aylward M. Blackman (London: Methuen, 1927), lviii–lxi; Samuel R. Levin, Linguistic Structures in Poetry (The Hague, 1964), 30–34; Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), 1:11–12, 163; Waldemar Golénischeff, “Parallélisme symétrique en ancien égyptien,” in Studies Presented to F. Ll. Griffith, ed. S. R. K. Glanville (London: Egypt Exploration Society/ Oxford Univ. Press, 1932), 86–96; cf. Charles F. Pfeiffer, Ras Shamra and the Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1962), 64; Cyrus H. Gordon, Ugaritic Handbook (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1947), 1, 62, and nn. 3–4; stylistic variation is also widely used in Arabic, e.g,, 1,001 Nights. We are not speaking here of the types of English parallel words and phrases which are tightly controlled by coordinating and correlative conjunctions (Bruce Bawer, The Contemporary Stylist [New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1987], 225–33).

20 As, for example, in Book of Mormon Critical Text, 2nd ed., 3 vols. (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1986–87); Wright, “Review of The God-Inspired Language of the Book of Mormon,” 10–17; Donald W. Parry, Poetic Parallelisms in the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2007); Hardy, The Book of Mormon; Royal Skousen, ed., The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009).

21 Adele Berlin, “Parallelism,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman, 6 vols. (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 5:155.

22 Hardy, The Book of Mormon, discusses parallelism in his Appendix 5.

23 James Limburg, “Psalms, Book of,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 5:528; so also David Noel Freedman, “Archaic Forms in Early Hebrew Poetry,” in Divine Commitment and Human Obligation: Selected Writings of David Noel Freedman, ed. John R. Huddlestun, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 2:5, “balance or symmetry is a principal characteristic of early Hebrew poetic structure”; cf. Berlin, “Parallelism,” 5:155, “Parallelism is the most prominent rhetorical feature in ancient Near Eastern poetry.”

24 Berlin, “Parallelism,” 5:157; Kevin L. Barney, “Poetic Diction and Parallel Word Pairs in the Book of Mormon,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 4, no. 2 (1995):15–81.

25 The x | x+1 or similar progression in the Hebrew Bible (Wolfgang M. W. Roth, “The Numerical Sequence x/x+1 in the Old Testament,” Vetus Testamentum 12 [1962]: 300–11; Menahem Haran, “Biblical Studies,” Tarbiz 39, no. 2 [1969]: 109–36 [Hebrew]; Andrew E. Steinmann, “The Graded Numerical Saying in Job,” in Fortunate the Eyes That See, 288–97; discussed by Parry, Poetic Parallelisms, xxix–xxxi; Robert O’Connell, “Telescoping N + 1 Patterns in the Book of Amos,” Vetus Testamentum 46 [1996]: 56–73).

26 Cf. Brant Gardner, Traditions of the Fathers: The Book of Mormon as History (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2015), 86–87.

27 See Dahood, Psalms, 2:321, for this translation; cf. Ps. 45:6, 90:4; and Kirta, tablet 1, 1:7–9, an Ugaritic tricolon which I present below. William F. Albright noted the frequent appearance of tricola in both Ugaritic and Hebrew in his “The Furniture of El in Canaanite Mythology,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 91 (Oct. 1943): 43; and “The Old Testament and Canaanite Language and Literature,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 7, no. 1 (January 1945): 21; see also John T. Willis, “The Juxtaposition of Synonymous and Chiastic Parallelism in Tricola in Old Testament Hebrew Psalm Poetry,” Vetus Testamentum 29, no. 4 (October 1979): 465–80.

28 Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 2297.

29 A. De Buck, Egyptian Readingbook (Leiden: Nederlandsch Archaeologisch-Philologisch Instituut, 1948), 120:1, m wnnt twy snw(y)t nt grh | hmtw nt hrw; so also in Kmyt, §VIII, cited in H. J. Polotsky, “Egyptian Tenses,” Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities 2 (Jerusalem: Central Press, 1968), 83 n. 22.

30 See Ugaritic Text 137:36b–37a (abc:abc:b2a) in John W. Welch, “Chiasmus in Ugaritic,” Ugarit-Forschungen VI (1974): 430; Frank M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997), 114, n. 9.

31 Waldemar Golénischeff presents us with a chiastic climactic tricolon in Pyramid Text §1302bc (abc:abc:bca), in Golénischeff, “Parallélisme symétrique en ancien égyptien,” 88–89 (6).

32 See also the two climactic tricola at Isa. 29:20–21 and 2 Ne. 27:31–32.

33 Richard Abbot, “Forked Parallelism in Egyptian, Ugaritic and Hebrew Poetry,” Tyndale Bulletin 62, no. 1 (2011): 41–64.

34 Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 1:196.

35 On midrashic exposition in the Book of Mormon, see Blake T. Ostler, “The Book of Mormon as a Modern Expansion of an Ancient Source,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 20, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 66–123; Grant Hardy, “2 Nephi 26 and 27 as Midrash,” Insights 24, no. 5 (2004): 2–3; Hardy, The Book of Mormon, xii; Robert A. Rees, “The Midrashic Imagination and the Book of Mormon,” Dialogue 44, no. 3 (Fall 2011): 44–66. For the broader view (based on the primary example of Jesus’ paranetic discourse of Mark 13 as a midrash on Daniel), see Lars Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted: The Formation of Some Jewish Apocalyptic Texts and of the Eschatological Discourse Mark 13 Par. (Lund: Gleerup, 1966).

36 Richard Rust does not distinguish it from within the larger poem in his “Poetry in the Book of Mormon,” in Rediscovering the Book of Mormon, ed. John L. Sorenson & Melvin J. Thorne (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1991), 106.

37 Another good example (synonymous) is at Alma 26:36, as laid out by Grant Hardy in his Appendix on “Book of Mormon Poetry,” The Book of Mormon, 660; cf. Donald Parry, “Antithetical Parallelism in the Book of Mormon,” in Reexploring the Book of Mormon, ed. John W. Welch (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1992), 168.

38 Following the translation of Edward L. Greenstein in Simon Parker, ed., Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (Society of Biblical Literature/Scholars Press, 1997), 12; see other Ugaritic climactic tricola in Kirta, tablet 1, II:47–50, III:52–54 = IV:26–28; tablet 2 (CAT 1.15), II:18–20, 21–23, III:13–15, 17–19; tablet 3 (CAT 1.16), I:53–55, II:40–42, III:13–16, IV:3–4, 6–8, 10–12, V:25–28, VI:27–29, 54–57; and passim.

39 Theodore Lewis trans., Simon B. Parker, ed., Ugaritic Narrative Poetry, 208; cf. KTU 1.161 obverse.

40 Watson even found a tetracolon in Prov. 1:26–27 inside a climactic pentacolon. See Watson, “Chiastic Patterns in Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” 128.

41 A more economical Hebrew translation might well be selected (and with a syllable count of 8:8:9:9, or accentual count of 3:3:3:3). I have preferred the Hebrew in a tetracolon contemporary with Lehi and Nephi found in Jer. 9:23–24 (MT 22–23) mithallel “boast” (so Bright, Jeremiah); cf. Isa. 25:9, Ps. 20:6, 35:9, 38:23 bišuˁati “in my yešuˁa (Salvation = the etymology of the name of Jesus),” as clearly understood soteriologically in Matt. 1:21, and Luke 1:69, 2:11, 21, 30–31, 3:6 (Isa. 52:10 yešuˁat ʼElohenu וניהלא תעושי “the salvation of our God”); cf. Exod. 15:2, 2 Sam. 22:3 (= Luke 1:69), 47, Isa. 12:2–3 (2 Ne. 22:2–3), Mic. 7:7, Hab. 3:18, Ps. 25:5, 56:14 (“For thou hast delivered my soul from death” (תוממ ישפנ תלצה יכ), 86:2, 11, 13, 15–16, 116:6, 13, 118:14–15; Mosiah 3:8–9. Other nice tetracola occur at 1 Sam. 2:1, and Jer. 9:4–5.

42 Watson, “Chiastic Patterns in Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” 128, and R. Weiss, “On Chiasmus in Scripture,” Beth-Mikra 13 (1962): 50 (Hebrew), both noting that the first four cola constitute a chiastic tetracolon.

43 Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 1:196.

44 Mitchell Dahood, Psalms 51–100, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1968 ), 339–40; cf. Pierre Auffret, “YHWH règne: Étude structurelle du Ps 93,” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 103 (1991): 101–09, on the structure of the tricola at 3a–4c; cf. other climactic parallels at 1 Sam. 2:1, Jer. 9:4–5,22–24,

2 Ne. 12:11, and some crescendoing parallels at Mosiah 2:20–21, and 36–39.

45 Berlin, “Parallelism,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 5:155–56.

46 Michael Sells, Approaching the Qur’án: The Early Revelations (Ashland, OR: White Cloud Press, 1999), 201, 205; cf. Sells, Approaching the Qur’án, 201, citing A. Yusuf Ali, The Holy Quran: Text, Translation, and Commentary (1946), 2:1784–88, on oaths; cf. suras 82:1–6 (Sells, Approaching the Qur’án, 18), 91:1–10.

47 Jeff Lindsay, “2 Nephi 12 and the Septuagint: Evidence for Fraud or Authenticity in the Book of Mormon?” Part Two, “Paired Tricola,” LDSFAQ (Mormon Answers) series, online at www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/2Nephi12.shtml#paired.

48 Citing H. W. M. van Grol, “Paired Tricola in the Psalms, Isaiah and Jeremiah,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 25 (1983): 55–73.

49 consecrated Original MS; covenanted Printer’s MS, 1830–1981, RLDS 1908 editions.

50 Susan B. Taber, “Parallelism and Contrast: Mormon’s Literary Technique,” paper presented at the May 14, 1983, meeting of the Association of Mormon Letters (AML) and published in the Association for Mormon Letters 4 (1984): 117–25. Taber attributes this structure to master editor (redactor) Mormon, and also finds that he created a diptych in Alma.

51 Cf. short chiasms at 1 Ne. 7:3–4 (abba), 2 Ne. 4:18 (abccab), 19:13–14 (abcdcba), Alma 50:14 (abccba).

52 Welch, Chiasmus in Antiquity, passim; Dan Vogel, “The Use and Abuse of Chiasmus in Book of Mormon Studies,” paper delivered at August 2001 Sunstone Symposium.

53 Yehuda T. Radday, “Chiasmus in the Old Testament,” in Chiasmus in Antiquity, 51; Victor Avigdor Hurowitz, Inu Anum ṣīrum: Literary Structures in the Non-Juridical Sections of Codex Hammurabi (Philadelphia: University Museum, 1994), 58 n. 67, “it may now be considered a well established and wide spread fact of literary style.”

54 Parry, Poetic Parallelisms, xxiv–xxix, mentions several of these.

55 Steven Sondrup, “The Psalm of Nephi: A Lyric Reading,” BYU Studies 21, no. 3 (1981): 357–72. Fragments of lyric poetry can be found at 1 Ne. 2:9–10 (laid out below), and Alma 26:8,16. A lyric form typical of both ancient Egyptian and Hebrew is love poetry (Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2:181–93; David P. Silverman, ed., Ancient Egypt [London: Duncan Baird, 1997], 239), good examples of which would be the Song of Songs and the very archaic Lament of David. Cf. William F. Albright, “A Catalogue of Early Hebrew Lyric Poems (Psalm LXVIII),” Hebrew Union College Annual 23 (1950–51):1–39; Hermann Gunkel, Introduction to the Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel, trans. James D. Nogalski (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1998).

56 Rust, “Poetry in the Book of Mormon,” 102.

57 From Hariri, Makamat, “Introduction,” quoted and translated in John Lewis Burckhardt, Arabic Proverbs (London: John Murray, 1830/ reprint Mineola, NY: Dover, 2004), 172.

58 Nibley, Lehi in the Desert.

59 Nibley, Lehi in the Desert, 89–92.

60 Jaroslav Stetkevych, The Zephyrs of Najd: The Poetics of Nostalgia in the Classical Arabic Nasib (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993).

61 Lines 4–5 from text 64 in Stetkevych, Zephyrs of Najd, 107, 215–16, citing Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Maqqari al-Tilimsani, Nafh al-Tib min Ghusn al-Andalus al-Ratib – wa Dhikr Waziriha Lisan al-Din Ibn al-Khatib, ed. M. M. al-Din Ibn al-Hamid, 2 vols. (Beirut, 1967), 1:284.

62 Welch, “A Study Relating Chiasmus,” 150–53 (2:9–10 river...righteousness... commandments; 20:18 commandments...river... righteousness; 3:7, 17:3 ways and means provided to obey commandments; 4:9, precious steel sword; 16:18, fine steel bow; 8:1–15:36, Lehi and Nephi visions and prophecies, etc.); ABCDEFGHIJKJIGFDCHEBA.

63 Gary G. Porton, “Midrash,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 4:819; Gary Porton, “Midrash: The Jews and the Hebrew Bible in the Greco-Roman Period,” Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt 19, no. 2 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1979),

103–38; James L. Kugel and Rowan A. Greer, Early Biblical Interpretation (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986), 46–51, 79–81.

64 “How beautiful” here is the translation of biblical Hebrew ma-nāvû וואנ–המ which was the name of Hugh Nibley’s LDS ward in Provo for much of his life, and is also the source of the name of the city of Nauvoo, “The Beautiful”—though the transliteration in that last case is Sephardic (which was used by Joseph and his brethren in the School of the Prophets at Kirtland)—and which can ultimately be compared to Akkadian nawû “flock, pastureland” = Sumerian á-dam “country, pasture” (cf. Adam-Ondi-Ahman D&C 117:8,11).

65 The “good tidings” (mĕbaśśr tôb) in Isa. 52:7 (בוט רשבמ) is identical to the New Testament use of “Gospel” (εὐαγγέλιον) as “good news” (Mark 1:1), while “Salvation, Savior” (העושי Yěšûˤâ) is the specific meaning and actual spelling of the name of Jesus: Yěšûˤâ (Luke 1:31,69, 2:21,30). That the very name of a forthcoming anointed holy one might be provided well ahead of time may be seen also in 1 Kings 13:2 (Josiah) and Isa. 44:28, 45:1 (Cyrus).

66 Cf. Mark D. Thomas, Digging in Cumorah: Reclaiming the Book of Mormon Narrative (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1999), 99–109.

67. See Book of Mormon Critical Text, 2nd ed., 3 vols., which contains by far the most comprehensive and relevant listing of texts parallel to the Book of Mormon available in any published source.

68 John W. Welch, “The Calling of a Prophet,” in First Nephi, The Doctrinal Foundation, ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1988), 35–54; cf. Samuel Meier, The Messenger in the Ancient Semitic World (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988).

69 Cf. Blake T. Ostler, “The Throne-Theophany and Prophetic Commission in 1 Nephi: A Form-Critical Analysis,” BYU Studies 26, no. 4 (1986): 67–95. See in particular Geo Widengren, Ascension of the Apostle and the Heavenly Book (Uppsala: Lundequistska Bokhandeln, 1950), for a look at these motifs throughout the ancient Near East; similarly, non-Mormon scholar Willis Barnstone, ed., The Other Bible (New York: HarperCollins, 2005), 537, was quite taken with the strong parallels he adduced in comparison of the Apocalypse of Paul and the story of Joseph Smith’s obtaining the Book of Mormon.

70 Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, 343, i.e., the Exile presumably transformed religious institutions such as prophecy; cf. Frank Moore Cross, “Light on the Bible from the Dead Sea Caves,” in Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. Hershel Shanks (New York: Random House, 1992), 163–66; Paul D. Hanson, “From Prophecy to Apocalyptic: Unresolved Issues,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 15 (1980): 3–6.

71 Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, 345 n. 8 for quotation, citing Emerton, “The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery,” Journal of Theological Studies 9 (1958): 225–42; cf. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, 346, n. 13, where he states that Jewish apocalyptic was derived from “old Canaanite mythic lore.” See also the comments of Matthew Black, “The Strange Visions of Enoch,” Bible Review 3, no. 2 (Summer 1987): 39, on the very early nature of the Enoch tradition (cf. 19, 21, 23). In addition, Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 1:73, 79 n. 59, interprets Egyptian sȝ s in the Maxims of Ptahhotep 35 (line 494 = page 15 in Papyrus Prisse) as “Son-of-man, wellborn,” and considers it similar to the Hebrew-Aramaic tradition (cf. Book of Abraham 3:27).

72 Helge S. Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic: The Mesopotamian Background of the Enoch Figure and the Son of Man (Neukirchener Verlag, 1988), part 1 from his dissertation, and part 2 from his article, “An Akkadian Vision as Background for Dan 7,” Studia Theologica 35 (1981): 85–89; cf. James VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984).

73 Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic, 389–441; E. A. Speiser, “Descent of Ishtar to the Nether World,” in Ancient Near Eastern Texts, ed. James B. Pritchard, 3rd ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 109–10 (hereafter as ANET); cf. John J. Collins, Daniel: With an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 79.

74 On the survival of early Jewish apocalyptic mysticism, see H. Curtis Wright, “A Sophic and Mantic People,” BYU Studies 31, no. 3 (Summer 1991): 63, n.. 6.

75 John Bright, A History of Israel, 3rd ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1981), 448.

76 Margaret Barker, “Joseph Smith and Preexilic Israelite Religion,” in The Worlds of Joseph Smith: A Bicentennial Conference at the Library of Congress, ed. John W. Welch (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 2006), 69–82.

77 See more in Alyson Skabelund Von Feldt, “‘His Secret is with the Righteous’: Instructional Wisdom in the Book of Mormon,” Maxwell Institute Occasional Papers 5 (2007): 49–83; cf. 2 Ne. 7:4, Isa. 50:4; and 2 Ne. 21:2, Isa. 11:2, Prov. 1:2, Eccles. 24:25–27, 2 Esdras 14:47.

78 Margaret Barker, Temple Mysticism: An Introduction (London: SPCK, 2011).

79 Ronald J. Williams, “Egyptian Wisdom Literature,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 2:395.

80 Joy and rejoicing is the final objective in both Ecclesiastes and Proverbs (Northrop Frye, The Great Code: The Bible and Literature [New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981], 125), and this is in line with the Egyptian Songs of the Harpers (James L. Crenshaw, “Ecclesiastes, Book of,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 2:278). Candice Wendt suggested that wisdom is needed to make independent decisions, which requires opposition in all things, which includes knowing sorrow in order to know joy, and keyed to the trees in the Garden of Eden (2 Ne. 2:10–25), during Q&A on her paper “Partaking of the Fruit of Ecological Wisdom,” presented June 7, 2013, at the Mormon Theology Seminar meeting on “Opposition in All Things: Mormon Perspectives on the Fall,” held at Utah Valley University (UVU), Provo, Utah.

81 Jan Assmann, “Survey of Egyptian Literature,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 2:382, citing Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2:110–14,146–63; Jan Assmann, “Weisheit, Loyalismus und Frömmigkeit,” in Studien zu altägyptischen Lebenslehren, ed. Erik Hornung and Othmar Keel, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 28 (Freiburg & Göttingen, 1979), 11–72.

82 Not only ˁAnkhsheshonq generally, but also the Papyrus Insinger, and the Dialogue of a Man with His Soul (Crenshaw, “Ecclesiastes, Book of,” 2:278, citing Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 3:159–217, and Pritchard, ANET, 405–07); Glendon E. Bryce, A Legacy of Wisdom: The Egyptian Contribution to the Wisdom of Israel: The Egyptian Contribution to the Wisdom of Israel (Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 1979); Carol R. Fontaine, “A Modern Look at Ancient Wisdom: The Instruction of Ptahhotep Revisited,” Biblical Archaeologist, 44 (Summer 1981):

155–60; Leo G. Perdue, Wisdom and Cult: A Critical Analysis of the Views of Cult in the Wisdom Literature of Israel and the Ancient Near East (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977); Donald B. Redford, “Egypt and the World Beyond,” in Ancient Egypt, 56; Willams, “Egyptian Wisdom Literature,” 2:397.

83 Crenshaw, “Ecclesiastes, Book of,” 2:278, notes that “the royal testament must surely correspond to this literary type in such instructions as those for Merikare,”; cf. Talmud Babli, Soṭa 1:7–9 (8b), 3:7–9; Sanhedrin 90a (10:1/11:1); Nedarim 32a (3:16); Megilla 12b (1:13); ’Abot 2:7, 3:19; Mk 4:24, Lk 6:38; 2 Enoch 44:5;1 Clement 13:2; Polycarp Philippians 2:3.

84 Crenshaw, “Ecclesiastes, Book of,” 2:278.

85 R. E. Murphy, The Tree of Life: An Exploration of Biblical Wisdom Literature, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002); Barker, Temple Mysticism, 8.

86 Daniel C. Peterson, “Nephi and His Asherah: A Note on 1 Nephi 11:8–23,” in Mormons, Scripture, and the Ancient World: Studies in Honor of John L. Sorenson, ed. Davis Bitton (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998), 191–243. On the significance of the presence of Mary, Mother of the Son of God, in the Vision of the Tree of Life, and the function of the Wisdom genre there: cf. Prov. 3:18, “She [Wisdom] is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her.” For Wisdom is the wife of God, and the Mother goddess Asherah is often associated with the Tree of Life (Alyson Skabelund Von Feldt, “Does God Have a Wife?” FARMS Review, 19, no. 1 [2007]: 81–118).

87 Cf. Ernest Horton, Jr., “Koheleth’s Concept of Opposites,” Numen 19 (1972):

1–21; Avraham Gileadi, Isaiah Decoded: Ascending the Ladder to Heaven (Hebraeus Press, 2013), presents a “bifid” structure of the entire book of Isaiah, with seven parallel themes arranged chiastically in each half of the book, through a series of opposites (ruin & rebirth, rebellion & compliance, etc.); James H. Charlesworth, “A Critical Comparison of the Dualism of 1QS 3:13–4:26 and the ‘Dualisms’ Contained in the Gospel of John,” in John and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. James H. Charlesworth (New York: Crossroad, 1990), 76–106; “Reinterpreting John: How the Dead Sea Scrolls Have Revolutionized Our Understanding of the Gospel of John,” Bible Review 9, no. 1 (Feb. 1993): 18–25, 54; Herbert Braun, Qumran und das Neue Testament (Tübingen: JCB Mohr, 1966), 1:201–04; cf. also Amos 5:14–15 in Francis L. Andersen and David Noel Freedman, Amos, The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1989), 506 (good & evil | evil & good), cited by Andrew H. Bartelt, “Isaiah 5 and 9: In- or Interdependence?” in Fortunate the Eyes That See, 167–68, “triple chiasm” of evil,good | good,evil; darkness,light | light,darkness; bitter,sweet | sweet,bitter; Gen. 2:9,17, 3:22, Deut. 11:26, 30:15–20, Prov. 4:18–19, 12:28, 15:24, 28:6,18, Jer. 17:8, 21:8, Ezek. 47:12, Matt. 5:14–18, 7:12–14, 19:16–26, 22:34–40, Luke 13:24, John 10:9–10, 14:6, Rom. 12:16–21, 13:8–12; Rev. 2:7; 1 Ne. 8:10–35, 11:8–25, 15:22–36, 2 Ne. 2:15, 4:4, Alma 5:34,62, 12:23–26, 32:40, 42:2–6.

88 Gen. 26:14–25, Exod. 15:22–27, 17:1–7, Ps. 36:8–9, 46:4, Prov. 13:14, 14:27, 16:22, 18:4, Isa. 12:3–4 (2 Ne. 22:3–4), 44:1–4, 55:1, 58:11b, Jer. 2:13, 17:5–8 (2 Ne. 4:34, 28:31), Ezek. 36:25–28, 47:1–12, Joel 2:28 (Acts 2:14–27 Pentecost), Zech. 14:8, Matt. 3:11, Mark 1:8, John 1:32–34, 4:14, 7:37–39, Rev. 7:16–17, 22:17; 1 Ne. 2:9, 8:13–26, 11:25, 20:18 (Isa. 48:18), Alma 5:34, 42:27, 3 Ne. 12:6, Ether 8:26, 12:28, Moro. 7:11.

89 Patrick Skehan, “Structures in Poems on Wisdom: Proverbs 8 and Sirach 24,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 41, no. 3 (1979): 371, n. 11.

90 Leonard Lesko, The Ancient Egyptian Book of Two Ways (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972).

91 Wisdom of Solomon 18:3; Eccles. (Wisdom of Jesus Ben Sirach) 11:14–16, 15:3,17, 24:23–31, 33:14; CD (passim); 1QM (passim), 1QS 1:9–10, 3:16–4:26 (Community Rule); 4Q246; Testament of Abraham 11–12 rescension A, and 8–9 rescension B; Testament of Asher 6; Didache 1 (Doctrina Apostolorum); Epistle of Barnabas 18–20.

92 Richard Dilworth Rust and Donald W. Parry, “Book of Mormon Literature,” in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, ed. Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan, 1992), 1:183–84.

93 Kugel and Greer, Early Biblical Interpretation, 133–34.

94 Frye, The Great Code, 79–80.

95 See J. Dominic Crossan, “Parable,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 5:146–52; cf. the grape vine motif at 1 Ne. 15:15, and 2 Ne. 15:1–7 (Isa. 5:1–7), “For the vineyard of the Lord of Hosts is the House of Israel, And the men of Judah his pleasant plant” (7).

96 Ps. 1:1–3, 44:2, 80:8–13, 92:12–14, 128:3, 144:12, Isa. 5:1–7 (= 2 Ne. 15:1–7), 27:2–11, Ezek. 19:10–14, Zech. 8:12–13, Matt. 20:1–16, 21:33–45, Luke 13:6–9, 20:9–19, John 15:1–8, Rom. 11:13–25, 1 Cor. 3:5–9.

97 Ahiqar Syriac 8:35 and Elephantine 73; 1QHodayot VIII; Odes of Solomon 11:18; Gospel of Thomas, logia 65–66; Midrash Sifre Deuteronomy 32:9 ‘312; Midrash Leviticus Rabba 11 (113a); cf. Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1994); Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, (Munich: Beck, 1922), 1:874–75.

98 Rust and Parry, “Book of Mormon Literature,” 1:183–84.

99 Spelled with the double-d in the Original Book of Mormon Manuscript. As pointed out by John W. Welch in 1985 (Welch “Thieves and Robbers,” in Reexploring the Book of Mormon, 248–49), the Hebrew word for “band; bandits,” is spelled with the double-d, gĕdûd. In fact, the Hebrew phrase ’îš gĕdûdîm “band of robbers” is even used in Hosea 6:9. Thus, perhaps the name is metonymic or a symbolic epithet. This might also apply to later Giddianhi (note the double-d), who was also chief of this powerful criminal conspiracy (3 Ne. 3).

100 Scott R. Noegel, ed., Puns and Pundits: Word Play in the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Near Eastern Literature (Bethesda: CDL, 2000); J. J. Gluck, “Paronomasia in Biblical Literature,” Semitics 1 (1970): 50–78; William L. Holladay, “Form and Word-Play in David’s Lament over Saul and Jonathan,” Vetus Testamentum 20, no. 2 (1970): 153–189; Raymond Van Leuwen, “What Comes out of God’s Mouth: Theological Wordplay in Deuteronomy 8,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 47, no. 1 (1985): 55–57; cf. Phil. 4:3, Col. 10.

101 Both these examples fully explained by Gordon C. Thomasson, “What’s in a Name? Book of Mormon Language, Names, and [Metonymic] Naming,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, 3, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 15–16; cf. James Barr, “Symbolism of Names in the Old Testament,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 52 (1969): 11–29; The Scope and Authority of the Bible (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1980), 141

n. 6.

102 Bartelt, “Isaiah 5 and 9: In- or Interdependence?” 157–58 (and n. 2);168.

103 Vincent A. Tobin, trans., “The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant,” in The Literature of Ancient Egypt, ed. William Kelley Simpson (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 41 n. 34.

104 Hypothetical Hebrew Yĕršôn *ןושרי “Place of Inheritance,” from yaraš, “to inherit” (Alma 27:22,24, 35:14, all with puns. Stephen D. Ricks and John Tvedtnes, “The Hebrew Origin of Some Book of Mormon Place-Names,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 6, no. 2 [1997]: 257–58).

105 Arabic Nhm, burial place in modern and ancient Yemen (1 Ne. 16:34), at the proper turning point for the Lehites in 1 Ne. 17:1 (Warren P. Aston, “Newly Found Altars from Nahom,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 10, no. 2 [2001]: 56–61,71; S. Kent Brown, “‘The Place That Was Called Nahom’: New Light from Ancient Yemen,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 8, no. 1 [1999]: 66–68; G. Lankester Harding, Index and Concordance of Pre-Islamic Arabian Names and Inscriptions [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971], 602ff.; K. A. Kitchen, Documentation for Ancient Arabia, Part II [Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2000], 744); cf. Job 2:11 lĕnaḥămô “ to comfort, console him.”

106 Note the very early Trigrammaton, YHH, on ostraca and papyri at the Jewish colony at Elephantine: see A. E. Cowley, ed. and trans., Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1923), 1:2, 13:14; Ronald J. Williams, “Egypt and Israel,” in The Legacy of Egypt, ed. J. R. Harris, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1971), 261 n. 1; Bezalel Porten, “Egyptian Aramaic Texts,” in Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, ed. E. Meyers (Oxford Univ. Press, 1997), 2:215.

107 Roger Launius, “From Old to New Mormon History: Fawn Brodie and the Legacy of Scholarly Analysis of Mormonism,” in Reconsidering No Man Knows My History, ed. Newell G. Bringhurst (Logan: Utah State University Press, 1996), 208–09.

108 Dan Vogel and Brent Lee Metcalfe, “Editors’ Introduction,” in American Apocrypha, ed. Dan Vogel and Brent Lee Metcalfe (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002), ix.

109 John W. Welch, “A Book You Can Respect,” Ensign (September 1977): 45–48.

110 Val Larsen, “The Benjamin/Noah Nexus: The Little Appreciated Literary Devices the Nephites Used to Communicate Their Messages,” paper delivered at the Sunstone East Symposium, May 16, 1987, in Bethesda, Maryland; “Restoration: A Theological Poem in the Book of Mormon,” Interpreter 10 (2014): 239–56; Mark D. Thomas, “A Rhetorical Approach to the Book of Mormon: Rediscovering Nephite Sacramental Language,” in New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Explorations in Critical Methodology, ed. Brent Lee Metcalfe (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1993), 53–80; Digging in Cumorah; “Moroni: The Final Voice,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12, no. 1 (2003): 88–99, 119–20; Marilyn Arnold, “Unlocking the Sacred Text,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 8, no. 1 (1999): 48–53, 79; Hardy, Understanding the Book of Mormon.

PROLEGOMENA TO A STUDY

OF THE EGYPTIAN ALPHABET DOCUMENTS

IN THE JOSEPH SMITH PAPERS

John Gee

Abstract: For many theories about the Book of Abraham, the Egyptian Alphabet documents are seen as the key to understanding the translation process. While the original publication of those documents allows many researchers access to the documents for the first time, careful attention to the Joseph Smith Papers as a whole and the practices of Joseph Smith’s scribes in particular allows for improvements in the date, labeling, and understanding of the historical context of the Egyptian Alphabet documents. This essay supports the understanding of these documents found in the other volumes of the Joseph Smith Papers that the Egyptian Alphabet documents are an incidental by-product of the translation process rather than an essential step in that process.

This study comes as a response to an invitation by principals of the Joseph Smith Papers Project to examine Revelations and Translations Volume 4[1] more closely. In this paper, I consider only the section on the Egyptian Alphabet documents. While doing so, however, I must correct a number of errors and misconceptions promoted in the volume about the documents.

I note at the beginning that the volume editors do not necessarily demonstrate a consistent or coherent line of thought about the documents and will not infrequently contradict in one place what they say in another place. This could be evidence of at least two possibilities: (1) unacknowledged fundamental disagreements among the editors about the nature of the documents with which they were working had different editors adding different comments to the text without realizing they contradicted other passages in the text; (2) the editors simply did not think about how the different parts of what they were doing fit into a larger whole.

Description

Three documents in the Church History Library either bear or are assigned the title “Egyptian Alphabet.” These are Church History Library ms. 1295 fd. 3‒5. They are published under the following rubrics:

Manuscript Number

JSP Designation

Published In

Handwriting

Leaves

Ms. 1295 fd. 3

Egyptian Alphabet, circa Early July‒circa November 1835-C

JSPRT4, 85–93

W. W. Phelps

4 leaves

Ms. 1295 fd. 4

Egyptian Alphabet, circa Early July‒circa November 1835-A

JSPRT4, 55–71

Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery

4 leaves

Ms. 1295 fd. 5

Egyptian Alphabet, circa Early July-circa November 1835-B

JSPRT4, 73–83

Oliver Cowdery

4 leaves

The manuscript leaves are written on only one side, with the exception of the Egyptian Alphabet containing Joseph Smith’s handwriting in which the last leaf has been flipped vertically and writing added to the back.

The documents are related in that they have the same title. Their content is similar but not always identical. In the eyes of many this set of documents is seen as the key to understanding Joseph Smith’s translation of the Book of Abraham, and they therefore deserve more careful scrutiny.

Date

The Joseph Smith Papers gives the date of the Egyptian Alphabet Documents as “Early July‒circa November 1835.”[2] The editors claim that the Egyptian Alphabet documents were first drafted in July 1835, although they provide no evidence to substantiate their assertion.[3]

On 1 October 1835, Oliver Cowdery wrote the following for Joseph Smith:

October 1, 1835. This after noon labored on the Egyptian alphabet, in company with brsr O Cowdery and W. W. Phelps: The system of astronomy was unfolded.[4]

In this case, we have three documents, two of which are labeled “Egyptian Alphabet,” and one of which is damaged at the place where the label would be. The titles of the documents match the name mentioned in the journal. These documents are in the handwriting of Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and W. W. Phelps, the three people who were present, according to the Journal. The most reasonable explanation is that the documents are the very ones mentioned in the Journal entry, and the entry allows us to date the documents.

The editors state that “The Egyptian Alphabet documents show changes in ink, scribe, and style of script, which suggests that the documents were created in multiple settings.”[5] This assertion is debatable. All the material in Joseph Smith’s hand is in the same ink and style of script. The same is true for the manuscript in Oliver Cowdery’s hand. Phelps’s hand is more erratic in style to begin with.[6] This suggests that the bulk of at least two of the manuscripts was created in a single setting.

Other factors, however, suggest the hypothesis that the documents were created at different times is unlikely. The editors note that “similarities in spelling and phonetics among many of the transliterations hint at a shared creation process.”[7] The 1 October 1835 journal entry also suggests this. The question that arises from this is — at what other times would Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and W. W. Phelps have gotten together to work on this?

During the 1835‒1836 period, we know of the following instances where Oliver Cowdery wrote dictation from Joseph Smith:

Date

Scribe

Pages

Reference

16 March 1835

Oliver Cowdery (copied by Warren Cowdery)

2

JSPD4,[8] 292‒93

27 April 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPD4, 298‒99

1 June 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPD4, 325

15 June 1835

Oliver Cowdery (copied by Warren Cowdery)

2

JSPD4, 344

10 August 1835

Oliver Cowdery (copied by Warren Cowdery)

1

JSPD4, 381‒82

22 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

2

JSPD4, 429‒30

22 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 61‒62

22 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPD4, 432‒33

22 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPD4, 433‒34

22 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

2

JSPD4, 435‒36

25 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 64

26 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 64‒66

27 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 66

28 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 66

29 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 66‒67

30 September 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 67

1 October 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 67

2 October 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPJ1, 67

21 December 1835

Oliver Cowdery

2

JSPD4, 351‒53

22 December 1835

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPD4, 364‒65

3 March 1836

Oliver Cowdery (copied by Warren Cowdery)

4

JSPD5,[9]181‒85

19 March 1836

Oliver Cowdery (copied by Warren Cowdery)

1

JSPD5, 185

21 March 1836

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPD5, 187‒88

17 August 1836

Oliver Cowdery

1

JSPD5, 280

During that same time period, we know of the following instances when W. W. Phelps took dictation from Joseph Smith:

Date

Scribe

Pages

Reference

1 June 1835

W. W. Phelps

2

JSPD4, 329‒33

2 June 1835

W. W. Phelps

4

JSPD4, 333‒39

15 June 1835

W. W. Phelps

1

JSPD4, 346‒47

6 August 1836

W. W. Phelps

3

JSPD5, 277‒78

There were also occasions during 1835–1836 when Joseph Smith wrote for himself:

Date

Scribe

Pages

Reference

20 July 1835

Joseph Smith

1

JSPD4, 370‒71

22 September 1835

Joseph Smith

1

JSPJ1, 62

23 September 1835

Joseph Smith

2

JSPJ1, 62

24 September 1835

Joseph Smith

1

JSPJ1, 64

19 December 1835

Joseph Smith

1

JSPJ1, 135

20 December 1835

Joseph Smith

1

JSPJ1, 135

21 December 1835

Joseph Smith

1

JSPJ1, 135

22 December 1835

Joseph Smith

1

JSPJ1, 135

19 August 1836

Joseph Smith

1

JSPD5, 281‒83

Two important points emerge from these listings: the dates of the scribal activity and the maximum number of pages they produced as scribes.

The dates show a range of time when each scribe was active taking dictation from Joseph Smith. Oliver Cowdery took dictation sporadically but served as Joseph Smith’s main scribe from 22 September 1835 to 2 October 1835. The dates show that Phelps worked as Joseph Smith’s scribe only in June 1835 and August 1836. We know he was present and involved only on 1 October 1835 because of Joseph Smith’s journal entry. Since all the records of scribal activity are based on Joseph Smith’s dictation, he was involved in all instances, and the list of times when he wrote for himself are irrelevant for the purpose of establishing his presence. Phelps’s rare involvement as a scribe for Joseph Smith during 1835 and 1836 raises questions about the extent of Joseph Smith’s involvement in material from this time in Phelps’s hand. Based on the ranges of scribal activity, the only other time the scribes were working in close relation to each other was the first part of August 1835.

Knowing the range of pages is also helpful. Both Oliver Cowdery and W. W. Phelps were known to produce documents in the range of one to four pages in length, whereas Joseph Smith wrote documents of only one or two pages. Of course, many of the documents were only one page long and needed to be only a page long. The lower end of the range is not particularly helpful, but the upper end of the range tells us it is well within the capacity of the scribe to produce a document of that length. Furthermore, while the Egyptian Alphabet document in Joseph Smith’s hand is four pages long, Joseph Smith’s handwriting ends on the second page, which is consistent with other documents from the same time in his handwriting.

All of the Egyptian Alphabet documents are within the range of documents being produced in a single session. This is even more likely because most of the pages are unused, and all the documents are unfinished. That no scribe can be considered to have worked on the Egyptian Alphabet documents in more than one session is the most likely possibility. That session occurred on 1 October 1835, and all the documents should be specifically dated to that day, as previous volumes in the Joseph Smith Papers series did.[10] The move away from the correct date is baseless and must be considered an error on the part of the editors.

How do we explain the “changes in ink, scribe, and style of script”? Those changes come after the explanations cease, in other words, after most of the documents were written. There is little reason to view the documents as other than essentially the creation of a single session which took place on 1 October 1835, as stated in Joseph Smith’s journal.

The editors claim that “JS [Joseph Smith] and his scribes envisioned them [these documents] less as an academic production meant to be evaluated by scholars of the day and more as a continuation of their spiritual quest to uncover ancient languages.”[11] The editors may be correct that the Egyptian Alphabet documents were probably not intended for evaluation by the scholars of the day. The documents were probably internal explorations. Were they seen as a “spiritual quest”? The term Joseph Smith uses for their work is labored, which means “performing hard work.” He did not use the revelatory term unfolded that he used elsewhere in this entry, nor did he use the term translate as in other entries in late 1835. In the Doctrine and Covenants, the verb labor is often used for secular work; even if it may have a spiritual dimension the frequent metaphor is laboring in the vineyard.[12] In the nominal form, this is emphasized by the phrases “temporal labors,”[13] “labors on the land,”[14] and “labor of his hands.”[15] In his journals, Joseph Smith refers to “our Labours in the printing buisness,”[16] “Laboured in Fathers orchard gathering apples.”[17] In discussing conducting Church councils to correct erring saints, he recorded: “Much good will no doubt, result from our labors during the two days in which we were occupied on the business of the Church.”[18] A similar usage appears a couple of months later: “after I came home I took up a labour with uncle John and convinced him that he was wrong & he made his confession to my satisfaction; I then went and laboured with President Rigdon and succeded in convincing him also of his error which he confessed to my satisfaction.”[19] Sometimes he does use the word labor in a spiritual sense, though this seems to be the minority: “This day Joseph Smith jr. labored with Oliver Cowdery, in obtaining and writing blessings. We were thronged a part of the time with company, so that our labor, in this thing, was hindered.”[20] While Joseph Smith could use the term labor for spiritual things, he more often used it for the exertion of physical and mental effort, and there is no particular reason to interpret it necessarily as some “spiritual quest.”[21] Joseph Smith’s usage suggests that mental effort is more likely in this context. Those who wrote them were working something out in their own minds.

Document Labeling

The labeling of the documents is misleading. It implies a chronological order: A, then B, then C. The editors claim that “Egyptian Alphabet-C (largely in the handwriting of Phelps) was likely begun first, followed by Egyptian Alphabet-B (in the handwriting of Cowdery),” and that “Egyptian Alphabet-A … was likely begun last,”[22] which would imply that their labeling was backwards. In the same paragraph, however, they argue the opposite, saying that “Phelps and Cowdery appear to have expanded on earlier, simpler definitions found in JS’s Egyptian Alphabet-A,”[23] which means it predates the other versions. They also argue that “both Phelps and Cowdery inscribed at least parts of their versions as the text was dictated or read aloud.”[24] We will deal with these assertions later. At this point, it is enough to note that the labeling of the Egyptian Alphabet documents implies an order and creates confusion.

It would have been simpler, less confusing, more accurate, and without chronological implications if the editors had simply identified the manuscript by the principal handwriting. Thus calling what the editors label “Egyptian Alphabet-A” the “Egyptian Alphabet in Joseph Smith’s handwriting” is clearer because it highlights the most salient difference in the document. Calling it “Egyptian Alphabet-A” implicitly assigns it chronological priority.

If one accepts the editor’s assumption that there is a relative order to the Egyptian Alphabet documents, how does one go about determining the order, and how does one do so without falling into a circular argument by assuming what one sets out to prove?

Evidence of Formatting

The formatting of the Egyptian Alphabet documents is distinctive among all the other documents in the volume in which they are published. Vertical lines are ruled on a number of pages, thus dividing the page into a number of columns.

In the copy of Egyptian Alphabet containing Joseph Smith’s handwriting, the first page is ruled into four columns, while the rest of the pages are not ruled. All four pages of W. W. Phelps’s manuscript are ruled into four columns. In the copy of the Egyptian Alphabet in Oliver Cowdery’s hand, the first page is ruled into five columns. The first column is used as a margin. The second page has two columns, but the rest of the leaves are not ruled.

Only W. W. Phelps labels the columns in the manuscript. On the first page, the columns are labeled “Character,” “lettr,” “Sound,” and “Explanation.” The last of these labels is written on a higher line than the other three. Two of these labels (“character” and “sound”) are continued through the rest of the pages of the manuscript.

The different scribes used the columns differently. Not all the written letters are kept within the confines of the columns. For the first page (which is the only page where all the manuscripts follow the columnar format), this can be tabulated in the following table:

W. W. Phelps

Oliver Cowdery

Joseph Smith

Sound column flows into following explanation column

7 out of 36

8/36

4/37

Explanation column flows into previous sound column

0/36

3/36

30/37

So W. W. Phelps respects the columns. He ruled all his pages with columns. He labeled them. In seven cases, where the writing in the sound column exceeded the space allotted, the writing extended to the next column, but otherwise he stayed within the columns. In subsequent pages, he adhered to the columnar format less rigidly. Oliver Cowdery did not label the columns and followed the format less rigorously but still followed the format most of the time. Joseph Smith, on the other hand, completely ignored the columns and simply ran the text together. In those cases where the line separating the column happens to separate the sections, it can be argued to be coincidental rather than intentional. In three cases, Joseph Smith did not even write the sound in and had to add it in above the line after the fact.

Based on these considerations, it would appear that the project was the brainchild of W. W. Phelps. Phelps followed the program, while Smith did not. Joseph Smith was not invested in the project, as indicated by way in which he ignored the columnar format and sometimes forgot to include the sound component. Based only on the formatting, we would conclude that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were copying Phelps’s work.

Evidence from Scribal Practices

The editors assert that “Phelps and Cowdery appear to have expanded on earlier, simpler definitions found in JS’s Egyptian Alphabet A.”[25] This assumption that later scribes expand the text and that the earlier text is always shorter in form, called lectio brevior potior, has been empirically debunked before,[26] but can be demonstrated to be false by looking at scribal usage among Joseph Smith’s scribes at exactly the time when the Egyptian Alphabet documents were produced.

Joseph Smith’s scribes did much more than simply take dictation in 1835, though they did do that. In some cases, they copied entire passages verbatim from sources that we have. This allows us to look at their scribal practice and tendencies. For our purposes, we can look at the amalgam of scribal efforts in copying and the tendencies to expand or contract the text they are copying in 1835‒1836. Since most readers will not be interested in a lengthy list of textual differences, the results will be summarized. There are 63 instances of dropping material from the text they are copying and eight instances of adding material to the text. The scribes (Thomas Burdick, James Mulholland, Warren Parrish, George W. Robinson, Frederick G. Williams) were almost eight times more likely to drop information from the text than to add to it.

In pie chart form, it looks like what is shown in Figure 1. This pattern extends to individual scribes — Frederick G. Williams (Figure 2) and Warren Parrish (Figure 3). In no case does the number of additions exceed the number of deletions.

Figure 1. Scribal errors.

Figure 2. Frederick G. Williams scribal errors.

Figure 3. Warren Parrish scribal errors.

Given this documented tendency in Joseph Smith’s scribes from the period when the materials in JSPRT4 were created, we can develop a method to determine whether a document is likely copied from another document. Material from one document not in the other document counts as an expansion in the first document and a contraction in the second. In a comparison of the two documents, the original should have significantly more expansions than contractions, and the copy should have significantly more contractions than expansions. We will consider the cases in the implied chronological order of the publication: Joseph Smith vs. Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith vs. W. W. Phelps, and Oliver Cowdery vs. W. W. Phelps.

For the sake of argument, we will consider the relationship between the Egyptian Alphabet in Joseph Smith’s hand with the one in Oliver Cowdery’s handwriting and assume for the purposes of the test that the document in Oliver Cowdery’s handwriting is a copy of the one in Joseph Smith’s handwriting, which is implied in the ordering of the documents in the publication. Comparing the Egyptian Alphabet document in Joseph Smith’s handwriting to the one in Oliver Cowdery’s handwriting, we get what is illustrated in Figure 4: the document in Cowdery’s hand has 33 expansions and 15 contractions compared to the one in Joseph Smith’s hand. Our method would indicate that if there is copying, Joseph Smith is copying the Egyptian alphabet in Oliver Cowdery’s hand.

Figure 4. Test of Egyptian Alphabet in Oliver Cowdery’s hand being the

copy of the one in Joseph Smith’s hand.

This single test is insufficient. We must also test the Egyptian Alphabet in Joseph Smith’s hand against the document in W. W. Phelps’s hand. Again we will follow the ordering of JSPRT4 and assume that the one in Joseph Smith’s hand is the original and that W. W. Phelps’s is the copy. We get the results illustrated in Figure 5: the document in Phelps’s handwriting has 52 expansions and 30 contractions compared to the one in Joseph Smith’s hand. For our test case, we would have to say the assumption fails the test, which indicates that if there is copying, Joseph Smith is copying the document in W. W. Phelps’s hand.

Figure 5. Test of Egyptian Alphabet in W. W. Phelps’s hand being the

copy of the one in Joseph Smith’s hand.

In either case, the Egyptian Alphabet in Joseph Smith’s hand appears to be a copy of the other document. Which of the documents in Oliver Cowdery’s or W. W. Phelps’s hand appears to be the original? We can test those two documents against each other. For this test we will assume, based on the order given in JSPRT4, that Phelps is copying Cowdery. The copy of the Egyptian Alphabet in Phelps’s hand has 13 expansions and 30 contractions compared to the one in Cowdery’s hand (see Figure 6). In this case, it does look like Cowdery’s is the original document.

Figure 6. Test of Egyptian Alphabet in W. W. Phelps’s hand being the

copy of the one in Oliver Cowdery’s hand.

It is actually doubtful that the Egyptian Alphabet documents were intended to be copies. The expansions in copies made by Joseph Smith’s scribes in 1835‒1836 were all dittographies; that is, they were all repetitions of words and phrases made when the scribe’s eye slipped back to a previous section, whereas none of the expansions in the Egyptian Alphabet documents are dittographies.

So were the documents dictated? The editors claim that “both Phelps and Cowdery inscribed at least parts of their versions as the text was dictated or read aloud.”[27] The evidence they provide is that

at character 2.6, it appears that “under or less” was heard and interpreted differently by Phelps and Cowdery. Phelps seems to have begun to write “under,” but then upon hearing “or,” he replaced “under” with “less.” Cowdery, on the other hand, heard “under or less,” and wrote the entire phrase, interpreting the “or” as a clarifying word.[28]

The full passage of this single instance in context makes their interpretation problematic. The full passages in the various handwritings are as follows (my transcriptions, their order):

Smith: Alc{h}{o\i}beth ministers of God un{d}<e><r> or the less

Cowdery: Alch{o\i}beth Ministers of Go<d>, less, or under th{e} high priests

Phelps: Alch<i>beth Ministers of God, under <less> than high priests

There are multiple problems with the editors’ interpretation. For starters, Cowdery did not write, as they claim, “under or less” but “less, or under”. Phelps wrote “under”, crossed it out, and wrote “less” directly over the second half of the word. It looks as if Smith (1) wrote “und”, (2) retouched the “d”, (3) added an “r”, (4) then went back and wrote the “e”, although steps (2) and (3) might have been in the other order. The manuscript evidence does not back the scenario set forth by the editors, even in their own transcriptions.

Considered alone, the Smith and Phelps manuscripts are explicable as aural errors for the same phrase. Cowdery’s metathesis of the phrase — that is, reversing the order of the words — is less explicable in that way.

This example also shows a problem with the editors’ assertion that “Egyptian Alphabet–A contains the most complete definitions for the final copied character.”[29] In this case, the definition in Joseph Smith’s hand is fundamentally incomplete, lacking the final noun phrase. This noun phrase, while it makes sense in the context, is not something that could be filled in based on Smith’s version alone.

Contents

One of the more interesting facets of the Egyptian Alphabet documents is their content, both in terms of the characters they use and the concepts discussed.

In terms of the characters, the various characters labeled “parts” correspond to various columns of Joseph Smith Papyrus I, as shown in the following table:

Papyrus column (from right to left)

Label in the Egyptian Alphabet

Joseph Smith Papyrus I column 1

Fourth part of the first degree

Joseph Smith Papyrus I column 2

Third part of the first degree

Joseph Smith Papyrus I column 3

Second part of the first degree

Joseph Smith Papyrus I inscription over the vignette

First degree

Joseph Smith Papyrus I column 4

Fifth part of the first degree

Matching the characters from the papyrus with the characters copied into the Egyptian Alphabet documents clarifies the terminology used in the Egyptian Alphabet documents. There the term part is used for what we call the column of the papyrus. It is a term that refers to location. The term degree refers to what we would call a fragment. The usage in the Egyptian Alphabet differs from that of the Book of Abraham manuscripts. In the Egyptian Alphabet documents part precedes degree. In the Book of Abraham manuscripts degree precedes part, as in “fifth degree of the Second part.”[30] The characters in the Book of Abraham manuscripts come from a number of different lines from Joseph Smith Papyrus XI, so the usage there cannot be the same as in the Egyptian Alphabet documents, as it no longer refers to the location of the character in the papyri (i.e., the reference to “fifth degree” in two of the Book of Abraham manuscripts does not seem to comply with the concept of “degree” in the Egyptian Alphabet). In the Book of Abraham manuscripts, all characters, regardless of which line they come from, have the same designation as to degree or part. The usage in the Grammar and Alphabet differs dramatically, since there the term degree has transformed into a method of interpretation of characters.[31] This is an indication of different minds using the same terminology.

It is also clear from this correspondence that the Egyptian Alphabet project took the columns in left to right order. This also extends to the reading of characters within the columns: the character on the left is given before the character on the right.[32] In the Book of Abraham manuscripts, the characters are read in the other direction, from right to left.

Joseph Smith Papyrus I, in its current state, has the remains of an inscription over the vignette. Only traces of the last three signs remain, but the state of preservation seems to have been better in October of 1835, when they were copied into the Egyptian Alphabet. In theory, the characters listed under the (first part of the) first degree could be reassembled to reconstruct the now missing inscription, but such a reconstruction would not be easy, since it is not a trivial matter to recognize the Egyptian glyphs as they have been copied by scribes who were unskilled at copying them. This may suggest that if the inscription here were more complete in 1835, then the vignette itself was likely more intact than at present.

It is also theoretically possible to reconstruct the titles of the mother of the ancient owner of Joseph Smith Papyrus I, though this is not currently possible, given the way that the glyphs were copied in the nineteenth century. Readers should recall that the glyphs in the first three columns of Joseph Smith Papyrus I were not correctly read by the first generation of scholars who had access to the actual photographs.

In terms of concepts, many of the definitions given parallel Abraham 1:24‒25, 31. Consider the following set of parallels emphasized here:[33]

Egyptian Alphabet — Oliver Cowdery handwriting

Book of Abraham

The land of Egypt first discovered under water by a woman

When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land. (Abraham 1:24)

What other person is that? Who.

Reign, government, power, kingdom, or dominion[34]

Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal. (Abraham 1:25)

The beginning, first, before, or pointing to

In the beginning of the earth, or creation

But the records of the fathers, even the patriarchs, concerning the right of Priesthood, the Lord my God preserved in mine own hands; therefore a knowledge of the beginning of the creation, and also of the planets, and of the stars, as they were made known unto the fathers, have I kept even unto this day, and I shall endeavor to write some of these things upon this record, for the benefit of my posterity that shall come after me. (Abraham 1:31)

It is clear that the Egyptian Alphabet document depends on the text of the Book of Abraham, but the Book of Abraham is not derivative of the Egyptian Alphabet document. Too much has to be supplied to claim that the Book of Abraham is derived from the scattered concepts of the Egyptian Alphabet. Had it been that obvious, the editors would have pointed out the connections, but they did not notice them. On the other hand, it is much easier to derive the concepts of the Egyptian Alphabet from the Book of Abraham. This indicates that the translation of the Book of Abraham had already reached Abraham 1:31 before 1 October 1835.

Did the scribes really think this was a translation project? If the scribes of the Egyptian Alphabet really thought that the characters from Joseph Smith Papyrus I were translated by the concepts listed in the Egyptian Alphabet documents, wouldn’t the concepts come together to form some sort of coherent narrative? Why did they spend all that time connecting Joseph Smith Papyrus I with the text from the Book of Abraham and yet match up the translation of the Book of Abraham with characters taken from Joseph Smith Papyrus XI? Here it is significant that Joseph Smith used the expression labored on rather than translated; he did not seem to regard the work that he did on those documents as translation.

The Theory of the Editors

As has been demonstrated, the evidence from the manuscripts indicates that the Egyptian Alphabet did not originate with Joseph Smith, who was generally copying the other two manuscripts. This is not the way the editors portray it in the footnotes and the introduction to the section:

“JS and some of his associates began creating three Egyptian Alphabet documents.”[35]

“Phelps likely began inscribing Grammar and Alphabet material in this volume sometime between July 1835 (when the Egyptian Alphabet documents were first drafted) and 1 October 1835 (when JS’s journal mentions that JS, Oliver Cowdery, and William W. Phelps worked on “the Egyptian alphabet,” which could refer either to the Grammar and Alphabet volume or to the Egyptian Alphabet documents).”[36]

“Phelps and Cowdery inscribed at least parts of their versions as the text was dictated or read aloud.”[37]

“Phelps and Cowdery appear to have expanded on earlier, simpler definitions found in JS’s Egyptian Alphabet-A”[38]

“The evolving use (or disuse) of columns and the varying page size both suggest that JS’s plans for presenting the information in the document changed as he worked.”[39]

“JS and his clerks abandoned this project, moving on to work on the Grammar and Alphabet volume.”[40]

“The Grammar and Alphabet volume, for example, adopts and further develops the structure found in the Egyptian Alphabet documents.”[41]

“The Grammar and Alphabet volume was one piece of a larger attempt to understand the Egyptian language, which was in turn part of a larger effort by JS to study ancient languages.”[42]

The editors present the whole project as Joseph Smith’s, but the manuscript evidence indicates that the conception of the project belonged to Phelps, while the fullest definitions are generally those of Cowdery.

Theories of Translation

There are three basic theories about the original source text from which the Book of Abraham was translated. One is that Joseph Smith translated the text of the Book of Abraham from the papyri fragments we now have. Few members of the Church believe this theory, but it is pushed by anti-Mormons. The second theory is that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham from papyri that we do not currently possess. The third theory is that Joseph Smith received the Book of Abraham directly through revelation without possessing a text that contained the ancient text of the Book of Abraham. The Church accommodates either of the latter two theories. Presumably, the Joseph Smith Papers Project would be fine with either of the latter two options.

How do the various documents in JSPRT4 fit into the various translation scenarios? We will consider these individually, starting with the theory that Joseph Smith received the Book of Abraham without possessing the text of the Book of Abraham. Under this theory, since Joseph Smith received the Book of Abraham directly by inspiration, there was no connection between the Book of Abraham and the papyri. At best the papyrus served as a catalyst for Joseph Smith to get revelation, but once he started receiving the Book of Abraham by revelation, he presumably did not need the papyrus anymore, since he would have been receiving the revelation as he did for sections of the Doctrine and Covenants. If one wishes to consider the production of the Egyptian Alphabet in October 1835 as the initial jumpstart of the project,[43] then there was no reason for Joseph Smith to pursue the project further. Under the direct-inspiration scenario, Joseph Smith would have no logical reason to be involved in the production of the further Grammar and Alphabet documents. Those documents would be seen as the work of W. W. Phelps during times when he was not serving as a scribe to Joseph Smith.

In the theory that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham from papyri that we no longer have, the Book of Abraham is connected with specific papyri, but papyri which we no longer have access to. The Egyptian Alphabet documents thus serve as an effort by Phelps and Cowdery to match the translation with the characters from papyri in their possession. As we have seen, the manuscript evidence actually supports this interpretation. The Grammar and Alphabet documents are seen as the work of Phelps, done at a time period (August 1835 to July 1836) when he was not serving as Joseph Smith’s scribe. These documents would not then be the work of Joseph Smith, and thus are irrelevant to understanding the translation of the Book of Abraham.

Only if one assumes that Joseph Smith tried to translate the Book of Abraham from papyri that have survived does the program propounded by the editors make any kind of sense. Although attributing the Grammar and Alphabet to Joseph Smith is not required for Joseph Smith to have translated the Book of Abraham from the current papyri, adopting this theory makes it easier to argue for this option. This scenario is pushed by critics of the Church, and not many members of the Church believe it.

Assigning the Grammar and Alphabet to Joseph Smith (for which, incidentally, there is absolutely no evidence) undercuts the direct inspiration scenario. It also does not work well with the scenario that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham from different papyri.

As we have seen, the editors of the documents promote a historical scenario in which Joseph Smith decided to produce an Egyptian Alphabet, and used it to produce the Book of Abraham. This is the scenario promoted by critics of the Church. Other possibilities, including the two theories most commonly held by members of the Church, are ignored.

Results

The Egyptian Alphabet documents seem to be evidence that Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and W. W. Phelps studied things out in their mind. There seems to be an attempt, for unknown reasons, to match concepts from Abraham 1:24‒25, and 31 with characters from Joseph Smith Papyrus I. Their incomplete nature is indicative of the stupor of thought that came with this otherwise unproductive line of inquiry. The last English words that Oliver Cowdery writes before giving up the “Sound” column are parenthetical comments after three sounds (perhaps glosses) listing words for “the earth &c,” “Moon,” and “Sun” before ending anything other than copying of characters,[44] which may have been done previously. Joseph Smith describes the process as they “labored on the Egyptian alphabet,” and then “the system of astronomy was unfolded” to them. In the other two manuscripts the last word written is “Kolob,” which is prominently associated with the astronomical portion of the Book of Abraham, occurring both in the Explanation to Facsimile 2 (Figures 1 and 2), and in Abraham 3:3‒4, 9, 16. The editors argue that this word (Kolob) is a later addition,[45] but even if the argument is correct, Cowdery’s manuscript shows that the project stopped when the topic shifted to astronomy. They stopped the Egyptian alphabet project once revelation came, and neither Joseph Smith nor Oliver Cowdery seems to have ever picked it up again.

The system of astronomy might refer to (1) the explanation of Facsimile 2, or (2) the astronomical portion of the Book of Abraham in chapter 3, or (3) the “knowledge of the beginning of the creation, and also of the planets, and of the stars, as they were made known unto the fathers,” promised at the end of the first chapter (Abraham 1:31), which would have come after the creation narrative in Abraham chapter 5. There is evidence that the third option was the one referred to. On 16 December 1835, Joseph Smith was explaining “many things to them concerning the dealings of God with the ancient<s> and the formation of the planetary system,”[46] which was understood as “the system of astronomy as taught by Abraham.”[47] On 6 May 1838, Joseph Smith gave a discourse wherein “He also instructed the Church, in the mistories of the Kingdom of God; giving them a history of the Plannets&c. and of Abrahams writings upon the Plannettary System &c.”[48] A system of astronomy taught by Abraham that includes the formation of the planetary system or history of the planets is arguably not in the current Book of Abraham or any of the manuscripts but does match the description of what Abraham promises to write at the end of the first chapter. It is also possible that the first and third options are the same. None of these three things are in manuscripts from the Kirtland period. Whichever of the three options it was, however we choose to understand it, the revelation on astronomy from 1 October 1835 was beyond the translation of the Book of Abraham as evidenced in the preserved manuscripts from the Kirtland period.

Such insights may be obtained by careful study of the documents if one does not subscribe, as the editors do, to anti-Mormon theories about the production of the Book of Abraham. The evidence of editorial bias in JSPRT4 is demonstrable, pervasive, and systemic. This bias opposes the interests of the Joseph Smith Papers institutional sponsors, the beliefs of most members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and (most importantly) the evidence of the manuscripts being published.

John Gee is the William (Bill) Gay Research Professor in the Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages at Brigham Young University. He has authored more than 150 publications on topics such as ancient scripture, Aramaic, archaeology, Coptic, Egyptian, history, linguistics, Luwian, rhetoric, Sumerian, textual criticism, and published in journals such as British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan, Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar, Enchoria, Ensign, FARMS Review, Göttinger Miszellen, Issues in Religion and Psychotherapy, Journal of Academic Perspecitves, Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Journal of Egyptian History, Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities, Lingua Aegyptia, Review of Books on the Book of Mormon, Studien zur altägyptischen Kultur, and Interpreter, and by such presses as American University of Cairo Press, Archaeopress, Association Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth, E. J. Brill, Carsten Niebuhr Institute of Near Eastern Studies, Czech Institute of Egyptology, Deseret Book, de Gruyter, Harrassowitz, Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, Macmillan, Oxford University Press, Peeters, Praeger, Religious Studies Center, Society of Biblical Literature. He has published three books and has edited eight books and an international multilingual peer-reviewed professional journal. He served twice as a section chair for the Society of Biblical Literature.

1 . Robin Scott Jensen and Brian M. Hauglid, eds., Joseph Smith Papers, Revelations and Translations, Volume 4: Book of Abraham and Related Manuscripts (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2018), hereafter referred as JSPRT4.

2 . JSPRT4, 53.

3 . Ibid., 112. The editors give a hint of their reasoning in JSPRT4, 184n12, which is based on the unreferenced JSPRT4, 162‒65. Even if one grants their argument about the Grammar and Alphabet in October, it does not automatically date the Egyptian Alphabet to July. The argument about the Grammar and Alphabet being referred to in the 1 October 1835 journal entry is inferior to the argument that the Egyptian Alphabet documents being mentioned because (1) the titles match the Egyptian Alphabet, not the Grammar and Alphabet; (2) the individuals involved match the handwritings of the Egyptian Alphabet, not the Grammar and Alphabet.

4 . Dean C. Jessee, Mark Ashurst-McGee, and Richard L. Jensen, eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, Volume 1: 1832–1839 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2008), 1:67, hereafter referred as JSPJ1.

5 . JSPRT4, 53.

6 . E.g., ibid., 162.

7 . Ibid., 4:53.

8 . Matthew C. Godfrey et al., eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Documents, Volume 4: April 1834–September 1835 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2016), herein referred as JSPD4.

9 . Brent M. Rogers et al, eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Documents, Volume 5: October 1835‒January 1838 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2017), herein referred as JSPD5.

10 . E.g., JSPJ1, 67n47.

11 . JSPRT4, 53.

12 . Doctrine and Covenants 10:4; 18:15; 21:9; 39:13; 43:28; 50:38; 52:36, 39; 53:6; 56:17; 58:54, 60; 64:25; 68:30; 71:4; 72:14, 19; 75:3, 28; 84:109; 88:52, 84; 104:20; 115:10, 12; 124:44, 112.

13 . Doctrine and Covenants 24:9.

14 . Doctrine and Covenants 26:1.

15 . Doctrine and Covenants 38:40.

16 . JSPJ1, 20.

17 . Ibid., 72.

18 . Ibid., 66‒67.

19 . Ibid., 86.

20 . Ibid., 61‒62.

21 . The reference in Doctrine and Covenants 10:4 about running and laboring appears to be metaphorical.

22 . JSPRT4, 53.

23 . Ibid., 53.

24 . Ibid.

25 . Ibid.

26 . James R. Royse, Scribal Habits in Early Greek New Testament Papyri (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007).

27 . JSPRT4, 53.

28 . Ibid., 104n6.

29 . Ibid., 55.

30 . E.g., ibid., 194.

31 . E.g., ibid., 117.

32 . In the column of characters to the immediate right of the lion couch scene of Facsimile 1 in Joseph Smith Papyrus I at JSPRT4:9, the order of the characters from this papyrus fragment in the Egyptian Alphabet is based on taking the character on the left first, followed by the character on the right, then moving down and repeating the left-right sequence, a sequence easily followed using the “Comparison of Characters” section (JSPRT4, 350–80), considering the characters labeled as 2.32, 2.35/2.36/2.40, and 2.42–2.59.

33 . I have normalized spelling and capitalization on the manuscript. There are appropriate times to do that just as there are inappropriate times to do that.

34 . JSPRT4, 75, spelling normalized.

35 . Ibid., 53.

36 . Ibid., 112.

37 . Ibid., 53.

38 . Ibid.

39 . Ibid., 55.

40 . Ibid., 54.

41 . Ibid.

42 . Ibid., 112.

43 . There are problems with this particular point of view, since the letter of W. W. Phelps to his wife Sally, dated 11 September 1835, mentions previous translation, which had not occurred for a long time; quoted in Bruce Van Orden, “Writing to Zion: The William W. Phelps Kirtland Letters (1835‒1836),” BYU Studies 33, no. 3 (1993): 563.

44 . JSPRT4, 78.

45 . Ibid., 89, 108n181.

46 . JSPJ1, 124.

47 . Karen Lynn Davidson et al., Joseph Smith Papers: Histories, Volume 1: Joseph Smith Histories, 1832–1844 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2012), 1:147; JSPJ1, 124n209.

48 . Mark Ashurst-McGee et al., Joseph Smith Papers: Documents, Volume 6: February 1838–August 1839 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2012), 6:134.

RECORD-KEEPING TECHNOLOGY

AMONG GOD’S PEOPLE

IN ANCIENT AND MODERN TIMES

Richard E. Turley Jr. and Stephen O. Smoot

Abstract: In a fascinating survey of the efforts of ancient and modern Saints to honor the Lord’s commandment to keep reliable records of their doings, the authors take us on a colorful tour of the past, present, and future of technology for records preservation. These efforts are not only awe-inspiring, but have had and will have important consequences for the faith and memory of the goodness of God and the fulfillment of His purposes in history.

[Editor’s Note: Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article is reprinted here as a service to the LDS community. Original pagination and page numbers have necessarily changed, otherwise the reprint has the same content as the original.

See Richard E. Turley Jr. and Stephen O. Smoot, “Record-Keeping Technology among God’s People in Ancient and Modern Times,” in “To Seek the Law of the Lord”: Essays in Honor of John W. Welch, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson and Daniel C. Peterson (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation, 2017), 467–94. Further information at https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/to-seek-the-law-of-the-lord-essays-in-honor-of-john-w-welch-2/.]

According to Latter-day Saint scripture, the first commandment God gave to the newly organized Church of Christ on April 6, 1830, was, “Behold, there shall be a record kept among you” (D&C 21:1).[1] Over the course of succeeding decades, members of the church—later renamed The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—have taken this commandment to heart, becoming renowned for their record keeping.[2] In the Church History Library in Salt Lake City, completed in 2009, the April 1830 charge appears over the door leading from the front lobby to the main reading room.[3] This new library, together with the Family History Library and the Church History Museum a block away, the Granite Mountain Records Vault in Little Cottonwood Canyon southeast of Salt Lake City, and thousands of Family History Centers around the globe, show the church’s continuing commitment to keeping records.

Yet the 1830 charge is not the only scriptural justification for Latter-day Saints to keep records. Rather, they also look to numerous other verses in the Bible and other scriptures for examples of record keeping and for reasons why it is important. A survey of the techniques used for record keeping over time also helps illuminate how the church should keep its records in the future.

The Rationale for Record Keeping

Latter-day Saints look to their canon—the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price—for the rationale to keep records. The New Testament, for example, explains that someday all humanity will stand before God to be judged from written records. The Revelation of John describes the future Judgment Day, which the writer has seen in vision. “And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne,” the text reads, “and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books” (John 20:12).[4]

The founding prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Joseph Smith, wrote an epistle to his followers on September 6, 1842. In it, he expounded on this New Testament passage. “The books spoken of,” he concluded, “must be the books which contained the record of their works, and refer to the records which are kept on the earth.” Speaking of the practice of baptism for the dead, which by this point had been practiced by Latter-day Saints for two years, he added an important doctrinal gloss: “Now, the nature of this ordinance,” the Prophet explained, “consists in the power of the priesthood…wherein it is granted that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Or, in other words,…whatsoever you record on earth shall be recorded in heaven, and whatsoever you do not record on earth shall not be recorded in heaven” (D&C 128:8).

Joseph Smith recognized that this doctrine—that an ordinance (rite or ceremony) must be recorded to be valid—might surprise some people. “It may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of—a power which records or binds on earth and binds in heaven,” he confessed. “Nevertheless, in all ages of the world, whenever the Lord has given a dispensation of the priesthood to any man by actual revelation, or any set of men, this power has always been given. Hence, whatsoever those men did in authority, in the name of the Lord, and did it truly and faithfully, and kept a proper and faithful record of the same, it became a law on earth and in heaven, and could not be annulled, according to the decrees of the great Jehovah” (D&C 128:9).

The doctrine takes on additional meaning because Latter-day Saints believe that human beings cannot reach the highest heaven—what they call the highest degree of the celestial kingdom—without participating in certain prescribed ordinances (cf. D&C 84:20–22; 131:1–4; Moses 1:39; Article of Faith 3).[5] In his 1842 epistle, Joseph Smith essentially stated that without records of these ordinances, they are not complete and, therefore, not valid. In short, in Mormon theology, no one can reach the highest heaven without proper record keeping.

Although the scriptures accepted by Latter-day Saints provide some reasons for record keeping, they are also clear that not all purposes for keeping records may be known to the record keepers themselves. In 1 Nephi 9, for example, the Book of Mormon prophet Nephi records, “Wherefore, the Lord hath commanded me to make these plates for a wise purpose in him, which purpose I know not”

(1 Ne. 9:5). Later in his account Nephi adds, “And after I had made these plates by way of commandment, I, Nephi, received a commandment that the ministry and the prophecies, the more plain and precious parts of them, should be written upon these plates; and that the things which were written should be kept for the instruction of my people, who should possess the land, and also for other wise purposes, which purposes are known unto the Lord” (1 Ne. 19:3). Nephi thus understood that his record keeping would serve an important didactic purpose, as well as other purposes unknown to him.

While abridging the small and large plates, the prophet-historian Mormon similarly admitted a level of uncertainty in precisely why he was abridging them the way he was, insisting that his editorship was the result of revelatory aid. “And I do this for a wise purpose; for thus it whispereth me, according to the workings of the Spirit of the Lord which is in me. And now, I do not know all things; but the Lord knoweth all things which are to come; wherefore, he worketh in me to do according to his will” (Words of Mormon 7). Like Nephi, Mormon bowed to the will of God, even if the Lord’s will concerning the record remained somewhat inscrutable.

Alma the Younger, another Book of Mormon prophet-historian, in passing the sacred records to his son Helaman, charged him to “keep a record of this people, according as I have done, upon the plates of Nephi, and keep all these things sacred which I have kept, even as I have kept them; for it is for a wise purpose that they are kept” (Alma 37:2). Alma understood the gravity and significance of maintaining the record and gave several reasons in his account for doing so (Alma 37:8–10). At the same time, he refrained from speculating on other purposes, telling Helaman, “Now these mysteries are not yet fully made known unto me; therefore I shall forbear” (Alma 37:11). Alma simply explained, “And it may suffice if I only say they are preserved for a wise purpose, which purpose is known unto God; for he doth counsel in wisdom over all his works, and his paths are straight, and his course is one eternal round” (Alma 37:12).

Modern Latter-day Saint scripture is emphatic about record keeping. While incarcerated in Liberty, Missouri, Joseph Smith and his companions emphasized in an 1839 epistle, canonized in 1876, that keeping records of the Saints’ persecutions was “an imperative duty that we owe to God, to angels, with whom we shall be brought to stand, and also to ourselves, to our wives and children” (D&C 123:7).[6] Driving the point home, the Prophet and his companions repeated that record keeping was not only a duty to God, but “an imperative duty that we owe to all the rising generation, and to all the pure in heart” (D&C 123:9, 11).

As if that weren’t explicit enough, the letter directs, “These should then be attended to with great earnestness. Let no man count them as small things; for there is much which lieth in futurity, pertaining to the saints, which depends upon these things” (D&C 123:14–15). Joseph Smith clearly understood that his record keeping, as well as the record keeping he required of his followers, would serve important purposes. He recognized and insisted that record keeping in the Church would serve both his contemporary Church membership and future generations.

As this sampling of scriptures show, Latter-day Saints believe that record keeping has been an important characteristic of God’s people throughout history. The specific techniques of this record keeping, however, have varied over time.

Record Keeping from Antiquity to 1830

The kinds of records that the ancients kept indicate how seriously ancient peoples thought of record keeping. They took record keeping so seriously, in fact, that some even pronounced curses on those who would change, efface, or destroy a record. The celebrated law code of Hammurabi famously invokes a series of curses on anyone who should tamper with the record. “[But] should that man…alter my engraved image, erase my inscribed name and inscribe his own name (in its place)…that man, whether he is a king, a lord, or a governor, or any person at all” would suffer divine curses from the Babylonian pantheon, according to the text’s epilogue.[7] Historically, record keepers used what twenty-first century observers might consider primitive and even awkward methods for record keeping. Laboring with often intensive care, they resorted to the media of their day, including stone, clay, metal, wood, animal skins, and papyrus, as reflected in the scriptures accepted by Latter-day Saints.

Stone Monuments

Some of the earliest texts that have survived in the archaeological record were made of stone and generally took two forms. One type of large stone record was the monument, something meant to stay in one place as part of the landscape or an edifice (such as a temple or palace). The other type of stone record, ranging from light to heavy, was meant to be portable and usually took the form of chiseled rock.

The Old Testament patriarch Jacob, the son of Isaac and grandson of Abraham, made a covenant with his father-in-law Laban, who proposed that they erect a stone monument to memorialize their covenant. “Come now, let us make a covenant, you and I,” Laban invited Jacob, “and let it be a witness between you and me.” The narrative explains that “Jacob took a stone, and set it up as a pillar. And Jacob said to his kinsfolk, ‘Gather stones,’ and they took stones, and made a heap; and they ate there by the heap.” During what could be described as a ritual meal,[8] Laban is reported to have said, “This heap [of stone] is a witness between you and me today” (Gen. 31:44–48). The significance of this passage is the use of a stone pillar (Heb.: הבצמ)[9] as a sign or token of the covenant entered into by Jacob and Laban.[10] Although the text does not specify that anything in particular was written on this pillar, its use as a memorial seems to link it with other media (e.g. written records) used to preserve or memorialize significant events. This is only to be expected, as Lee I. Levine explains that maṣṣēbôt anciently “served as memorials, legal monuments, commemorative markers, or objects of worship and veneration for cultic purposes.”[11]

Later in Genesis, after Jacob left Laban and journeyed from Paddan-aram to Canaan, the Lord renewed the Abrahamic covenant with him, as noted in Genesis 35: “God said to him, ‘Your name is Jacob; no longer shall you be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name.’ So he was called Israel.” After receiving his new name, Jacob, now Israel, was blessed as follows, “God said to him, ‘I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall spring from you. The land that I gave to Abraham and Isaac I will give to you, and I will give the land to your offspring after you.’” After receiving his blessing from God, Israel then commenced to erect another stone pillar, just as he had done after making his covenant with Laban. “Jacob set up a pillar in the place where he had spoken with him, a pillar of stone; and he poured out a drink-offering on it, and poured oil on it. So Jacob called the place where God had spoken with him Bethel” (Gen. 35:10–15). As in Genesis 31, the Hebrew of Genesis 35 employs הבצמ and ןבא תבצמ for “stone” and “pillar of stone” respectively. The covenantal/ritual significance of Jacob receiving a new name at a location that literally translates as “house of El” (לא־תיב) will not be missed by attentive Latter-day Saint readers. Nor will the attentive reader fail to see that Jacob’s behavior in erecting another stone memorial, accompanied by offering libations, casts this passage in definite covenantal terms.

Many generations later, after the children of Israel sojourned in Egypt and wandered in the wilderness, they finally passed over the Jordan River into the promised land under the leadership of Joshua, for whom the Lord replicated the miracle of parting the Red Sea by parting the Jordan River as priests bearing the ark of the covenant entered the stream:

When the entire nation had finished crossing over the Jordan, the Lord said to Joshua: “Select twelve men from the people, one from each tribe, and command them, ‘Take twelve stones from here out of the middle of the Jordan, from the place where the priests’ feet stood, carry them over with you, and lay them down in the place where you camp tonight.’” Then Joshua summoned the twelve men from the Israelites, whom he had appointed, one from each tribe. Joshua said to them, “Pass on before the ark of the Lord your God into the middle of the Jordan, and each of you take up a stone on his shoulder, one for each of the tribes of the Israelites, so that this may be a sign among you. When your children ask in time to come, ‘What do those stones mean to you?’ then you shall tell them that the waters of the Jordan were cut off in front of the ark of the covenant of the Lord. When it crossed over the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan were cut off. So these stones shall be to the Israelites a memorial for ever.” The Israelites did as Joshua commanded. They took up twelve stones out of the middle of the Jordan, according to the number of the tribes of the Israelites, as the Lord told Joshua, carried them over with them to the place where they camped, and laid them down there. (Joshua set up twelve stones in the middle of the Jordan, in the place where the feet of the priests bearing the ark of the covenant had stood; and they are there to this day.) (Josh. 4:1–9)

Although the text does not employ the familiar Hebrew noun הבצמ to describe this stone memorial (instead it uses the Hebrew word תוא—“sign,” “token,” or “omen”), as it does with the accounts of Jacob’s covenant ceremonies with Laban and God, the stones in this passage effectively serve the same purpose. They served as a memorial for the occasion, or otherwise to signify the importance of the event for future generations, as is made clear in the text.

After Joshua led his people into the Promised Land, and after he and the Israelites had victoriously overcome their Canaanite rivals, he issued an ultimatum and put the children of Israel who chose to do so under a covenant of their own free will. “Now if you are unwilling to serve the Lord,” Joshua instructed, “choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served in the region beyond the River or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord” (Josh. 24:15). In response to this directive, as well as to Joshua’s command to “put away the foreign gods that are among you” (Josh. 24:23), the Israelites proclaimed, “The Lord our God we will serve, and him we will obey” (Josh. 24:24). Wasting no time, Joshua “wrote these words in the book of the law of God; and he took a large stone, and set it up there under the oak in the sanctuary of the Lord,” informing the Israelites that “this stone shall be a witness against us; for it has heard all the words of the Lord that he spoke to us; therefore it shall be a witness against you, if you deal falsely with your God” (Josh. 24:26–27).

Most striking about this passage is that Joshua wrote both the words of the covenant and the people’s response on a רפס or scroll, as well as commissioned a stone memorial to act as a witness of the event.[12] As with Joseph Smith later, Joshua evidently understood the importance of recording the transaction of the covenant in some kind of record, which presumably would have served as additional testimony against the people should they fail to uphold their covenant obligations.

In subsequent generations, as the Israelites faced battle with their perennial nemesis, the Philistines, the prophet Samuel offered a sacrifice, as recorded in 1 Samuel 7. “So Samuel took a sucking lamb and offered it as a whole burnt-offering to the Lord; Samuel cried out to the Lord for Israel, and the Lord answered him. As Samuel was offering up the burnt-offering, the Philistines drew near to attack Israel; but the Lord thundered with a mighty voice that day against the Philistines and threw them into confusion; and they were routed before Israel” (1 Sam. 7:9–10).

This victory—granted to the Israelites in a supernatural display of godly power on account of their faithfulness—prompted Samuel to erect a stone monument commemorating their deliverance. “Then Samuel took a stone and set it up between Mizpah and Jeshanah, and named it Ebenezer; for he said, ‘Thus far the Lord has helped us’” (1 Sam. 7:12). As we see from this passage, the erection of a stone memorial in ancient Israel could serve not only as a sign or token for a covenant, but also an expression of gratitude for divine aid.

Portable Stone Records

In addition to using large stone monuments to memorialize covenants, ancient peoples employed stone for making portable records. The most famous example of this use, of course, was the stone tables on which were written the law revealed by God on Sinai, as noted in several scriptural passages, including Exodus 24. “The Lord said to Moses, ‘Come up to me on the mountain, and wait there; and I will give you the tablets of stone [Heb.: ןבאה תחל], with the law and the commandment, which I have written for their instruction’” (Exod. 24:12).

The use of stone to record God’s law undoubtedly served a pragmatic purpose, which was preservation. But it may also have had covenantal significance, serving as a witness of the covenant entered into between Israel and God. This is reinforced later in the book of Exodus, where these tablets are explicitly identified as “tablets of the covenant, tablets of stone” (Exod. 31:18; Heb.: ןבא תחל תדעה תחל).

But the stone tables received by Moses were not the only portable stone records or inscriptions mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. Exodus 28 describes inscribed stones on the ephod, part of the ancient Israelite high priest’s temple regalia. “You shall take two onyx stones, and engrave on them the names of the sons of Israel, six of their names on one stone, and the names of the remaining six on the other stone, in the order of their birth” (Exod. 28:9–10). Significantly, the text of Exodus makes it clear that the engraver of the names on the stones of the ephod was to work “[a]s a gem-cutter [who] engraves signets” (Exod. 28:11), leaving little ambiguity as to what the process was in the creation of the ephod. There is likewise little ambiguity what purpose these stone inscriptions served in the temple system of worship. “You shall set the two stones on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod, as stones of remembrance for the sons of Israel; and Aaron shall bear their names before the Lord on his two shoulders for remembrance” (Exod. 28:12). Thus, the high priest’s holy vestures contained a stone memorial or record of the children of Israel by name.

One final example of the use of stone as a writing material is in Deuteronomy 27. The text relates that “Moses and all the elders of Israel charged all the people” of the house of Israel to write “the words of this law” on “large stones” (Heb.: תולדג םינבא) when they had crossed over the Jordan (Deut. 27:2–3). These stones were to be placed “on Mount Ebal” next to an altar, in what would effectively become a worship site for the Israelites (Deut. 27:4).

In turning to the archeological record, we find ready confirmation that stone was used abundantly in the ancient Near East as a writing material. “Monumental inscriptions on stone, often associated with reliefs, are well attested in Anatolia, N Syria, Persia, Phoenicia, and Egypt,” according to André Lemaire.[13] In particular, the use of the stele (Gk.: ἡ στήλη; “upright stone”)[14] to record monumental inscriptions, as well as sundry smaller stone inscriptions, is so widely attested in the ancient Near East that to list every example would be tedious. Here are just a few examples that are pertinent to the Bible:

- The famous Tell Dan Stele, discovered at Tell Dan in northern Israel in 1993 and dating to the 8th century BCE, contains the earliest extra-biblical reference to the “house of David.” The stele is one of the most important pieces of evidence for the historicity of the Davidic kingdom.[15]

- The Moabite Stone, also known as the Mesha Inscription, chronicles “the details of the military actions of Mesha king of Moab, contemporary with Ahab king of Israel and Jehoshaphat and Jehoram, kings of Judah.”[16] It was inscribed on a black basalt stele and besides offering an important glimpse into ancient Moabite history serves as the “earliest occurrence of the name of Israel’s god [Yahweh] in an inscription.” It dates to the mid-9th century BCE.[17]

- Although not technically a stele, the Siloam inscription, which documents the efforts of king Hezekiah of Judah’s engineers to create a water tunnel to connect the pool of Siloam in Jerusalem with the Gihon Spring, is an important text written on “the lower half of a prepared [stone] panel” and dates to circa 700 BCE. It is almost certainly “a product of Hezekiah’s reign.”[18] The text, which also serves as an important specimen of pre-exilic Hebrew script, “was inscribed in beautiful letters in straight lines on the lower half of a rectangular area in the rock that had been smoothed beforehand.”[19]

- The celebrated victory stele of pharaoh Merneptah, son of Ramses II, provides crucial information on the formation of Israel in the late Bronze Age. Discovered in 1896 in Thebes by the eccentric Sir Flinders Petrie, this stele commemorates the military victories of Merneptah in Libya and the Levant (circa 1211–1208 BCE) and contains “the earliest occurrence of [the name] Israel outside of the Bible.” This reference to Israel “has considerable interest for biblical historians as they attempt to explain Israel’s origins in Canaan apart from the Bible.” This interest is largely due to the fact that “the writing of Israel uses the determinative (semantic indicator) for an ethnic group, and not for a geographic region or city. This scenario is in complete agreement with the picture portrayed in the books of Joshua and Judges, viz. the Israelites had no clearly defined political capital city, but were distributed over a region.”[20] John A. Wilson likewise comments that the stele “seem[s] to have the Children of Israel in or near Palestine” at the end of the 13th century BCE, “but not yet as a settled people. This would have important bearing on the date of the Conquest.”[21]

As these examples show, some of our most important non-biblical texts that elucidate or provide some level of historical context to parts of the Bible were recorded on stone.

Outside of the biblical tradition, Latter-day Saints are familiar with examples in their unique Restoration scriptures of recording texts on stone. The Book of Mormon, for instance, mentions an engraved stone record containing an account of the Jaredites. “And it came to pass in the days of Mosiah, there was a large stone brought unto him with engravings on it; and he did interpret the engravings by the gift and power of God. And they gave an account of one Coriantumr, and the slain of his people.…It also spake a few words concerning his fathers. And his first parents came out from the tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people” (Omni 20–22). Archaeologically, as John L. Sorenson and others have noted, the use of stone as writing material is well attested in ancient Mesoamerica.[22]

Clay Tablets

Stone, of course, was heavy and difficult to engrave. Ancient Near Eastern peoples discovered how to make records in soft clay to create tablets (often firing them in the process). Surviving clay tablets help clarify the culture of Old Testament times.[23] Often, these tablets were impressed with seals, with the intention of giving the record official sanction or approval. The use of clay as a writing material is so abundant from the archaeological record that it is unnecessary to list examples here. Levantine and Mesopotamian cultures (e.g. Ugarit, Assyria, and Babylonia) in particular stand out as notable for their large corpuses of clay tablet records.

Many Latter-day Saints know the famous passage in Job 38 in which the Lord speaks to Job out of the whirlwind and asks where he was “when the morning stars sang together and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy” (Job 38:7). The same chapter describes how the Lord created and controls the earth and its systems, comparing that to how a record keeper controls clay and impresses it with a seal. The Lord asks Job, “Have you commanded the morning since your days began, and caused the dawn to know its place, so that it might take hold of the skirts of the earth, and the wicked be shaken out of it? It is changed like clay under the seal, and it is dyed like a garment” (Job 38:12–14). Some commentators think this verse refers to a practice of applying a lump of clay to letters made of other materials and using a signet to impress it with a seal.[24]

To Latter-day Saints, there is meaningful symbolism in being “sealed” by the Lord, thereby taking his name, a reminder of the tie between record keeping and the validity of ordinances.

Metal

Latter-day Saint sacred history includes accounts of records being kept anciently on metal plates. The best-known example is the story of the Book of Mormon, which Joseph Smith testified was engraved on gold plates. In addition to this well-known example, the narrative of the Book of Mormon refers to other records kept anciently on metal plates. In Mosiah 8, for example, King Limhi refers to gold plates kept by the Jaredite people. “I caused that forty and three of my people should take a journey into the wilderness,” the king informs the Nephite missionary Ammon.

And they were lost in the wilderness for the space of many days, yet they were diligent, and found not the land of Zarahemla but returned to this land, having traveled in a land among many waters, having discovered a land which was covered with bones of men, and of beasts, and was also covered with ruins of buildings of every kind, having discovered a land which had been peopled with a people who were as numerous as the hosts of Israel. And for a testimony that the things that they had said are true they have brought twenty-four plates which are filled with engravings, and they are of pure gold. (Mosiah 8:7–9)

Metal plates abound elsewhere in the Book of Mormon narrative,[25] such as the brass plates that Nephi recovered from Laban. They are described by Nephi as containing “the record of the Jews and also a genealogy of my forefathers” (1 Ne. 3:3). Besides acquiring the brass plates, Nephi made two sets of plates for his and his family’s records. The first was the large plates, which he said contained “the record of my father, and also our journeyings in the wilderness, and the prophecies of my father; and also many of mine own prophecies” (1 Ne. 19:1). Then there were the small plates, which Nephi said contained “an account of my proceedings in my days” and “an abridgment of the record of my father” (1 Ne. 1:17).

Some Latter-day Saints might be surprised to find gold plates in the Bible as well. Exodus 28 includes the command to add a gold plate to the high priest’s temple clothing. “And thou shalt make a plate of pure gold, and grave upon it, like the engravings of a signet, HOLINESS TO THE LORD. And thou shalt put it on a blue lace, that it may be upon the mitre; upon the forefront of the mitre it shall be” (KJV Exod. 28:36–37). “Holiness to the Lord” appears on the exterior of Latter-day Saint temples throughout the world, hearkening back to the priestly ordinances of ancient Israel.

The use of metal as a writing material occurs elsewhere in the Old Testament as well. In one of the prophet Isaiah’s early oracles, the Lord instructed him to “take a large tablet and write on it” with a ḥereṭ (Isa. 8:1). A ḥereṭ (Heb.: טרח), is more than a simple pen. It is a stylus, and in later Hebrew means “to chisel.”[26] According to Kevin Barney, it “is not a ‘pen’ in the sense of an instrument that would use ink but rather a stylus that engraves in a hard surface.” Barney also notes that this “tablet” (Heb.: ןוילג) on which the Lord commanded Isaiah to write appears not to have been “a papyrus or leather scroll but rather a tablet of some kind, whether of metal, stone, or wood.”[27] It appears that in the context of Isaiah 8:1 and Exodus 32:4, a ḥereṭ is a stylus, not a pen, as the KJV translates it. Accordingly, Donald Parry, writing for The New Interpreter’s Bible Dictionary, notes that a ḥereṭ is “a graving-tool or stylus for inscribing stone or metal. Aaron employed this tool when fashioning the calf (Exod. 32:4), as well did Isaiah when he inscribed a tablet (Isa. 8:1).”[28]

The Apocrypha, which is derived from the ancient Greek translation of the Bible known today as the Septuagint and included in Roman Catholic and Orthodox scriptural canons (as well as the 1611 KJV and Joseph Smith’s 1828 Phinney Bible, for that matter), contains another example of metal plates being used as a writing medium. In their attempt to stop “the Greeks [from] enslaving Israel completely” during the Maccabean-Seleucid conflict of the mid-second century BCE, Judas Maccabeus sent an envoy to Rome in hopes of “establish[ing] friendship and alliance” with the powerful ancient state (1 Macc. 8:17). Accordingly, the Jewish envoys “went to Rome, a very long journey; and they entered the senate chamber and spoke as follows: ‘Judas, who is also called Maccabeus, and his brothers and the people of the Jews have sent us to you to establish alliance and peace with you, so that we may be enrolled as your allies and friends.’”

Impressed with the Jewish delegation, the Romans agreed to enter a treaty with the Maccabean forces, and sent “a copy of the letter that they wrote in reply, on bronze tablets (ἐπὶ δέλτοις χαλκαῖς), and sent to Jerusalem to remain with them there as a memorial of peace and alliance” (1 Macc. 8:22). As Daniel J. Harrington clarifies, “The original treaty is said to have been inscribed on bronze tablets and kept in Rome. The copy was presumably written in Latin or Greek, translated into Hebrew in the original version of 1 Maccabees, and translated [back] into Greek in the extant text of 1 Maccabees.”[29] This example further shows that metal was used later in the ancient world as a writing medium, including for documents of diplomatic or national importance.[30] Indeed, 1 Maccabees records additional instances of bronze plates being used for important writings. 1 Maccabees 14 records the renewal of a diplomatic alliance between Rome and Sparta under Simon, who replaced his brother Jonathan as high priest and became ruler “over the country and the towns in it” (1 Macc. 14:16–17). As part of this diplomatic renewal, Rome (and evidently also Sparta) “wrote to [Simon] on bronze tablets to renew with him the friendship and alliance that they had established with his brothers Judas and Jonathan.” These bronze tablets, the text explains, “were read before the assembly in Jerusalem” (1 Macc. 14:18–19). Bronze tablets are also described as having been used as a writing medium for different occasions later in the same chapter (1 Macc. 14:25–27, 46–49).

Archaeological evidence for the use of metal as a writing medium has been found throughout the Mediterranean region. Although the use of metal as a writing medium was rather limited when compared to papyri or stone, some important examples have survived.

- The Ketef Hinnom scrolls are two small silver amulets, discovered in 1980 by Gabriel Barkay, that “include blessings almost identical to the so-called priestly or aaronid Benediction of Num 6:24–26.” Although the dating of the scrolls is disputed, most scholars assign a pre-exilic date.[31]

- Among the corpus of texts discovered at Qumran is the so-called Copper Scroll (3Q15). As William J. Hamblin summarizes, “Although the origin and purpose of the Copper Scroll is widely debated, it is a clear example of an attempt to preserve an important sacred record by writing on copper/bronze (Heb. nechushah) plates and then hiding the document.”[32]

Numerous other examples of writing on metal or metal plates from the ancient Near East, including both Semitic and Greek inscriptions, are attested.[33]

Wood

Although far less frequently attested, the biblical text does speak of wood being used as a writing material. In the famous passage about Aaron’s miraculously sprouting rod or staff, Numbers 17 records:

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelites, and get twelve staffs [Heb.: הטמ] from them, one for each ancestral house, from all the leaders of their ancestral houses. Write each man’s name on his staff, and write Aaron’s name on the staff of Levi. For there shall be one staff for the head of each ancestral house. Place them in the tent of meeting before the covenant, where I meet with you. And the staff of the man whom I choose shall sprout; thus I will put a stop to the complaints of the Israelites that they continually make against you. (Num. 17:1–5)

Then there are the “sticks” of Ezekiel 37 that Latter-day Saints frequently cite and have cited since the nineteenth century.[34] The passage speaks of Ezekiel being commanded by the Lord to write on wood. “The word of the Lord came to me: Mortal, take a stick and write on it, ‘For Judah, and the Israelites associated with it’; then take another stick and write on it, ‘For Joseph (the stick of Ephraim) and all the house of Israel associated with it’; and join them together into one stick, so that they may become one in your hand” (Ezek. 37:15–17). The Hebrew word underlying the English “stick” is simply the word for “wood” or “tree” (Heb.: ץע). In addition, many books—including scriptures—up through the Middle Ages had text blocks that were sandwiched between slabs of wood, which helps explain why even today the core of the front and back covers of hardbound books are called “boards.”[35]

Unfortunately, because wood is a highly perishable material, there remains almost no archaeological evidence for the use of wood as a writing medium during biblical times. The vast majority of any wood media have long eroded in the climes of the Near East. That being said, a few examples have miraculously survived. As Lemaire explains, “Wooden tablets, often coated with stucco, were frequently used in Egypt, especially for schoolboys’ exercises. Such tablets have little chance of surviving in Mesopotamia or Syria-Palestine because of the climate. Only one example is known from Palestine: a letter sent by Bar Kosiba/Kokhba and found in Nahal Hever.”[36] Wooden tablets have also been recovered from the oasis of Dakhla, attesting to the use of wood as a writing medium in the classical era.[37] Also attested in the archaeological record are a precious few wax-coated wooden writing boards used “in Assyria and N Syria in the 8th century B.C.”[38] It is possible that these Assyrian wax-coated wooden writing boards are the type of “sticks” used by the prophet in Ezekiel 37, as has been suggested by one Latter-day Saint scholar.[39]

Animal Skins

Another common writing material in antiquity was animal skin, referred to generally as parchment.[40] Several Bible verses refer to frontlets or phylacteries, described in the Latter-day Saint Bible Dictionary as “[s]trips of parchment on which were written four passages of scriptures (Exod. 13:1–10, 11–16; Deut. 6:5–9; 11:13–21) and that were rolled up and attached to bands of leather worn (as an act of obedience to Exod. 13:9, 16; Deut. 6:8; 11:18) around the forehead or around the arm.”[41] Parchment was also used in early Christian times, as evidenced in the New Testament. In writing to his friend and missionary companion Timothy, the apostle Paul asked him not only to bring some clothing but “also the books, and above all the parchments [Gk.: τὰ βιβλία μάλιστα τὰς μεμβράνας]” (2 Tim. 4:13). This passage is significant in that it distinguishes between papyrus scrolls and animal skin parchment as writing media. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, it is interesting to study the headnote to Doctrine and Covenants section 7, which explains that the section is a “Revelation given to Joseph Smith the Prophet and Oliver Cowdery, at Harmony, Pennsylvania, April 1829, when they inquired through the Urim and Thummim as to whether John, the beloved disciple, tarried in the flesh or had died. The revelation is a translated version of the record made on parchment by John and hidden up by himself.”

Papyrus

Papyrus served as one of the most common writing media in biblical Israel and throughout the ancient Mediterranean world.[42] “It is likely that the biblical texts were [originally] written on papyrus or leather scrolls,” observes Paul D. Wegner.[43] The evidence for this comes not only from the archaeological record but also from the text of the Bible itself, which speaks repeatedly of scrolls or rolls (e.g. Ezra 6:1; Isa. 34:4; Jer. 36:14; Ezek. 2:9–10; Zech. 5:1; Rev. 6:14).

The example of writing on papyrus in Jeremiah 36 serves as one of the best examples in the biblical text. In this chapter, Jeremiah was commanded to “take a scroll and write on it all the words that I have spoken (Jer. 36:2). Accordingly, Jeremiah employed a scribe, Baruch, who wrote “on a scroll at Jeremiah’s dictation” (Jer. 36:4). This scroll was written “with ink,” and subsequently reproduced when king Johiakim burned the first scroll out of frustration (Jer. 36:18, 20–32). The word used for “scroll” in the Hebrew text is sēper and means “writing, inscription.” It commonly translated as “scroll” throughout the Bible.[44] That this scroll was made of papyrus or leather is evident in king Jehoiakim’s ability to “cut [the scroll] with a penknife and throw [it] into the fire” (Jer. 36:23), a feat that would have been impossible with metal or stone.

As with the numerous archaeological examples of texts being written on stone and clay, the examples of texts being written on papyrus are so abundant that it would take an inordinate amount of time to describe every single known instance, and a whole sub-discipline (papyrology) in ancient Near Eastern studies has developed to catalogue and study the abundance of surviving papyri from the ancient world. Indeed, the very word for “Bible” comes from the Greek τά βιβλία (“the books”), which is also the Greek word for “papyrus.”[45] Papyrus in particular was used throughout the span of Egypt’s history, and frequently exported to neighboring locales. “The proximity of Palestine to Egypt made papyrus easy to obtain there, all the more so during the [Late Bronze] period, when Canaan was an Egyptian protectorate,” notes Lemaire.[46]

The earliest complete extant biblical manuscripts thus far discovered are among the Dead Sea Scrolls. They date from circa 150 BCE to 68 CE.[47] The materials used in the composition of these manuscripts include both papyrus and tanned leather, and were collected as both individual sheets and bound scrolls.[48] Besides the Qumran manuscripts, the overwhelming number of biblical manuscripts (besides a few ostraca) that have survived from the Hellenistic period onward into the Christian era are written on papyrus, parchment, and early forms of paper. Given the fact that papyrus sheets were, relatively speaking, easily manufactured—as well as the fact that papyrus was relatively cheap—papyrus, and later parchment, served as an extremely common writing medium in antiquity.[49]

Pottery Sherds

Like papyrus, broken pieces of ceramic pots, called ostraca (Gk.: ὄστρακα), were used abundantly in the ancient Near East to record numerous texts, from administrative records and letters to receipts of exchange and commerce.[50] “Since ostraca are virtually indestructible,” notes Lawrence E. Toombs, “numerous examples have been found by archaeologists.”[51] Perhaps the ostraca best well known to Latter-day Saints, thanks to the work of Hugh Nibley and subsequent Latter-day Saint scholars,[52] are the Lachish letters, written on the eve of the Babylonian conquest of Judah in the early 6th century BCE.[53] Of these letters, the so-called Hošayahu letters provide great insight into the military situation of Judah shortly before the Jewish diaspora.[54]

This review of ancient record-keeping media is by no means exhaustive. Rather, it is meant to illustrate broadly the sort of technology used by ancient peoples to write and preserve their most important inscriptions and texts. Much more could be said about each of these different kinds of writing material, as well as other forms of material (e.g. bone and linen mummy wrappings), and their use anciently for record keeping. Notwithstanding, these examples illustrate what record-keeping technology was like anciently. They also demonstrate how seriously the ancient peoples viewed the records that they kept.

Record Keeping in the Modern Church

Record-keeping technologies in ancient times provide an interesting comparison and background to record-keeping technologies used over the course of the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, beginning with its founding in 1830 by Joseph Smith.

Paper

The most common technology used for records in Joseph Smith’s day was paper impressed with ink applied by a pen or printing press.[55] When Joseph Smith dictated his translation of the record contained on the golden plates, scribes recorded his dictation on paper. In terms of volume, paper constitutes the principal medium for most of the records contained in the Church History Library today.[56]

Metal

Some records of the restored church appear on some of the same types of mediums as were used anciently, including stone and metal. For example, some early photographs were captured on metal. The earliest commercially viable photographic technology was the daguerreotype, invented in 1839 in France. Nelson B. Wadsworth, an expert on early Latter-day Saint photography, has described how daguerreotypes captured images on metal.

“Basically,” he explains, “the daguerreotype was a silver-coated copper plate polished to a high luster and sensitized in a box by vapors of iodine.…After the plate was exposed in a camera…, development was achieved by heating mercury to 167 degrees and subjecting the plate to the resulting vapor.”[57] The Church History Library in Salt Lake City holds daguerreotypes of early Church leaders, such as Brigham Young and Eliza R. Snow, as well as of the Nauvoo Temple and of the groundbreaking for the Salt Lake Temple.[58]

A later form of metal photograph is the tintype, which, as Wadsworth describes, “was made on black japanned iron.…Tintypes, most with a grayish cast, were easily colored and were made in a variety of sizes, often larger than daguerreotypes.”[59] The wide-ranging photograph collections in the Church History Library in Salt Lake City include tintypes too.[60]

Glass

As technology advanced, metal photographs gave way to images captured on glass and paper.[61] Nelson Wadsworth explains, “Wet plate photography came to Utah in the late 1850s and made the daguerreotype obsolete. The first wet plate images were called ambrotypes and were often referred to as ‘daguerreotypes on glass.’ They were actually small glass negatives converted to positives and placed in miniature daguerreotype cases.”[62] The Church History Library in Salt Lake City and the Church-owned Brigham Young University in Provo hold numerous glass plates used as negatives for photographs during succeeding decades of the church’s history.[63]

Film

Over time, plastic film replaced glass as the main medium for photographic negatives and slides. It also became the medium for motion pictures. Motion pictures were originally silent.[64] In October 1916, the Clawson Film Company took silent footage of the Latter-day Saint general conference in Salt Lake City on 35mm nitrate film stock. As audiovisual archivist Christine Marin points out, “From 1919 to 1929 the Clawsons recorded moving film images of Church leaders such as Joseph F. Smith, Heber J. Grant, George Albert Smith, David O. McKay, and Joseph Fielding Smith walking outside the Salt Lake Temple and Church Administration Building.” Regrettably, much of the Clawsons’ film footage went up in flames in 1929, though precious pieces remain in the Church History Library.[65]

The Church History Library also has later film recordings, such as of the first general conference television broadcast in 1949 and the live satellite broadcast of conference on April 6, 1980 to mark the Church’s sesquicentennial.[66]

In 1938 the Church adopted microfilm technology as a means of capturing genealogical information. Over time, the Granite Mountain Records Vault, a record preservation facility for the Church in a canyon southeast of Salt Lake City, came to contain some 2.4 million reels of microfilm.[67]

Wax

In the latter part of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Thomas Edison and others discovered how to capture sound on metal foil, wax, and plastic. The earliest known sound recordings by a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are wax cylinder recordings that captured the voice of Church president Wilford Woodruff as he spoke into a “talking machine” in March 1897.[68]

Shellac and Vinyl

Popular as they were at the time, cylinders eventually gave way to recording disks. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir made its first sound recordings in 1910 using acoustic equipment. Sound that was funneled into a recording horn vibrated a needle that made impressions on a wax master that was taken to New York and used to create shellac records.[69] These were “78 rpm 10-inch records with one song per side.”[70]

As time marched on, these disk technologies were replaced by ever more dense recordings on better materials, such as vinyl. Throughout much of the twentieth century, the Tabernacle Choir issued its recordings on vinyl disks.[71]

Tape

Eventually, magnetic tape superseded vinyl recordings as the preferred technology for recording sound and video. Reel-to-reel recordings gave way, for the most part, to cassette tapes. The Church History Library in Salt Lake City has decades of magnetic reels and tapes of various sizes and types that record historical events and interviews with Church members.[72]

Magnetic Disks

In the relentless progress of technology, magnetic tape for some purposes over time gave way to magnetic disks. Many readers of this article will recall the familiar 5.25 and 3.5 inch versions that were used with personal computers in the late twentieth century. As the Church automated with the rest of the world, numerous such disks were used to store information at Church headquarters.

CDs, DVDs, and Flash Drives

Magnet media was ultimately replaced with compact disks, DVDs, flash drives, and other technologies that should be familiar to technologically savvy readers. All of these have been employed not only at the Church’s headquarters in Salt Lake City but also in area offices and many local units around the world.

The Future of Record Keeping in the Church

The multi-millennium survey in this paper exposes an imposing challenge for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and every other institution that seeks to preserve its records. Generally, the more record-keeping technology has advanced, the shorter the shelf life has become for the new media.

The earliest surviving media—stone, baked clay, and metal—were inorganic and could last tens or even hundreds of thousands of years, depending on storage conditions. Organic media like wood, animal skins, papyrus, and paper might last hundreds or thousands of years, again depending on original quality and storage conditions, though low-quality media like highly acidic paper can deteriorate much more quickly. Glass can last for thousands of years, though given its fragile nature, it tends to break. Shellac and vinyl records are also fragile, making the practical lifetimes of these items more like hundreds or just tens of years. Magnetic tape deteriorates in tens of years. Disks like CDs and DVDs, for the most part, cannot be reliably trusted for more than just a few years.

In order to employ modern technology to preserve digital records in perpetuity, the Church and other institutions may need to think of records in different terms. In the past, a record has often been considered to be the combination of (1) the information it contains and (2) the medium on which it is recorded. Both elements have been considered important. Given the transient nature of digital media today, more emphasis in the future will probably be given to the information and less to the medium.

With pre-digital technologies, each subsequent copy of a record—whether paper, film, or tape—generally lost quality in the copying. That meant records on original media were of better quality than copies on later media. Today, however, digital technology makes it theoretically possible to make perfect copies without a loss of quality. By making multiple copies of digital records and copying them to new media as they develop, it may be possible to preserve the information in a record perpetually with virtually no degradation.

Already, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has begun storing digital records in a modern Digital Records Preservation System that keeps duplicate copies in multiple locations to help assure their preservation in the event of a natural or man-made disaster.

Conclusion

Given the importance of record keeping in Latter-day Saint theology, historians and record keepers in the Church will continue to preserve records kept to date using old technologies and will continue to track new technologies to see what they can offer in the future. A now canonized epistle of Joseph Smith to the Saints of his day contains doctrine that they will continue to find relevant: “There is much which lieth in futurity, pertaining to the saints, that depends upon these things” (D&C 123:15).

Richard E. Turley Jr. is the managing director of the Public Affairs Department and the former assistant Church historian and recorder for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. His career includes twenty-two years managing the church’s history operations and record-keeping functions. He has helped guide the acquisition, preservation, and sharing of Church history and family history records and the development of digital record-keeping systems, including at the Family History Library, Church History Library, Church History Museum, and Granite Mountain Records Vault.

Stephen O. Smoot graduated cum laude from Brigham Young University with Bachelor of Arts degrees in ancient Near Eastern studies and German studies. He is currently pursuing graduate studies in Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations (with a concentration in Egyptology) at the University of Toronto. He has published on Latter-day Saint scripture and history with such venues as the Religious Studies Center at BYU, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, and the Interpreter Foundation. His areas of academic interest include the Hebrew Bible, ancient Egyptian history and religion, Mormon studies, and German Romanticism.

1 The text originally read: “Behold there Shall a Record be kept among you.” In preparing the revelation for publication, editor John Whitmer revised the text to read, “Behold there Shall be a Record kept among you.” Robin Scott Jensen, Robert J. Woodford, and Steven C. Harper, eds., Manuscript Revelation Books, facsimile edition, first volume of the Revelations and Translations series of The Joseph Smith Papers, ed. Dean C. Jessee, Ronald K. Esplin, and Richard Lyman Bushman (Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2009), 27. Whitmer and his fellow editors had authority from the church’s Literary Firm to “make all necessary verbal corrections” to the text for publication. See the April 30, 1832, minutes of the firm in Far West Record: Minutes of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1830–1844, ed. Donald Q. Cannon and Lyndon W. Cook (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1983), 46. There were limits, however, to the editors’ authority to change the wording of the revelations. “I will exhort you,” Joseph Smith wrote, “to be careful not to alter the sense of any of them for he that adds or diminishes to the prophecies must come under the condemnation written therein.” Joseph Smith Jr. to William W. Phelps, July 31, 1832, in Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, revised edition, ed. Dean C. Jessee (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2002), 273.

2 See Charles P. Adams and Gustive O. Larsen, “A Study of the LDS Church Historian’s Office, 1830–1900,” Utah Historical Quarterly 40, no. 4 (Fall 1972): 370-89; Glenn N. Rowe, “The Historical Department and Library of the LDS Church,” in Mormon Americana: A Guide to Sources and Collections in the United States, ed. David J. Whittaker (Provo, UT: BYU Studies, 1995), 154-71; James B. Allen, Jessie L. Embry, and Kahlile B. Mehr, Hearts Turned to the Fathers: A History of the Genealogical Society of Utah, 1894–1994 (Provo, UT: BYU Studies, 1995). On the change of the church’s name, see D&C 115.

3 R. Scott Lloyd, “‘A Record Kept’ Among His People,” LDS Church News, June 27, 2009, 3, 5.

4 All biblical citations are from the New Revised Standard Version unless otherwise noted.

5 Gospel Principles (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2009), 275–80; Handbook 2: Administering the Church (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2010), 1.1.2, 1.1.5, 1.2, 1.3.1, 20.1. The church’s official handbook explains, “The ordinances of baptism, confirmation, Melchizedek Priesthood ordination (for men), the temple endowment, and temple sealing are required for exaltation for all accountable persons. These are called the saving ordinances.” Handbook 2: Administering the Church, 20.1.

6 Richard E. Turley Jr. and William W. Slaughter, How We Got the Doctrine and Covenants (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2012), 85, 87; Lyndon W. Cook, The Revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith: A Historical and Biographical Commentary of the Doctrine and Covenants (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1985), 239. The original of this letter and a transcript is viewable at http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-the-church-and-edward-partridge-20-march-1839/1.

7 Martha T. Roth, Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1995), 135–140, quote at 136.

8 On the phenomenon of “commensality,” or communal feasting, in the ancient Near East, see Ronan James Head, “The Politics of Feasting in the Ancient Near East,” in By Our Rites of Worship: Latter-day Saint Views on Ritual in Scripture, History, and Practice, ed. Daniel L. Belnap (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, BYU, 2013), 69–82.

9 For an overview of the הבצמ in the biblical record, see Dale W. Manor, “Massebah,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 4:602.

10 Manor describes Jacob’s הבצמ in Gen. 31 as one example of the הבצמ (cf. Exod. 24:3–8) being used to signify “the completion of a ceremonial covenant agreement.” See Manor, “Massebah,” 4:602. Miles V. Van Pelt notes that the Hebrew and Aramaic names given by Jacob and Laban to the stone (דעלג and שׁאתודה רגיrespectively) “describe the covenantal function of the monument.” Miles V. Van Pelt, Basics of Biblical Aramaic: Complete Grammar, Lexicon, and Annotated Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), 165.

11 Lee I. Levine, Visual Judaism in Late Antiquity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012), 23.

12 Manor once again sees Joshua’s הבצמ in this passage as a witness of “the covenant renewal between YHWH and Israel.” See Manor, “Massebah,” 4:602.

13 André Lemaire, “Writing and Writing Materials,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 6:1001.

14 The Septuagint translates maṣṣēbâ as στήλη in the passages reviewed above, including Gen. 31 and 35.

15 Alan Millard, “The Tell Dan Stele,” in The Context of Scripture, Volume 2: Monumental Inscriptions from the Biblical World, ed. William W Hallo (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 161–62. See also André Lemaire, “The United Monarchy: Saul, David, and Solomon,” in Ancient Israel: From Abraham to the Roman Destruction of the Temple, 3rd edition, ed. Hershel Shanks (Washington, DC: Biblical Archaeology Society, 2011), 121, 134–35, 144, 152.

16 Shmuel Aḥituv, compiler, trans. Anson E. Rainey, Echoes from the Past: Hebrew and Cognate Inscriptions from the Biblical Period (Jerusalem: CARTA, 2008), 389.

17 K. A. D Smelik, “The Inscription of King Mesha,” in The Context of Scripture, Volume 2, 137–38, and note 17. See also Siegfried H. Horn and P. Kyle McCarter, Jr, “The Divided Monarchy: The Kingdoms of Judah and Israel,” in Ancient Israel, 144–46.

18 K. Lawson Younger, Jr., “The Siloam Tunnel Inscription,” in The Context of Scripture, Volume 2, 145–46. See also Siegfried H. Horn and P. Kyle McCarter, Jr, “The Divided Monarchy: The Kingdoms of Judah and Israel,” in Ancient Israel, 188–91.

19 Aḥituv, Echoes from the Past, 19.

20 James K Hoffmeier, “The (Israel) Stela of Merneptah,” in The Context of Scripture, Volume 2, 40–41.

21 John A. Wilson, “Hymn of Victory of Mer-ne-Ptah,” in The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures, ed. James B. Pritchard, revised edition (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011), 328.

22 John L. Sorenson, Images of Ancient America: Visualizing Book of Mormon Life (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998), 160; Mormon’s Codex: An Ancient American Book (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2013), 230–31; Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, Volume 3: Enos–Mosiah (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), 64.

23 Kerry M. Muhlestein, “From Clay Tablets to Canon: The Story of the Formation of Scripture,” in How the New Testament Came to Be: The Thirty-fifth Annual Sidney B. Sperry Symposium, ed. Kent P. Jackson and Frank F. Judd Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, BYU, 2006), 44–45.

24 For a discussion on the use of seals anciently, see B. S. J. Isserlin, The Israelites (London: Thames and Hudson, 1998), 226–28.

25 See the various entries in Dennis L. Largey, ed., Book of Mormon Reference Companion (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2003), 643–47; Grant R. Hardy, “Book of Mormon Plates and Records,” in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, ed. Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan, 1992), 1:195–201.

26 Ludwig Kohler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 1:352.

27 Kevin Barney, “A More Responsible Critique,” FARMS Review 15, no. 1 (2003): 107. Kohler and Baumgartner, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon, 1:193, indicate that the word has a range of meaning, from papyrus to tablet. It also seems to connote a fine garment or gauze. The fact that the Lord commands Isaiah to write with a ḥereṭ (טרחב), which appears to specifically be an engraving stylus, would lend plausibility to Barney’s contention that the medium is a stone or metal tablet.

28 Donald W. Parry, “Pen,” in The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, ed. Katharine Doob Sakenfeld (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2009), 4:430.

29 Daniel J. Harrington, “First Maccabees,” in The HarperCollins Study Bible, ed. Harold W. Attridge (San Francisco: HarperOne, 2006), 1499, emphasis in original.

30 Interestingly, specimens of inscribed Roman bronze plates have been recovered and documented. See John W. Welch and Kelsey D. Lambert, “Two Ancient Roman Plates,” BYU Studies 45, no. 2 (2006): 55–76. It is likely that the bronze tablets mentioned in 1 Maccabees were similar to those discussed by Welch and Lambert.

31 P. Kyle McCarter, “The Ketef Hinnom Amulets,” in The Context of Scripture, Volume 2, 221. See also King and Philip J. King and Lawrence E. Stager, Life in Biblical Israel (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 305–306.

32 William J. Hamblin, “Sacred Writing on Metal Plates in the Ancient Mediterranean,” FARMS Review 19, no. 1 (2007): 41. See also King and Stager, Life in Biblical Israel, 305.

33 Hamblin, “Sacred Writing on Metal Plates in the Ancient Mediterranean,” 42–52. As Hamblin, ibid. 52–53, concludes, “Based on these examples of Hebrew, Phoenician, Greek, and Italic practices, we can conclude that writing and preserving sacred bronze and gold plates was a widespread phenomenon in the eastern Mediterranean world.”

34 See D&C 27:5; Orson Pratt, Divine Authority, or the Question, Was Joseph Smith Sent of God? (Liverpool: R. James, 1848), 4; Franklin D. Richards discourse, October 5, 1895, as reported in Millennial Star 58, no. 9 (February 27, 1896): 129.

35 John Carter and Nicolas Barker, ABC for Book Collectors, 8th edition (New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll Press, 2006), 47–48.

36 Lemaire, “Writing and Writing Materials,” 1002.

37 Adam Bülow-Jacobsen, “Writing Materials in the Ancient World,” in The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology, ed. Roger S. Bagnall (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 12–13.

38 Lemaire, “Writing and Writing Materials,” 1002.

39 Keith H. Meservy, “Ezekiel’s Sticks and the Gathering of Israel,” Ensign, February 1987, 4–13.

40 Bülow-Jacobsen, “Writing Materials in the Ancient World,” 11.

41 Bible Dictionary, s.v. “Frontlets or phylacteries,” online at https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bd/frontlets?lang=eng.

42 See the discussion in Bülow-Jacobsen, “Writing Materials in the Ancient World,” 4–10.

43 Paul D. Wegner, A Student’s Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History, Methods & Results (Downer Groves, IL: IVP Academic, 2006), 62.

44 The meaning of this term, however, can range from “letter” or “document” to even “inscription” in both biblical and non-biblical usage.

45 James I. Cook, “Books and Bookmaking in Antiquity,” in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 93.

46 Lemaire, “Writing and Writing Materials,” 1003.

47 Donald W. Parry, Illuminating the Dead Sea Scrolls (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2014), 24.

48 Emanuel Tov, Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts Found in the Judean Desert (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 31–56.

49 Wegner, A Student’s Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible, 28, 62, 79–82, 150, 201, 208, 232–34, 304, 307.

50 Again see Bülow-Jacobsen, “Writing Materials in the Ancient World,” 14–17.

51 Lawrence E. Toombs, “Ostraca,” in Harper’s Bible Dictionary, ed. Paul J. Achtemeier (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 736.

52 Hugh Nibley, The Prophetic Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1989), 380–406; Dana M. Pike, “Israelite Inscriptions from the Time of Jeremiah and Lehi,” in Glimpses of Lehi’s Jerusalem, ed. John W. Welch, David Rolph Seely, and Jo Ann H. Seely (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2004), 205–210.

53 Aḥituv, Echoes from the Past, 59, dates the ostraca “to the conquest of the city by Nebuchadnezzar’s army in 586 BCE.”

54 See generally Aḥituv, Echoes from the Past, 56–91; Siegfried H. Horn and P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., “The Divided Monarchy,” in Ancient Israel, 201–05.

55 Ultimately, virtually all of the papers of Joseph Smith will be available for public view and searching on the Joseph Smith Papers website, josephsmithpapers.org. For an overview on the history and evolution of paper see Dard Hunter, Papermaking: The History and Technique of an Ancient Craft (New York: Dover, 1978).

56 See Behold, There Shall Be a Record Kept Among You: Collections of the Church History Library of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ed. Richard E. Turley Jr., et al. (Salt Lake City: Church History Library, 2009), 8–25, 36–41.

57 Nelson B. Wadsworth, Set in Stone, Fixed in Glass: The Great Mormon Temple and Its Photographers (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1992), 20.

58 William W. Slaughter, Life in Zion: An Intimate Look at the Latter-day Saints, 1820–1995 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1995), 18, 24, 33, 185–86; Nelson B. Wadsworth, Through Camera Eyes (Provo, UT: BYU Press, 1975), 45, 49.

59 Wadsworth, Set in Stone, Fixed in Glass, 33–34.

60 William W. Slaughter, “Photographs. ‘Like Apples of God in Pictures of Silver,’” in Behold, There Shall Be a Record Kept Among You, 28.

61 Beaumont Newhall, The History of Photography: From 1839 to the Present (New York: Little, Brown and Co., 1982).

62 Wadsworth, Set in Stone, Fixed in Glass, 28.

63 Wadsworth, Through Camera Eyes, 117–70; Slaughter, “Photographs,” 28.

64 Newhall, The History of Photography, 121–30.

65 Christine R. Marin, “Audiovisual Materials. ‘The Hearing Ear, and the Seeing Eye, the Lord Hath Made Even Both of Them,’” in Behold, There Shall Be a Record Kept Among You, 33.

66 Marin, “Audiovisual Materials,” 34. In the twentieth century, the state of Utah, with its heavy Latter-day Saint population, became a mecca for commercial movie-making, and the films created there sometimes featured Mormon characters or themes. See James V. D’Arc, When Hollywood Came to Utah: A History of Moviemaking in Utah (Layton, UT: Gibbs Smith, 2010).

67 Allen, Embry, and Mehr, Hearts Turned to the Fathers, 216–58.

68 Richard Neitzel Holzapfel and Stephen H. Smoot, “Wilford Woodruff’s 1897 Testimony,” in Banner of the Gospel: Wilford Woodruff, ed. Alexander L. Baugh and Susan Easton Black (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2010), 327–64; Marin, “Audiovisual Materials,” 30–31, 33.

69 Richard E. Turley Jr., “‘Epoch in Musical History’: The Mormon Tabernacle Choir’s First Recordings,” Utah Historical Quarterly 79, no. 2 (Spring 2011): 100–121.

70 Marin, “Audiovisual Materials,” 32–33.

71 The most complete discography of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir can be found at http://www.josephsons.org/slmtc/mtc_rec.htm.

72 Matthew K. Heiss, “Oral History. ‘For the Good of the Church and for the Rising Generations,” in Behold, There Shall Be a Record Kept Among You, 28–31; Marin, “Audiovisual Materials,” 35.

FANTASY AND REALITY IN THE TRANSLATION OF THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM

John Gee

Abstract: The volume editors of The Joseph Smith Papers Revelations and Translations: Volume 4 propose a theory of translation of the Book of Abraham that is at odds with the documents they publish and with other documents and editorial comments published in the other volumes of the Joseph Smith Papers Project. Two key elements of their proposal are the idea of simultaneous dictation of Book of Abraham Manuscripts in the handwritings of Frederick G. Williams and Warren Parrish, and Joseph Smith’s use of the so-called Alphabet and Grammar. An examination of these theories in the light of the documents published in the Joseph Smith Papers shows that neither of these theories is historically tenable. The chronology the volume editors propose for the translation of the Book of Abraham creates more problems than it solves. Unfortunately, the analysis shows that the theory of translation of the Book of Abraham adopted by the Joseph Smith Papers volume editors is highly flawed.

The translation of the Book of Abraham has been a controversial topic for well over a century. At present a number of theories have been put forward. Publication of the Joseph Smith Papers has provided the means to test the validity of some of the theories proposed for the translation of the Book of Abraham. I will look at two interconnected theories put forward by the volume editors of The Joseph Smith Papers Revelations and Translations: Volume 4[1] in the light of the Joseph Smith Papers and demonstrate that they are untenable.

Simultaneous Dictation

The volume editors of JSPRT4 have promoted a testable theory about the translation of the Book of Abraham. The theory is sometimes referred to as the Simultaneous Dictation Theory. This theory is elaborated in detail in the volume itself in a general discussion of the Book of Abraham manuscripts:

The three [Book of Abraham] manuscripts presented here provide insight into the timing of the translation of the Book of Abraham text. The close relationship between the manuscripts created by Williams [labeled Book of Abraham Manuscript–A] and Parrish [labeled Book of Abraham Manuscript–B] indicates that they were begun around the same time — perhaps even concurrently. The leaves on which the two manuscripts were inscribed were originally two halves of a single sheet: one large sheet was separated in two, and the halves were used by Williams and Parrish as the first leaves of their respective documents. The same process was repeated with a second large sheet, the halves of which then served as the second leaves of the two manuscripts. The texts of the Williams and Parrish manuscripts are similar though not identical, as are the revisions, including cancellations and insertions.

Discrepancies in the spelling of several words in the two manuscripts suggest that the manuscripts were not visually compared against one another or against a single earlier version. Given the similarities between the texts of the two manuscripts and the revision process for both, JS may have dictated some or most of the text to both scribes at the same time. In that case, these two manuscripts would likely be the earliest dictated copies of the Book of Abraham. Some scribal errors in the later portion of the manuscript made by Williams, however, indicate that he copied some of his text from another manuscript. JS may have read aloud to Williams and Parrish from an earlier, nonextant text, making corrections as he went; he followed a similar process in his work in the Bible revision project.[2]

This theory is repeated in the introduction to Book of Abraham Manuscript–A:

In late 1835, Frederick G. Williams inscribed the following version of the first portion of the Book of Abraham. Williams’s manuscript was closely related to Book of Abraham Manuscript–B, which was inscribed by Warren Parrish. Evidence suggests that large portions of this version and Book of Abraham Manuscript–B were created and revised simultaneously. The similarities in the revisions to the two manuscripts suggest that Williams and Parrish created portions of these texts by taking down dictation and perhaps by copying portions from a nonextant version of the Book of Abraham.[3]

It is also repeated in the introduction to Book of Abraham Manuscript–B:

Warren Parrish created this version of the Book of Abraham, which is closely related to Book of Abraham Manuscript–A, the version created by Frederick G. Williams. Evidence suggests that large portions of this version and Book of Abraham Manuscript–A were created and revised simultaneously. The similarities in the revisions to the manuscripts suggest that Williams and Parrish created these texts by taking down dictation and perhaps by copying from a nonextant version of the Book of Abraham.[4]

Finally, in a joint interview after the publication, the volume editors elaborated on their theory:

JENSEN: Yes. Documentary editors make a big deal of small things sometimes, but it’s sometimes those small things that have lasting implications. There’s one particular instance where there are two documents in here, two Book of Abraham manuscripts in manuscript form. One written by [Warren Parrish] and Frederick G. Williams. These always have posed a challenge. We’ve never known precisely the order in which these were created. And as we looked more closely at these, we realized these documents were created at the same time. In other words, there was some sort of dictation process and then [Parrish] and Williams are capturing this same aural, spoken, text at the same time.

One of the pieces of evidence for that which seems pretty solid is that there was — and we’re really going to get into the nitty-gritty here — but there was one large piece of paper cut in half, divided in half. Those two pieces of paper from the same larger piece of paper make up page one of each of the respective pages of the Book of Abraham. So what we have is pretty compelling evidence that they are there at the same time using the same piece of paper, creating this text, the Book of Abraham, that gives us a new appreciation to the dictation process. Usually when we hear about Joseph Smith dictating, it’s he dictating to one singular scribe. So it’s interesting to imagine trying to reconstruct what that would look like with Joseph Smith dictating to multiple clerks.

HAUGLID: It’s interesting that we’re now talking about this when years and years ago Ed Ashment proposed the same thing. It created a firestorm of rejection amongst our LDS scholars, but now here we are talking about this and agreeing with Ed Ashment.

HODGES: About having multiple clerks in particular at the same time?

HAUGLID: Receiving dictation, yeah.

HODGES: Why was that so controversial?

JENSEN: I have no idea.

HAUGLID: Probably because it was Ed Ashment that proposed it. [laughter][5]

Contrary to Hauglid’s assertions that the theory is not accepted because of who first proposed it, there are valid historical reasons for rejecting the theory. As shown shortly, the proposal that multiple clerks recorded newly dictated scripture from Joseph Smith at the same time has serious weaknesses.

Dictation Errors?

The theory of the volume editors (Hauglid and Jensen) contradicts the findings of other editors from the Joseph Smith Papers. The earlier editors concluded that “textual evidence suggests that these Book of Abraham texts were based on an earlier manuscript that is no longer extant.”[6] The other editors base these conclusions on the following reasoning: “Documents directly dictated by J[oseph] S[mith] typically had few paragraph breaks, punctuation marks, or contemporaneous alterations to the text. All the extant copies, including the featured text, have paragraphing and punctuation included at the time of transcription, as well as several cancellations and insertions.”[7]

In their interview, Robin Jensen claims that “there was some sort of dictation process and then [Parrish] and Williams are capturing this same aural, spoken, text at the same time.” Since aural errors are associated with dictation rather than visual copying, they can be viewed as a sign that a manuscript is dictated. The volume editors assert that “Discrepancies in the spelling of several words in the two manuscripts suggest that the manuscripts were not visually compared against one another or against a single, earlier version.”[8] The footnote gives three differences in spelling: “See, for instance, the misspelling of ‘indeovered’ and ‘endeavoured’, ‘alter’ and ‘altar’, and ‘bedsted’ and ‘bedd stead’.”[9]

The examples are not dispositive. The volume editors may have misinterpreted the phenomenon they are discussing. In each of the cases listed, Frederick G. Williams has a nonstandard spelling of the word while Warren Parrish has the standard one, and this is typical when one compares the two manuscripts. There is another way to explain this phenomenon. In the production of this manuscript, Parrish could be visually copying but correcting the manuscript he is copying.[10]

The three examples the volume editors provided are inadequate, since there are dozens of differences between the manuscripts. Most are ambiguous, since they could be explained either as simultaneous dictation or as Parrish editing while copying the text from Williams’s manuscript. A few of the differences, however, cannot be explained if they were both receiving dictation at the same time.

Because the volume editors neither exhaustively cataloged nor even noted the various discrepancies, it has been necessary to compare and collate the manuscripts by cataloging the various discrepancies to determine whether the discrepancies can be accounted for by mishearing a word, visual errors, or editorial correcting.[11]

Most of the differences between the manuscripts could come from either taking dictation or from Parrish correcting and normalizing the manuscript he was copying. Only 12 of the 147 differences between the manuscripts cannot be explained as Parrish editing Williams, and all of those can also be explained as simple visual copying errors. Twenty-five of the differences (about one in six) cannot be explained as simultaneous dictation errors. A few of the differences, however, can be accounted for only by Parrish’s making a correction to the manuscript in Williams’s hand that he was visually copying.

The hardest differences to explain by reference to simultaneous dictation are the two lengthy insertions. In the manuscript in Williams’s hand, the first of these insertions is crammed between the space at the end of a paragraph and above the already written first line of the next paragraph. In the Parrish manuscript this is continuous flowing text at the bottom of the page.

Williams’s manuscript:

edge of this alter <I will refer you to the representation that is at the(commencement of this record>

It was made after the form of a bedsted such as was had

Parrish’s manuscript:

ledge of this altar, I will refer you to the

representation, that is lying before you

at the commencement of this record.

[end of page]

It was made after the form of a bedd stead

The section corresponding to the first line of the new paragraph in Williams’s hand (“It was made after the form of a bedstead”) is at the top of the next page in Parrish’s manuscript. But if the section were not in the Parrish manuscript, then it would have left an uncharacteristically large margin at the bottom of the page, almost twice the size of any other margin in that manuscript.

Page of Book of Abraham manuscript in Parrish’s hand

Measurement of Lower Margin (in inches/cm.)

1

.4/1.04

2

.2/.55

2 (hypothetical)

.9/2.29

3

.5/1.38

4

.6/1.42

5

.6/1.42

6

(ends mid-page)

It is difficult to imagine what sort of simultaneous dictation would have produced the manuscript evidence. For the sake of argument, let’s try (although we will ignore that the dips of the pen in the ink do not support this reconstruction):

Joseph dictates “that you might have a knowledge of this altar.” At this point Warren Parrish stops and pulls out another piece of paper. Joseph then dictates, “It was made after the form of a bedstead such as was had among the Chaldeans.” Joseph then indicates he forgot something. At this point Williams backs up and inserts the text between the lines. Parrish, rather than inserting the text at the top of the new page because he does not have enough room, goes back to the previous page and adds the line in at the bottom of the previous page, but manages to evenly space his lines. Somehow Williams did not hear the words “lying before you” but Parrish did. Joseph apparently made a mistake and Parrish had to strike them out but Williams did not. Then Parrish and Williams pick up where they left off.

If they did pick up where they left off, we would expect a simultaneous re-inking of the pens, but it is difficult to locate where that may have occurred.

The other addition, inserted into the upper margin of the manuscript in Williams’s hand, but included in the text, is harder to explain.

Parrish is normally consistent in his spelling. On the rare occasion where he uses a spelling that for him is unusual, the mistake looks more like a visual copying error that he did not correct. Williams much more frequently uses nonstandard spelling and is not terribly consistent in his orthography.

An example of the variant use of spelling is the word endeavor used in the Book of Abraham. Williams spells it differently every time, but Parrish is consistent in his spelling.

Reference

BoA-M-Williams

BoA-M-Parrish

Abraham 1:7

indeovered

endeavoured

Abraham 1:28

indeaver

endeavour

Abraham 1:31

endeaver

endeavour

When considering the spelling of altar, Williams and Parrish are consistent in their spellings but Williams consistently uses the nonstandard spelling.

Reference

BoA-M-Williams

BoA-M-Parrish

Abraham 1:8

Alter

altar

Abraham 1:10

alter

altar

Abraham 1:11

alter

altar

Abraham 1:11

alter

altar

Abraham 1:12

alter

altar

Abraham 1:12

alter

altar

Abraham 1:20

alter

altar

With the spellings of heathen, Williams is inconsistent, including nonstandard spellings while Parrish is consistent.

Reference

BoA-M-Williams

BoA-M-Parrish

Abraham 1:5

hethens

heathens

Abraham 1:7

heathens

heathens

Parrish is generally more consistent in his use of standard orthography.

Parrish has occasionally one unusual feature to his spelling. In a number of places Parrish drops the final letter or letters of the word. This is a visual copying error.

Reference

BoA-M-Williams

BoA-M-Parrish

Abraham 1:8

strange

strang

Abraham 1:9

made

mad

Abraham 1:10

plains

plain

Abraham 1:13

among

amon

Abraham 1:17

their hearts are turned

their harts are turn

There are places where Parrish slips in his spelling and follows Williams. For example, Parrish consistently spells the word hearken while Williams consistently spells it harken. But in Abraham 1:7, Parrish spells the word harkened.[12] Parrish here follows Williams in spelling the word in a way that is uncharacteristic for him. This is a visual copying error that Parrish did not correct.

Reference

BoA-M-Williams

BoA-M-Parrish

Abraham 1:5

harken

hearken

Abraham 1:7

harkened

harkened

Abraham 1:15

harkened

hearkened

Consider also the spellings of the god of Elkenah in the two manuscripts. The endings of –er and –ah may have been caused by the /r/ intrusion from Joseph Smith’s accent. The /r/ intrusion adds an /r/ sound at the end of words ending in a long vowel. This can be seen in the switching of the spelling in the Book of Abraham manuscript in Williams’s hand.

Reference

BoA-M-Williams

BoA-M-Parrish

Abraham 1:6

Elk=kener

Elkkener

Abraham 1:7

Elk=Kener

Elkken[er]

Abraham 1:7

Elk=Keenah

Elkkener

Abraham 1:13

Elk-keenah

Elkkener

Abraham 1:17

Elk kee-nah

Elkkener

Abraham 1:20

Elkeenah

Elkken{ah|er}

Abraham 1:29

Elkeenah

Elkkener

While Williams used a number of different spellings for the deity, Parrish consistently used the same spelling, the first one that Williams used, except one time when he wrote the same ending as Williams and then corrected it to his version of the spelling. If this were a dictation error, one would have expected Parrish to consistently hear the –er ending and write it. Parrish’s consistency makes this example easier to explain as a visual copying error rather than an aural copying error.

The volume editors have not only mischaracterized ambiguous differences between the manuscript to match a preconceived theory, but they have also missed the differences in the manuscripts which indicate other theories that have greater explanatory power. The theory that Parrish copied and normalized Williams’s manuscript explains more of the features than the Simultaneous Dictation Theory does.[13]

Some might point to identical corrections between the Book of Abraham manuscripts in Parrish’s and Williams’s hands as evidence for simultaneous dictation. The evidence for this does not necessarily support the argument. Here is the evidence for the scribal corrections in Williams’s hand from the Book of Abraham manuscripts before the long insertions. (I have used my transcriptions, since there are a couple of errors in the JSPRT4 transcriptions here.)

BoA-M-Williams

BoA-M-Parrish

BoA-M-Phelps/Parrish

first seccond (line 1)

first second (page 1, line 1)

my mine (line 2)

the mine (page 1, line 2)

mine (page 1, line 22)

whereunto unto (line 2)

whereunto unto (page 1, lines 2–3)

unto (page 1, line 22)

d{m|u}mb (line 12)

dumb (page 1, line 22)

dum (page 2, line 5)

E{k|l}k=Keenah (line 15)

Elkkener (page 1, line 26)

Elkkener (page 2, line 9)

the{m|se} (line 18)

these (page 2, line 1)

these (page 2, line 14)

{S}un (line 22)

son sun (page 2, line 9)

Sun (page 2, line 22)

Pot{t|i}pher<s> (line 24)

Potiphers (page 2, line 12)

Potiphers (page 2, line 25)

plains (line 25)

plain (page 2, line 13)

plain (page 2, line 26)

{offer|up}on (line 26)

upon (page 2, line 14)

upon (page 2, line 27)

regular royal (line 28)

regular royal (page 2, line 17)

royal (page 2, line 30)

{p|di}scent (line 28)

descent (page 2, line 17)

descent (page 2, line 30)

wor{e|s}hip (line 30)

worship (page 2, lines 19–20)

worsh=ip (page 2, lines 33–34)

were Killed (line 31)

were Killed (page 2, line 21)

were Killed (page 3, line 1)

Of the fourteen scribal corrections that Williams makes, three are copied by Parrish, two in the first two lines, and one later on. This is hardly an indication of Joseph making a correction in dictation that both men are following. In the second error Williams makes, Parrish makes a different error but makes the same correction. But one can see that where Parrish is copying his own work, he copies his own mistake (e.g., “Potiphers”). One can also see that where Williams capitalized Killed in the middle of the sentence, Parrish copies the error not once but twice. So Parrish could and did copy both errors and corrections. But the fact that he did not match all the errors argues against simultaneous dictation. For example, Williams has a corrected my appointment while Parrish has a corrected the appointment in Abraham 1:4. Williams had to correct them strange gods in Abraham 1:8 (this could be seen as a correction of them to these strange gods), but Parrish did not. The fact that the errors and corrections are not consistent argues against the two manuscripts being dictated simultaneously.

It may also be worth noting that one of the early errors Williams corrects (offered {offer|up}on in Abraham 1:11) is a dittography, the first of multiple in this manuscript, which in Joseph Smith’s scribes in 1835–1836 is more typical of a copying error than a dictation error.

Scribal Employment

Comparison of the manuscripts does not support the simultaneous dictation scenario proposed by the volume editors. It substantially undermines it, showing that Parrish copied and edited Williams’s manuscript. But to prove that the scenario of simultaneous dictation by Joseph to Williams and Parrish is impossible, one has only to ask one question: When did this supposed simultaneous dictation take place?

The volume editors have very helpfully specified that they think the translation took place between July and November 1835 and have included this in the title of both of the Book of Abraham manuscripts in question. So were Warren Parrish and Frederick G. Williams ever scribes together during this time?

The dates that Frederick G. Williams served as scribe are somewhat restrictive: We know of only 28 September 1835,[14] 3–7 October 1835,[15] 16 November 1835,[16] and 23–26 December 1835.[17] On 2 November 1835, Williams even proposed leaving town.[18]

Warren Parrish, whom Joseph Smith even designated “my scribe,”[19] was more commonly employed as a scribe during this time, but not all of it. In July of 1835, Warren Parrish was serving a mission and was the companion of Wilford Woodruff. Parrish had finished his time on a mission and took his departure from Woodruff on 23 July 1835 in Sandy, Kentucky, about 265 miles from Kirtland.[20] The earliest mention of him in Kirtland was on 17 August 1835 when he took minutes of the general assembly of the Church.[21] Joseph Smith was out of town[22] and noted as “absent.”[23] He also served as a clerk for a meeting of the Kirtland High Council on 28 September 1835.[24] After two experiences drafting documents for Joseph Smith on 23 and 27 October 1835,[25] Parrish was hired as Joseph Smith’s scribe on 29 October 1835.[26] On that day, they “went to Dr. Williams after my large journal.”[27] Parrish served daily in the scribal capacity from that time until 18 December 1835,[28] when he took ill. He began again about a week and a half later on 27 December 1835 and served daily until 22 January 1836.[29] Williams served as a scribe only during times when Parrish was unavailable.

Parrish and Williams were also together with Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, and Oliver Cowdery on 2 November 1835 when they, along with “a number of others went to Willoughby to Hear Doct Piexotto deliver a lecture on the profession theory & practice of Physic,” after which they “returned home.”[30] It does not appear that there was any time taken to work on translation on this occasion.

The only day when both Williams and Parrish served as scribes together was on 16 November 1835. On that day, Joseph Smith “dictated a letter for the Advocate, also one to Harvey Whitlock.”[31] The letter to the Messenger and Advocate was over 2,500 words long and filled three printed pages,[32] and probably took ten manuscript pages.[33] The letter to Harvey Whitlock was three manuscript pages, and both it and the original letter from Harvey Whitlock were copied into Joseph Smith’s journal. About one page of the copying was taken over by Williams. At around 20 pages, Parrish is known to have written more on that day than on any other day when he was employed as Joseph Smith’s scribe. Only on two other days is Parrish known to have written anything close to what he did on that day.[34] The effort seems to have taken Parrish all day.[35] In the evening, Joseph Smith was busy with a council meeting.[36] Williams takes over copying a page after Parrish has already written about 13 pages, and Williams seems to have been at Joseph Smith’s to take part in that evening’s council. This particular day seems a very unlikely time for the simultaneous dictation to take place.

The day of 19 November 1835 is another possible time when Williams and Parrish were together in the presence of Joseph Smith. The journal entry reads:

Thursday 19th went in company with Doct. Williams & my scribe to see how the workmen prospered in finishing the house; the masons on the inside had commenced putting on the finishing coat of plastureing, on my return I met Loyd & Lorenzo Lewis and conversed with them upon the subject of their being disaffected. I found that they were not so, as touching the faith of the church but with some of the members.

I returned home and spent the day in translating the Egyptian records:[37]

What is not clear from the journal entry is whether Williams accompanied Smith and Parrish only to the temple, or whether he was with them the entire day. This is the only possible day mentioned in the journals when Williams and Parrish could have worked together as scribes on the Book of Abraham, and it is not clear they did so. While such an event might have occurred without being recorded in the journal, one still has to argue for something on the basis of no evidence, which appears exactly the same as making it up.

In December 1835, the handwriting in Joseph Smith’s journal changes. For four days (19–22 December 1835), Joseph Smith writes his own journal.[38] Then Williams takes over for the next four days (23–26 December 1835).[39] A similar pattern occurs in late January and early February 1836 when Parrish’s “ill health” prevented him from writing for Joseph Smith when he complained that “writing has a particular tendency to injure my lungs.”[40] The last of those days in December, Williams and Parrish are together again with Joseph Smith, but Joseph Smith says that he “commenced studeing the Hebrew Language in company with bros Parish & Williams in the mean time bro Lyman Sherman came in and requested to have the word of the lord through me.”[41] On that day the three were studying Hebrew, not Egyptian, and were interrupted. Parrish takes up the scribal duties again the next day.[42] But this is after the period when the volume editors speculate that the Book of Abraham manuscripts were produced.

So during the period when the volume editors claim the Book of Abraham manuscripts were produced, Frederick G. Williams served as scribe only when Joseph Smith’s regular scribe, Warren Parrish, was not available because (1) he had not been hired yet, or (2) he was ill. The only occasions during that time when it is known that Smith, Williams, and Parrish are together, they are doing something else.

There is something else odd about these particular dates. The only days when Parrish and Williams worked together were 16 November 1835, 19 November 1835, and 26 December 1835. Consider these dates in the context of known work on the Book of Abraham:

Date

Present

Work on the Book of Abraham

1 October 1835

JS, OC, WWP

“labored on the Egyptian alphabet” “The system of astronomy was revealed”[43]

7 October 1835

JS, FGW

“recommenced translating the ancient records”[44]

16 November 1835

JS, WP, FGW

“dictated a letter”[45]

19 November 1835

JS, WP, (FGW?)

“spent the day in translating the Egyptian records”[46]

20 November 1835

JS, WP

“we spent the day in translating”[47]

24 November 1835

JS, WP

“we translated some of the Egyptian, records”[48]

25 November 1835

JS, WP

“spent the day in Translating.”[49]

26 November 1835

JS, WP

“we spent the day in transcribing Egyptian characters from the papyrus”[50]

28 November 1835

JS, WP

“I think I shall be able in a few days to translate again”[51]

We cannot prove that Williams is involved in the 19 November translation session. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that Williams did not just visit the Kirtland temple with Smith and Parrish but continued with them the rest of the day, and that contrary to all our manuscript evidence, the Book of Abraham manuscripts in the handwriting of Parrish and Williams were simultaneously dictated. Since this would be the last known time in the proposed time of translation of the Book of Abraham that Frederick G. Williams participated in the translation, all of the text in his hand would have had to be done on that day. The manuscripts are certainly within the known and expected range of what Williams and Parrish could do as scribes. The manuscript in Parrish’s hand does not cover as much of the text as Williams does. Why does Parrish stop early? Over the next week and a half Parrish is also involved in the same translation on four separate occasions. Where is the text? If Abraham 1:4–2:6 (32 verses) are covered in one day, should we not expect about 128 more verses over the next four translation sessions? Since there are only 101 more verses in the published Book of Abraham, what does such a scenario say about the pace of translation of the Book of Abraham?

Looked at another way, Parrish’s handwriting is only on the following materials:

Book of Abraham Manuscript-C = CHL Ms. 1294, fd. 1, 10 pages

Book of Abraham Manuscript-B = CHL Ms. 1294, fd. 3, 6 pages

Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language = CHL Ms. 1295, fd. 1, four scattered entries, none exceeding a single paragraph

We know that Parrish is involved in five translation sessions, yet all of that amounts to at best eighteen pages of material, six of which can be produced in a single session. At best that can account for three of the sessions. Where is the rest of the Book of Abraham material in Parrish’s hand? Since the rest of the material is simply copying, why was it called translating?

The proposed theory of simultaneous translation does not account for the manuscript evidence, or the historical evidence.

Errors in Joins

Finally, the volume editors raise the issue of joins, but their statements need to be examined. Although the volume editors raise the issue, their Simultaneous Dictation Theory does not depend on it. The Simultaneous Dictation Theory could still be true even if their observations about manuscript joins were false.

Manuscript joins are very important in work with fragmentary documents.[52] In this case, the join tells us less about the document and more about the source of the paper for the documents. A number of ledger volumes had been purchased,[53] some of which were mined for paper by taking quires and cutting the larger folded sheets apart at the fold in the gutter. Indeed, although unnoted by the volume editors, the ledger volume containing the Grammar and Alphabet document has indications that at least one quire has been removed from the volume. Since the cuts were freehand, there are irregularities that allow for different parts of an original leaf to be matched together to show they were once together. There is no real meaning to this phenomenon, since the main purpose was simply getting usable sheets of paper. The volume editors, however, try to use this to hypothesize that two manuscripts that both have one page from an originally larger sheet of paper were created at the same time. I have long been interested in the phenomenon of joins since I first noticed it and pointed it out to Hauglid. At the time, I could not find any other joins between manuscript sheets when looking at the originals, so their announcement that the second leaves also joined came as a surprise, since I had checked that in the originals and had not found that to be the case.

The volume editors use the term leaf to refer to a sheet of paper. They use the term page to refer to the side of a leaf. Each leaf has two pages: the front side (called the recto) and the back side (called the verso).

The volume editors are correct in the first half of their statement. The first leaf of what they call Book of Abraham Manuscript–A originally joined to the first leaf of what they call Book of Abraham Manuscript–B before being separated. The rectos were on the same side of the original sheet. The separate leaves, however, were originally oriented upside- down to each other so the left sides of the rectos of the two leaves join. The divergent orientation as well as the formatting for each leaf indicates that the leaves were separated before they were inscribed.

The volume editors, however, are not correct in their assertion that the second leaves in each manuscript were also joined. In what they call Book of Abraham Manuscript–A, the second leaf (comprising the third and fourth pages) has excess paper on the cut edge (which is the right edge of the recto or left edge of the verso) that has been folded over and is visible only from the verso. This material (approximately 1 mm wide in the photograph) appears along the left-hand edge between 3.5 and 5 cm from the top edge in the photograph.[54] A portion of the corresponding image from the Joseph Smith Papers website is shown in Figure 1 with an arrow marking the folded-over excess paper. No corresponding lack of paper, or nick, appears in any potentially corresponding edge of the second leaf of Book of Abraham Manuscript–B as would be necessary if the second leaves also joined.[55] Contrary to the assertions of the volume editors, these two leaves were not originally joined.

Figure 1. Detail of upper right section of page 4 of Book of Abraham Manuscript A with an added arrow showing the folded over excess paper along the cut edge.[56]

Even if the two successive leaves were joins, it would support the Simultaneous Dictation Theory only if the page usage were the same for both scribes. But it is not. Warren Parrish has a larger hand and makes use of different margins than Frederick G. Williams. Williams has 41 lines on his first page, while Parrish only has 30. Thus Parrish was on the second page (verso of the leaf) at the same place in the text where Williams was on only his 19th line of the first page. At the place in the text when Parrish began his second leaf, Williams still had not finished his first page. At the place in the text where Williams was ready for his second sheet of paper, Parrish was almost done with his second sheet. Had the second sheet joined, it probably would have been coincidence. In other words, this argument is not necessary for the simultaneous dictionary theory to be true. It would count as evidence for the theory only if it were true. Since it is not, it is simply irrelevant.

One suspects that the volume editors have confused page and leaf. This occurs elsewhere in the volume where the page count is given for a document rather than the leaf count.[57] Because a leaf has two sides, or pages, and the first leaf is a join, perhaps the volume editors mistook the fact that the first two pages in each manuscript necessarily join because the pages are two sides of two leaves that join and either through confusion or mistake changed this to a statement about the first two leaves joining. The assertion suggests that they were looking at photographs rather than the originals.

Just because the second proposed join is incorrect does not, in and of itself, mean that the Simultaneous Dictation Theory is false. It just means that the volume editors cannot use this to bolster their theory.

Summary

In summary, the evidence that the volume editors have adduced for a simultaneous dictation does not prove their case. Looked at in the fuller picture of what Joseph Smith was doing in July through November 1835, there is no time when both Parrish and Williams were known to serve as scribes together. If they did, they are known to be working on other projects. Even if they did, the theory does not account for all the time when Parrish served as a scribe in the translation after the alleged event.

The Use of the Grammar and Alphabet

The volume editors insist that Joseph Smith worked on the book titled Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language,[58] and that book was a source for the Book of Abraham. The volume editors treat the book as though it were a single coherent document. It does seem to have been intended as an attempt to make a coherent document, but the manuscript also indicates it was executed in a number of discrete sessions where the bulk of the text was written and then a few pages were skipped to write another section. The individual sections are each within the range of known scribal work for a single section:

Document Label

Written Pages

Blank Pages

Reference

Grammar and Aphabet [sic] of the Egyptian Language

7

26

JSPRT4, 116–29

Bethka

1

0

JSPRT4, 130–31

Egyptian Alphabet fourth degree

3

6

JSPRT4, 132–37

Bethka

1

0

JSPRT4, 138–39

Egyptian Alphabet third degree

2

6

JSPRT4, 140–43

Egyptian Alphabet Second Degree

4

11

JSPRT4, 144–51

Bethka

1

0

JSPRT4, 152–53

Egyptian Alphabet first degree

3

15

JSPRT4, 154–59

Second part 5th Degree

4

12

JSPRT4, 160–67

Second part 4thDegre

2

22

JSPRT4, 168–71

Second part of 3rd Degree

2

22

JSPRT4, 172–75

Second part 2nd Degree

2

22

JSPRT4, 176–79

Second part of the Alphabet 1d Dgree

2

38

JSPRT4, 180–83

The volume editors assert that “some evidence indicates that material from the Grammar and Alphabet volume was incorporated into at least one portion of the Book of Abraham text in Kirtland.”[59] They repeat this assertion later: “Some characters and elements from the definitions in the Egyptian Alphabet documents were incorporated into the Grammar and Alphabet volume, and a few were then copied into the Book of Abraham.”[60] They neglect, however, to supply that evidence.

A truly puzzling issue arises when the volume editors claim that “This prefatory material [Abraham 1:1–4] contains the most similarities to the definitions in the Grammar and Alphabet volume and was therefore also likely connected to JS’s study of the Egyptian language.”[61] This is footnoted to a reference,[62] which refers the reader to another page in the volume which contains nothing to substantiate that the beginning verses of the Book of Abraham have anything to do with the Grammar and Alphabet.[63] It is only when this claim is repeated (“The prefatory material inscribed by Phelps is closely related to the English explanations of characters found in the Grammar and Alphabet volume”[64]) that an actual usable reference is provided,[65] but the assertion still begs the question of which document is the original and which is the copy. I will argue that the volume editors have it backwards.

Two documents containing significant portions of identical wording certainly raise the question of literary influence. One document may be influenced by another, or both could be influenced by a third source. For example, in Noah Webster’s The American Dictionary of the English Language, under the definition of the term accord, the phrase “My heart accordeth with my tongue” appears.[66] This exact phrase, “my heart accordeth with my tongue,” also appears in a play by William Shakespeare.[67] Following the volume editors’ line of thinking, one could erroneously conclude that Shakespeare obviously used this dictionary in producing his play and quoted the line from it. Of course, this specious line of reasoning ignores two things. The first is that Shakespeare’s play appears over two hundred years before Webster’s dictionary. The second is that dictionaries and other language reference works tend to quote from actual examples of earlier works. So in the case of the Grammar and Alphabet and the Book of Abraham, the question arises as to whether it is more likely that in composing a language reference work, the compilers would quote a phrase from a previous translation out of context or that in composing a work, that an entire phrase from a dictionary would be quoted and seamlessly make sense in the passage. The latter is a much harder thing for an author to do, so the former is the more likely direction of influence.

Authorship

The volume editors claim “the scribes gradually ceased work on the Egyptian Alphabet documents. After completing about four pages, JS and his clerks abandoned this project, moving on to work on the Grammar and Alphabet volume.”[68] Without supplying any evidence, they simply beg the question of whether Joseph Smith was involved in the creation of the Grammar and Alphabet. They repeat this assertion later: “The Grammar and Alphabet volume was one piece of a larger attempt to understand the Egyptian language, which was in turn part of a larger effort by JS to study ancient languages.”[69]

This assumption is carried over to other parts of the text: “it appears that at the time Phelps stopped work on the Grammar and Alphabet volume in Kirtland, JS and his associates felt their work in studying an Egyptian language system was not finished.”[70] The Book of Abraham manuscripts were, according to the volume editors, “also related to JS’s efforts to study the Egyptian language.”[71]

The tendency of the volume editors to assign work by Phelps to Joseph Smith continues in their discussion of a letter that Joseph Smith asked Phelps to ghostwrite for him:

Several months later, on 13 November 1843, JS and William W. Phelps drew on the Grammar and Alphabet volume in a letter to sometime Mormon supporter James Arlington Bennet. In the letter, JS and Phelps included several phrases in other languages, including an allegedly Egyptian passage based on the Grammar and Alphabet: “Were I an Egyptian,” the letter stated, “I would exclaim= Jah oh=ah: Enish-go=an=dosh. Flo-ees-Flo-isis.”[72]

This is not the way Joseph Smith talked about the letter in his journal. In his journal, Joseph Smith said he “gave instruction to have it [a letter from James Arlington Bennet] answerd” by W. W. Phelps in his name.[73] Phelps spent three or four days working on the draft. On the morning of 13 November 1843, “Phelps read [the] letter to Jas A Bennet. & [Joseph Smith] made some correcti[o]ns.”[74] It is clear from the journal that Joseph Smith considered the work that of W. W. Phelps.

Timing

When the volume editors claim that “Some characters and elements from the definitions in the Egyptian Alphabet documents were incorporated into the Grammar and Alphabet volume, and a few were then copied into the Book of Abraham,”[75] they posit an order of the documents: The Egyptian Alphabet documents come first. The Grammar and Alphabet comes second. The Book of Abraham manuscripts come third. The evidence from the Joseph Smith Papers contradicts the volume editors’ posited order.

Before proceeding with that evidence, it is worth noting another error the volume editors make in arguing for the order of the documents. They claim: “Characters from the Book of Breathing for Horos, the Egyptian Alphabet documents or the Grammar and Alphabet volume, and possibly other unknown sources were copied in the margins” of manuscripts of the Book of Abraham.[76] The volume editors give no reason other than their underlying assumptions as to why the copying could not have gone the other direction, namely, from the manuscripts of the Book of Abraham to the Egyptian Alphabet documents or the Grammar and Alphabet. This is not a one-time mistake. In discussing Book of Abraham Manuscript A = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 2, the volume editors state: “Along the left margin of each page of this version are characters copied from the surviving fragments of the papyri, from the Egyptian Alphabet documents or the Grammar and Alphabet volume, and possibly from other unknown sources.”[77] When introducing Book of Abraham Manuscript B = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 3, the volume editors claim: “Characters from the Book of Breathing for Horos, from the Egyptian Alphabet documents or the Grammar and Alphabet volume, and possibly from other unknown sources were copied in the margins.”[78] In the introduction to Book of Abraham Manuscript C = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 1, the volume editors say: “Characters from the Book of Breathing for Horos, from the Egyptian Alphabet documents or the Grammar and Alphabet volume, and possibly from other unknown sources were copied in the margins.”[79] While the assumption of a particular direction of copying is an important issue, the volume editors have actually made a greater error here. The characters in the margins of the Egyptian Alphabet document come from Joseph Smith Papyrus I, while the characters in the Book of Abraham manuscripts come from Joseph Smith Papyrus XI, so the characters in the Book of Abraham manuscripts cannot have been copied from the Egyptian Alphabet documents. The characters in the Grammar and Alphabet come from a variety of sources but mostly from Joseph Smith Papyrus I, so they cannot be the source of the characters in the Book of Abraham manuscripts.

The volume editors insist this manuscript was also produced between July and November 1835. They assert that “Phelps likely began inscribing Grammar and Alphabet material in this volume sometime between July 1835 (when the Egyptian Alphabet documents were first drafted) and 1 October 1835 (when JS’s journal mentions that JS, Oliver Cowdery, and William W. Phelps worked on ‘the Egyptian alphabet,’ which could refer either to the Grammar and Alphabet volume or to the Egyptian Alphabet documents).”[80] The volume editors reinforce this in a footnote, claiming the reference to “the system of astronomy” in the journal “may refer to the significant material in the Grammar and Alphabet volume that discusses a planetary system.”[81] They claim that “the first through fourth degrees of the first part of the Grammar and Alphabet volume begin with the title ‘Egyptian Alphabet,’ perhaps indicating that members referred to the volume that way.”[82] They further claim “that those transliterations [of Hebrew words] are absent from the Grammar and Alphabet volume suggests that work on the Grammar and Alphabet was completed before church leaders began studying Hebrew in early 1836.”[83]

If finding Parrish and Williams together in the presence of Joseph Smith is problematic, it is nothing compared with having Joseph Smith working with Phelps at this time. Joseph Smith’s journal records five such instances.

On 1 October 1835, Joseph Smith labored with Oliver Cowdery and W. W. Phelps on “the Egyptian Alphabet.”[84] These are the same three individuals in whose handwriting are three documents all labeled “Egyptian Alphabet.”[85] Since both the titles and handwritings match, there is no reason hypothesize, as the volume editors do, that the entry “could refer either to the Grammar and Alphabet volume or to the Egyptian Alphabet documents.”[86] The Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language matches neither in the title nor the handwriting and thus is not a possibility. The volume editors state that “Characters, transliterations, and definitions from the Egyptian Alphabet documents were later copied into the Grammar and Alphabet volume.”[87] I concur with this statement. This dates the Grammar and Alphabet after the Egyptian Alphabet documents and, by logical extension, should date the Grammar and Alphabet after 1 October 1835.

On 23 October 1835, Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, Hyrum Smith, John Whitmer, Sidney Rigdon, Samuel H. Smith, Frederick G. William and W. W. Phelps were involved in a prayer meeting.[88] Translation does not seem to have been on the agenda.

On 29 October 1835, while Joseph Smith and Warren Parrish were visiting Frederick G. Williams to fetch “my large journal,”[89] Edward Partridge and W. W. Phelps came together and the four “examined the mumies,” after which Joseph Smith and Parrish “returned home and my scribe commenced writing in <my> journal a history of my life.”[90] This document survives, and from the handwriting and the description left in the journal, we know that Parrish wrote less than a page on that day.[91]

On Sunday, 1 November 1835, Joseph Smith was in the congregation when W. W. Phelps preached.[92] A large amount of Church business was transacted on the occasion, but translation is not listed.

On Sunday, 8 November 1835, Joseph Smith publicly rebuked W. W. Phelps and John Whitmer before the congregation, and “they made satisfaction the same day.”[93]

To these journal entries, we can add the following known instances of W. W. Phelps’s serving as Joseph Smith’s scribe:

He served as a scribe on documents dated to 1 June 1835,[94] 2 June 1835,[95] and 15 June 1835.[96] He apparently worked on the translation in July, as he wrote his wife in September of that year: “Nothing has been doing in the translation of the Egyptian Record for a long time, and probably will not for some time to come.”[97] He is not otherwise known to have served again as a scribe until 6 August 1836.[98]

So was the work in July on the Grammar and Alphabet? Phelps calls it “the Egyptian Record,” not an alphabet or a grammar, and says it was a translation, not an analysis. This makes it unlikely that it was the Grammar and Alphabet, especially since there is a better candidate for this document. One of the manuscripts of the Book of Abraham is in the handwriting of W. W. Phelps.[99] Furthermore, it is specifically called a “Translation.”[100] Joseph Smith used the same language when he published the Book of Abraham, calling it “A Translation of some ancient Records that have fallen into our hands.”[101] This manuscript was started in the handwriting of Phelps and stops at the point where the other two Kirtland period manuscripts begin. The most likely explanation is that Phelps wrote the translation of this portion “a long time” before September, likely in July, and the other manuscripts started on separate sheets of paper, picking up where Phelps left off. Later, Parrish copied these manuscripts onto the one started by Phelps.

This accounts for all the known instances in 1835 and 1836 when Phelps served as a scribe for Joseph Smith. There is no point in time, especially in the time period specified by the volume editors, when Phelps could have taken the Grammar and Alphabet in dictation from Joseph Smith. Yet the Grammar and Alphabet is in the handwriting of W. W. Phelps. The conclusion must be that either the document was not produced when the volume editors claim it was produced, or Joseph Smith was not involved in its authorship, or both. At one point the volume editors refer to “Phelps used material from the Egyptian Counting document in some of the definitions in” the Grammar and Alphabet.[102]

Letters of W. W. Phelps to his wife, Sally, give indications of what he had been doing. Although Phelps wrote on a weekly basis,[103] not all of the letters have been preserved. On 11 September 1835, Phelps wrote that he was “now revising hymns for a hymn Book.”[104] On 16 September 1835, Phelps noted that the first copies of the Doctrine and Covenants had come back from the bindery: “We got some of the Commandments from Cleveland last week; I shall try to send one hundred copies to the Saints this fall by Br. Wm Tippets. He starts next week. I know there will be one hundred Saints who will have their dollar ready, when he arrives, for a Book, we put them at a dollar in order to help us a little.”[105] On 27 October 1835, Phelps told Sally that “We shall begin to study Hebrew this winter, according to our present calculations.”[106] So they were already making plans to learn Hebrew. Phelps was also not satisfied with using the bindery in Cleveland and so noted that “We are also establishing a bindery to bind our own books.”[107] By 14 November 1835, the school had already started:

The school has commenced under the charge of President Sidney Rigdon as teacher. I shall not be able to go much, if any; President Cowdery has gone to New York to purchase tools for a book bindery and to secure some Hebrew books so that we may study Hebrew this winter. My time and that of President John Witmer [sic] is all taken up in the printing office. We have, when all are in the office, three apprentices and four journeymen, and we shall have to employ more men, as our work is so far behind. We have 18 numbers of the old “Star” [Evening and Morning Star] to print yet, and the “Messenger and Advocate” has been and is yet five or six weeks behind its time; and the hymn book is not likely to progress as fast as I wish, but we are all kept busy and have faith that the Lord will eventually bring about all things for our own good and his name’s glory.[108]

Even on 5 January 1836, Phelps was able to tell Sally, “The Hebrew school has commenced in one of the attic school rooms in the Lord’s House.”[109] This frustrated Phelps a bit: “I want to study Hebrew, and I have not as yet been able to begin.”[110] Ironically, Joseph Smith was studying Hebrew. The printing office kept Phelps so busy that he found he had to take “time when others sleep to write” on other projects.[111]

The volume editors do not seem to appreciate that Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon, Frederick G. Williams, and W. W. Phelps were all very busy. The whole reason that Warren Parrish was hired as a scribe was that the other brethren were too busy to serve as scribe.

The volume editors may have done Joseph Smith a great disservice by assigning the Grammar and Alphabet to him. They have standard ways of indicating disputed documents, and they should have used them here.[112]

Comparative Chronology

To see the difference that a more accurate view of the documents gives to the translation of the Book of Abraham, I will compare my chronology (based on the manuscript evidence) with that proposed by Edward Ashment, Brent Metcalfe, Dan Vogel, Brian Hauglid, and Robin Jensen (hereafter AMVHJ) and promoted by Hauglid and Jensen in their volume of the Joseph Smith Papers. Although by their own admission, Hauglid and Jensen derived their theory from critics of the Church, I do not address the individual claims of those critics, but instead focus only on the theory as Hauglid and Jensen articulate it in JSPRT4.

Both theories require certain assumptions and hypothesize events that are not recorded. I will make explicit these assumptions and hypothesized events.

The AMVHJ hypothesis is based on their theoretical approach to the translation (most of the group may lack significant experience with translation). They suppose that Joseph Smith first copied a character, then constructed an alphabet, then wrote a grammar, then translated the Book of Abraham. Many people who learn languages first learn the signs and grammar, and then start translating, but those who decipher languages decipher first and then write the sign lists and grammar. For the AMVHJ hypothesis, the theory takes precedence over the evidence, and if the evidence does not match the theory, then it is set aside, or ignored.

My chronology proceeds on the basis of two assumptions, which I derive from evidence. Based on known scribal output from Joseph Smith’s scribes at the time, I assume that a translation session will produce four to six pages per session, with an absolute maximum of eight pages. Based on the extant manuscripts, this equates to about 45 verses per session. Compared to the translation of the Book of Mormon six years earlier in 1829,[113] this is a slower pace.

July 1835

Evidence: The only contemporary record of events is the letter of W. W. Phelps to his wife dated 19–20 July 1835:

The last of June, four Egyptian mummies were brought here; there were two papyrus rolls, besides some other ancient Egyptian writings with them. As no one could translate these writings, they were presented to President Smith. He soon knew what they were and said they, the “rolls of papyrus,” contained the sacred record kept of Joseph in Pharaoh’s court in Egypt, and the teachings of Father Abraham. God has so ordered it that these mummies and writings have been brought in the Church and the sacred writing I had just locked up in Brother Joseph’s house when your letter came, so I had two consolations of good things in one day. These records of old times, when we translate and print them in a book, will make a good witness for the Book of Mormon. There is nothing secret or hidden that shall not be revealed, and they come to the Saints.[114]

A later reminiscence, probably also from Phelps written as though from Joseph Smith, reads:

Soon after this, some of the Saints at Kirtland purchased the mummies and papyrus, a description of which will appear hereafter, and with W. W. Phelps and Oliver Cowdery as scribes, I commenced the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt, etc. — a more full account of which will appear in its place, as I proceed to examine or unfold them.[115]

My Theory: I posit two translation sessions during this time; three is preferable. In the first session, the portion of Book of Abraham Manuscript C = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 1 in the handwriting of Phelps was produced. In the second session, a manuscript paralleling Book of Abraham Manuscript A = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 2 was produced; this would also have been in the hand of Phelps, or possibly Cowdery. It would have started on a separate sheet of paper. Its existence is inferred from the lengthy dittography (a repeated portion of text) on the last page of Book of Abraham Manuscript A = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 2. Lengthy dittographies are otherwise attested in Joseph Smith’s scribes at the time only in copied texts, not in dictated passages.[116] Since, by my dating, neither manuscript in Parrish’s handwriting (Book of Abraham Manuscript B = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 3 and Book of Abraham Manuscript C = CHL ms. 1294 fd.1) existed to be copied from the existence of another manuscript, and a translation session to produce it must be deduced. One further translation session would bring the translation to Abraham 3:28. This is indicated because the term Shinehah from Abraham 3:13 appears as a code name for Kirtland in the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants.[117] Other translation sessions could have possibly occurred and further material produced, but my theory does not require them.

Some might hypothesize that the term Shinehah was borrowed into the Book of Abraham from its use in the Doctrine and Covenants. This hypothesis assumes that the Book of Abraham is a modern fictional work written by Joseph Smith. The assumption, though unstated, is essential for the argument to be comprehensible. The problem with the assumption is that this term in the Book of Abraham is a known Egyptian term. For at least two decades this term has been known to be an Egyptian term for the path of the sun around the earth, the ecliptic,[118] which matches with the Book of Abraham’s description that “this is Shinehah, which is the sun” in the context of the movement of heavenly bodies (Abraham 3:13). A look at the ancient Egyptian usage of the term provides a more informative view of its usage. The ancient Egyptian term is either written mr-n-ḫꜣ or š-n-ḫꜣ. The pronunciation of the latter can be reconstructed as *šī-ne-ḫaʾ.[119] The spread of usage of the spellings shows the following (using only datable sources[120]):

Pharonic Reign

Approximate Date

mr-n-ḫꜣ

š-n-ḫꜣ

Unas

2321–2306 BC

2 (100%)[121]

Teti

2305–2279 BC

12 (100%)[122]

Pepi I

2276–2228 BC

23 (100%)[123]

Merenre

2227–2217 BC

9 (100%)[124]

Pepi II

2216–2153 BC

13 (62%)[125]

8 (38%)[126]

Dynasty IX preunification

2066–1970 BC

3 (100%)[127]

Mentuhotep II

1970–1959 BC

3 (100%)[128]

Sesostris I or Amenemhet II

1920–1843 BC

1 (100%)[129]

As the table shows, there was a change in the use of the term from mr-n-ḫꜣ to š-n-ḫꜣ that took place at the end of the Sixth Dynasty. The term disappears at the end of the Middle Kingdom and is not attested later. While the majority of the Middle Kingdom uses are not more precisely datable, only two uses from the Middle Kingdom that are not more precisely datable use the archaic form; the rest use the later form. This term is used only in Abraham’s day. If one accepts that the Book of Abraham is ancient, then the simplest explanation is that the Doctrine and Covenants borrows from the Book of Abraham. If one argues that the Book of Abraham borrows from the Doctrine and Covenants, then one assumes the Book of Abraham is modern, but one must still explain how it contains an authentic Egyptian term whose existence was unknown to Western scholarship until 1882.[130]

My theory requires three sessions and two documents produced, both Book of Abraham manuscripts, one of which is no longer extant. With two sessions, the first would cover Abraham 1:1–4; the second would cover Abraham 1:5–2:18. A third session would bring the translation to Abraham 3:28. This would be the equivalent of nine pages of translation.

AMVHJ Theory: July was a very busy month in the AMVHJ theory. The volume editors claim that “In early July 1835 in Kirtland, Ohio, JS and other individuals purchased a collection of Egyptian artifacts from Michael Chandler.”[131] Then “Oliver Cowdery, William W. Phelps, and perhaps another clerk prepared two notebooks, into which they copied Egyptian characters from the papyri that had been brought to Kirtland, Ohio, by Michael Chandler.”[132] They claim that “both were likely created in early July 1835 — after Chandler arrived in Kirtland but before the papyri were purchased — presumably to help JS and others study the content of the papyri.”[133] “Smith, Phelps, and Cowdery ‘commenced Translation of some of the Characters’ presumably soon after the papyri and mummies were purchased. According to Richards, the work of ‘translating an alphabet to the Book of Abraham, and arrangeing a grammar of the Egyptian language as practiced by the ancients’ continued through the end of July.”[134] Although they note that “there is no evidence Joseph Smith read, approved, or corrected this passage”[135] in a later narrative written by Willard Richards, who was not present. They also claim that “Likely in summer 1835, JS and his clerks created three loose-leaf documents bearing copies of Egyptian characters and vignettes.”[136] Given that Joseph Smith was away in August, the only summertime available was in July. They likewise posit that the copy of the hypocephalus should also be dated “to the Kirtland era” possibly as early as July 1835.[137] The volume editors also claim that July 1835 was “when the Egyptian Alphabet documents were first drafted.”[138] They also claim that “JS and his scribes evidently worked on the Book of Abraham in summer 1835. JS’s history places the translation effort soon after the acquisition of the Egyptian artifacts in early July 1835.”[139] They do not identify any specific translation activity.

According to the AMVHJ theory, Joseph Smith and his scribes produced nine documents in July 1835:

1. “Valuable Discovery” = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 6.[140]

2. Notebook of Copied Egyptian Characters = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 7.[141]

3. Copies of Egyptian Characters–A = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 8.[142]

4. Copies of Egyptian Characters–B = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 9.[143]

5. Copies of Egyptian Characters–C = Papyrus Joseph Smith IX.[144]

6. Copy of Hypocephalus = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 5.[145]

7. Egyptian Alphabet–C = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 3.[146]

8. Egyptian Alphabet–B = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 4.[147]

9. Egyptian Alphabet–A = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 5.[148]

Together they total 22 pages. Based on the average amount that scribes seem to be doing per session, then it would conservatively have taken at least five translation sessions.

There is actually a major problem with this theory. The Egyptian Characters on Copies of Egyptian Characters–C was on the backing paper when the papyrus fragments were mounted. But Copies of Egyptian Characters–B = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 9 is actually a copy of the papyrus fragment (Papyrus Joseph Smith IX) mounted on Copies of Egyptian Characters–C, but shows that the fragment was much larger at the time it was copied.[149] So the characters on Copies of Egyptian Characters–C must have been copied much later than Copies of Egyptian Characters–B = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 9, after the bits of papyrus were lost. Because proponents of the AMVHJ theory cannot read the characters copied, they did not notice this problem.

August–September

In August “JS traveled from Kirtland to Michigan to visit Saints” returning on the twenty-third.[150] On 9 September Phelps wrote to his wife saying that he hoped his letters “will be sufficient to keep every member in the way of duty till the ‘Doctrine and Covenants’ arrive.”[151] A week later he said that “We got some of the Commandments from Cleveland last week; I shall try to send one hundred copies to the Saints this fall by Br. Wm Tippets. He starts next week.”[152] This indicates that the entire Doctrine and Covenants was in print by that time. This is important, because the Doctrine and Covenants uses Shinehah from the Book of Abraham as a code name for Kirtland.[153] This would indicate that Abraham 3:13 had been translated before that point.

Phelps also wrote his wife on 11 September 1835: “Nothing has been doing in the translation of the Egyptian Record for a long time, and probably will not for some time to come.”[154] This shows that no translation had been done since Joseph Smith left for Michigan. It also shows that what they had worked on to that point was considered a “translation.” Up to this point, the only translation that Phelps had mentioned to his wife was “the sacred record kept of Joseph in Pharaoh’s court in Egypt, and the teachings of Father Abraham. … These records of old times, when we translate and print them in a book, will make a good witness for the Book of Mormon.”[155]

During August and September neither theory posits any translation. My theory accounts for the translation up to that point; the AMVHJ theory does not.

1 October 1835

Evidence: Joseph Smith’s journal records the following for this date: “This after noon labored on the Egyptian alphabet, in company with brsr O Cowdery and W W. Phelps: The system of astronomy was unfolded.”[156]

My Theory: The title of what the three men were laboring on is given as “the Egyptian alphabet.” I identify these with the three documents labeled “Egyptian alphabet” (CHL 1295 fd. 3–5).[157] The three documents are in the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery, William W. Phelps, and Joseph Smith, the three people mentioned in the journal entry. All are four or five pages and so within the range of what was known to be produced in a single session.

Since the third chapter of Abraham had already been produced in July (as evidenced by the reference to it in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants), there are two possibilities: If the system of astronomy is the explanations of Facsimile 2, then only 14 pages needed to have been produced at this point. If the system of astronomy refers to additional material we no longer have which would provide the promised content about the “knowledge of the beginning of the creation, and also of the planets, and of the stars, as they were made known unto the fathers” (Abraham 1:31), then we would have to increase the number of translation sessions in July.

AMVHJ Theory: The AMVHJ theory asserts that the journal entry “could refer either to the Grammar and Alphabet volume or to the Egyptian Alphabet documents.”[158] The volume editors hypothesize that “the first through fourth degrees of the first part of the Grammar and Alphabet volume begin with the title ‘Egyptian Alphabet,’ perhaps indicating that members referred to the volume that way.”[159] They claim that “Phelps likely began inscribing Grammar and Alphabet material in this volume sometime between July 1835 (when the Egyptian Alphabet documents were first drafted) and 1 October 1835,”[160] but the material was still done by Joseph Smith because “the Grammar and Alphabet volume was one piece of a larger attempt to understand the Egyptian language, which was in turn part of a larger effort by JS to study ancient languages.”[161] Apparently “the scribes gradually ceased work on the Egyptian Alphabet documents. After completing about four pages, JS and his clerks abandoned this project, moving on to work on the Grammar and Alphabet volume.”[162]

So the bulk of the Grammar and Alphabet is hypothesized to have been done on 1 October 1835. Since the Grammar and Alphabet comprises 34 pages of material, this would have been the largest single production session known for Joseph Smith in 1835 and 1836. And it is mostly in the handwriting of Phelps. Cowdery is not involved in the handwriting to the volume. What was he doing all that time when this phenomenal production was going on? Proponents of the AMVHJ theory do not say. For all the laboring that Oliver Cowdery did that day, according to the AMVHJ theory, there is nothing to show for it.

My theory posits 14 or 17 pages produced by three scribes on that day, whereas the AMVHJ theory posits twice as many at 34 pages produced by one scribe.

3–7 October 1835

Frederick G. Williams served as a scribe to Joseph Smith between the third and seventh of October 1835.[163] On the last journal entry of that period, Joseph Smith recorded: “this afternoon recommenced translating the ancient records.”[164]

My Theory: The period when Frederick G. Williams served as a scribe is the best time to place the production of Book of Abraham Manuscript–A = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 2.[165] While the recommencement of translation mentioned on 7 October 1835 could have simply been the occasion of copying the known manuscript in his handwriting, it might also have been a continuation of the Book of Abraham that had been produced in July. On the minimal end of things, that would put the translation of the Book of Abraham through about the end of Abraham 5.

AMVHJ Theory: The AMVHJ theory posits that essentially nothing happening during this time. Although the journal entry is noted,[166] nothing particular is done with this information other than vaguely suggesting that this was somehow involved in the translation process. According to the AMVHJ theory, no actual translation of the Book of Abraham had yet been produced at this point.

8–28 October 1835

No mention of translation occurs during this time. Neither theory posits any specific translation during this period. My theory posits that because Joseph Smith lacked a scribe, nothing was done. The AMVHJ theory is vague about any translation occurring.

29 October 1835

On 29 October 1835 “Br W. Parish commenced writing for me.”[167] This is the commencement of Warren Parrish’s involvement with Joseph Smith as a scribe. No manuscript in Warren Parrish’s hand should be dated before this date.

19–26 November 1835

This week is the time when the most translation activity takes place. These are the pertinent entries from Joseph Smith’s journal:

19 November 1835: “I returned home and spent the day in translating the Egyptian records.”[168]

20 November 1835: “we spent the day in translating, and made rapid progress.”[169]

24 November 1835: “in the after-noon, we translated some of the Egyptian, records.”[170]

25 November 1835: “spent the day in Translating.”[171]

26 November 1835: “at home, we spent the day in transcribing Egyptian characters from the papyrus.”[172]

My Theory: The evidence is for four sessions of translation. I had conservatively estimated the previous session as ending at the end of Abraham chapter five. At the rate indicated by the scribal remains, 45 verses per session, and with an average of slightly more than 27 verses per chapter in the current Book of Abraham, the translation at the end of 25 November 1835 should be at about Abraham 11:18 in a book whose published version ends suddenly at Abraham 5:21. This is well beyond the published text of the Book of Abraham and is based, not on wishful thinking, but on the actual documented scribal activity of Joseph Smith’s scribes in 1835 and 1836.

Even if we went absolute minimalist on the production of the Book of Abraham, the W. W. Phelps portion of Book of Abraham Manuscript–C = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 1 would have had to be produced in July 1835. Book of Abraham Manuscript–A = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 2 would have been produced on 7 October 1835. If we assign the production of Book of Abraham Manuscript–B = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 3 to 19 November 1835 and the Warren Parrish portion of Book of Abraham Manuscript–C = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 1 to 20 November 1835, then Abraham 2:19–3:28 would have to be assigned to 24 November 1835 and Abraham 4:1–5:21 to 25 November 1835. All of the current Book of Abraham would have to fit in the Kirtland period, on the basis of known scribal practice and known translation dates. This minimalist scenario does not account for all of the evidence and so is not to be preferred.

The activity on 26 November 1835 is given as “transcribing.” The only manuscripts that fit with transcribing are Copies of Egyptian Characters–A = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 8,[173] and Copies of Egyptian Characters–B = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 9.[174] It would make the most sense to assign these two documents to this date rather than July. Otherwise we need to hypothesize the existence of transcription documents we no longer have.

AMVHJ Theory: According to the AMVHJ theory, “five more times in late November, Smith and likely Phelps and Parrish were occupied either in ‘translating’ or in ‘transcribing Egyptian characters from the papyrus.’”[175] Since the AMVHJ theory insists that Book of Abraham Manuscript–A = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 2 and Book of Abraham Manuscript–B = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 3 were dictated simultaneously, the only day that might have been possible is 19 November 1835, and only if Frederick G. Williams spent the whole day with Joseph Smith and not just the temple inspection in the morning. On this day, according to the AMVHJ theory, both Book of Abraham manuscripts were produced simultaneously. If the session on 20 November 1835 was spent with Warren Parrish copying the same manuscript onto Book of Abraham Manuscript–C = CHL ms. 1294 fd. 1 (ignoring that Joseph Smith described them as having “made rapid progress” on this date[176]), then according to the AMVHJ theory the next three sessions produced nothing in spite of the documentation in the journals, since the AMVHJ theory insists that nothing after Abraham 2:18 was dictated in Kirtland, and the rest of the Book of Abraham was dictated in Nauvoo.

This creates an unacknowledged problem for the volume editors. Even the volume editors commenting on Parrish’s statement that “I have set by his [Joseph Smith’s] side and penned down the translation of the Egyptian Hieroglyphicks as he claimed to receive it by direct inspiration from Heaven,”[177] note that “while it is possible Parrish was speaking of the work on the Egyptian Alphabet documents or the Grammar and Alphabet volume, the majority of Parrish’s scribal work was on the Kirtland-era Book of Abraham manuscripts.”[178] For at least one of those manuscripts they claim that “it appears that Parrish copied from his earlier version of the Book of Abraham.”[179] The other manuscript, as I have shown, is more readily explained as a corrected copy. This means that the volume editors do not really have Parrish recording any “translation of Egyptian Hieroglyphicks” from the mouth of Joseph Smith, contrary to both Parrish’s statement and Joseph Smith’s journal.

The project ended here because “JS’s journal does not mention work on the Egyptian-language project after late November 1835.”[180]

1842

The next evidence for translation of the Book of Abraham occurs in 1842 when the Book of Abraham was being published. Though some days mentioned giving “instructions concerning the cut for the altar & gods in the Records of Abraham,”[181] “explaining the Records of Abraham,”[182] “correcting the first plate or cut. of the Records of father Abraham,”[183] or “exhibeting the Book of Abraham,”[184] fewer journal entries actually mention translation. There are two. On the 8 March 1842, the entry reads: “Commenced Translating from the Book of Abraham, for the 10 No of the Times and seasons — ”[185] The 9 March 1842 entry reads: “in the afternoon continud the Translation of the Book of Abraham. … & continued translating & revising. & Reading letters in the evening Sister Emma being present in the office.”[186]

Joseph Smith also mentioned his translation activities in a letter written to Edward Hunter on 9 March 1842: “I am now very busily engaged in Translating, and therefore cannot give as much time to Public matters as I could wish, but will nevertheless do what I Can to forward your affairs.”[187]

My Theory: The printed version of the Book of Abraham from 1842 differs from the Kirtland manuscripts of 1835, which shows instances of revision for publication, including the addition of the “and the god of Korash” in Abraham 1:6 and 1:17, the spelling of the god “Libnah” in the same verses, and the standardization of the spelling of “Elkenah.” These are instances of the “revising” mentioned in the 9 March 1842, but since these changes had occurred in sections of the Book of Abraham that had been published previous to 9 March, they show revisions in translations. Retranslating and revising is not uncommon in translations. The document in Doctrine and Covenants 7 also shows Joseph Smith retranslating and revising his translations.[188] Because my theory already has this portion translated, there is no problem in there being revisions to the translation at this stage. Those revisions could hypothetically include revising the Hebrew transliterations to the then standard Hebrew transliteration system that Joseph Smith had learned from Sexias, though he could also have received them via revelation, as he had with Hebrew names that appear in the Book of Mormon. We cannot determine this without the manuscripts.

AMVHJ Theory: The AMVHJ theory assumes that when Joseph Smith “Commenced Translating from the Book of Abraham, for the 10 No of the Times and seasons — ”[189] on 8 March 1842, he had not translated anything of that section (Abraham 2:19–5:21) beforehand. Thus there had been no translation between 19 November 1835 and 8 March 1842, and Joseph was starting from scratch. Where Joseph had translated 49 verses in five days in Kirtland (about ten verses per day), in these two days in Nauvoo, he translated 87 verses (about 43 verses per day) at four times the rate that he had in Kirtland. The volume editors’ theory does not account for the use of the term “revising” in the 9 March entry. There is, in this theory, nothing to revise, though they do note that for the earlier installment, “the first two hundred words of Richards’s Nauvoo- era copy contain significantly more revisions than subsequent portions of the copied text. The heavy revision suggests that Richards copied this section from an intermediate text that contained revisions, rather than from the original Kirtland-era document.”[190] But they note that for the section of the Book of Abraham they claim was translated at this time, “few differences exist between the surviving portion of this manuscript and the published version.”[191] They claim that “by mid-March 1842, JS had dictated enough material to publish the next installment, and the Nauvoo-era Book of Abraham material was published in the 15 March issue of the Times and Seasons. JS made no known additional attempts to translate, though some evidence indicates that he intended to continue with the effort.”[192]

The theory accounts for the presence of Hebrew phrases in the section of Abraham 2:19–5:12 naturalistically. This was after Joseph Smith studied Hebrew in late 1835 and early 1836. The theory posits that Joseph Smith did not receive any Hebrew phrases via revelation.

Loose Ends

Each of the theories accounts for different things and leaves different things unaccounted for. Although I have mentioned those at various points, it is worth summarizing the loose ends.

My Theory: My theory at least proposes something for all the known translation dates. It proposes steady progress on the Book of Abraham and matches known documents with the scribes who were known to have been working with Joseph Smith at the time.

My theory does not propose a date for a number of documents. The Valuable Discovery booklet (= CHL ms. 1295 fd. 6) and the other booklet (CHL ms. 1295 fd. 7) are not assigned dates.

My theory does not propose a date for the Grammar and Alphabet (CHL ms. 1295 fd. 1). That is because, as I have shown above, there was no time when Joseph Smith and W. W. Phelps could have worked on it together. It is entirely the work of W. W. Phelps and is not connected to Joseph Smith’s translation efforts at all. It would have taken Phelps about a week’s worth of late night labors to put it together, but it does not have to be shoehorned into a particular timeline for Joseph Smith’s labors on the Book of Abraham in Kirtland. The same holds true for the Egyptian Counting document = CHL ms. 1295 fd. 2, which is also the work of Phelps and is not connected either to the translation of the Book of Abraham or to the Joseph Smith Papyri.

My theory hypothesizes three days of translation in July and accounts for a translation of the Book of Abraham up to a hypothesized Abraham 11:18 in Kirtland.

AMVHJ Theory: The AMVHJ theory posits intense periods of activity and periods when Joseph Smith claims to have been working, but nothing was actually produced. For example, the AMVHJ theory actually posits a much busier time in July than mine does. It also proposes an unbelievably busy activity on the part of W. W. Phelps on 1 October 1835 but nothing on the part of Oliver Cowdery on the same date, even though Joseph Smith’s journal claims that Cowdery was involved. It also posits a joint session for a simultaneous dictation involving Warren Parrish and Frederick G. Williams. This is only possible on one day and only if Joseph Smith’s journal is read in a non-obvious way. But the theory then requires that nothing actually be produced the next four sessions in spite of Joseph Smith’s remarks to the contrary. It also requires a much greater rate of productivity in Nauvoo than in Kirtland.

The theory requires the involvement of W. W. Phelps with Joseph Smith at times when both Phelps’s own correspondence and the rest of the Joseph Smith Papers show that Joseph Smith was not involved. The AMVHJ theory lacks a sound historical basis.

Conclusions

I have shown that the theory of translation propounded in The Joseph Smith Papers Revelations and Translations: Volume 4 does not accord with the facts presented in the rest of the Joseph Smith Papers or even with the documents published in JSPRT4. The evidence adduced for a simultaneous dictation appears to be refuted by the documents themselves and the historical use of scribes in 1835 and 1836. The purported simultaneous dictation of manuscripts cannot be demonstrated to have ever occurred, and the documents show that it could not have happened the way the volume editors propose. Their proposal for the use of the Grammar and Alphabet in the translation process runs into the problem that Joseph Smith and W. W. Phelps were scarcely together during the time in question, and when they were together, they were known to be working on something else. Looking at the translation process in Kirtland as a whole, the AMVHJ theory creates more problems than it solves.

John Gee is the William (Bill) Gay Research Professor in the Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages at Brigham Young University. He has authored more than 150 publications on topics such as ancient scripture, Aramaic, archaeology, Coptic, Egyptian, history, linguistics, Luwian, rhetoric, Sumerian, textual criticism, and published in journals such as British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan, Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar, Enchoria, Ensign, FARMS Review, Göttinger Miszellen, Issues in Religion and Psychotherapy, Journal of Academic Perspecitves, Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Journal of Egyptian History, Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities, Lingua Aegyptia, Review of Books on the Book of Mormon, Studien zur altägyptischen Kultur, and Interpreter, and by such presses as American University of Cairo Press, Archaeopress, Association Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth, E. J. Brill, Carsten Niebuhr Institute of Near Eastern Studies, Czech Institute of Egyptology, Deseret Book, de Gruyter, Harrassowitz, Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, Macmillan, Oxford University Press, Peeters, Praeger, Religious Studies Center, and Society of Biblical Literature. He has published three books and has edited eight books and an international multilingual peer-reviewed professional journal. He served twice as a section chair for the Society of Biblical Literature.

1 . Robin Scott Jensen and Brian M. Hauglid, eds., Joseph Smith Papers, Revelations and Translations, Volume 4: Book of Abraham and Related Manuscripts (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2018), hereafter referred to as JSPRT4.

2 . Ibid., 192.

3 . Ibid., 193.

4 . Ibid., 203.

5 . Robin Jensen and Brian Hauglid, “Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Papers,” MIPodcast, no. 92, https://mi.byu.edu/mip-hauglid-jensen/. In the transcript, HODGES refers to Blair Hodges, host of the podcast. The transcript is taken from the “Transcript” option available at the noted website.

6 . Brent M. Rogers et al., eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Documents, Volume 5: October 1835–January 1838 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2017), 5:74, hereafter referred to as JSPD5.

7 . Ibid., 74–75n323.

8 . JSPRT4, 192.

9 . Ibid., 4:238n18.

10 . I will argue below that this copying was not part of the translation process.

11 . Unfortunately, the transcriptions provided in JSPRT4 are inadequate to study scribal characteristics. I give my own transcriptions throughout.

12 . In the so-called Book of Abraham Manuscript–C page 1 line 32 and page 2 line 4, in JSPRT4, 218, 220.

13 . Note that the statement cited elsewhere from Parrish about acting as a scribe while Joseph translated should not be assumed to apply to this work of copying and occasionally correcting an existing Book of Abraham manuscript, just as it does not apply to his copying of other manuscripts.

14 . Matthew C. Godfrey et al., eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Documents, Volume 4: April 1834–September 1835 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2016), 4:444, hereafter referred to as JSPD4.

15 . Dean C. Jessee, Mark Ashurst-McGee, and Richard L. Jensen, eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, Volume 1: 1832–1839 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2008), 67–71 (hereafter referred to as JSPJ1); JSPD5, 20–21.

16 . JSPJ1, 101–102.

17 . Ibid., 135–38.

18 . Ibid., 82.

19 . Ibid., 76, 93, 107, 173, 183.

20 . Wilford Woodruff, Wilford Woodruff’s Journal (Midvale, UT: Signature Books, 1983), 1:38.

21 . JSPD4, 382–96.

22 . Ibid., 382–83 citing “History, 1838–1856, volume B-1 [1 September 1834 — 2 November 1838],” p. 600, The Joseph Smith Papers, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-b-1-1-september-1834-2-november-1838/54.

23 . JSPD4, 386.

24 . Ibid., 444–46, 449–52.

25 . JSPD5, 24–26.

26 . JSPJ1, 71–79.

27 . Karen Lynn Davidson et al, eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Histories, Volume 1: Joseph Smith Histories, 1832–1844 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2012),1:76, hereafter referred to as JSPH1.

28 . Ibid., 71–134.

29 . Ibid., 138–72.

30 . Ibid., 82.

31 . Ibid., 101.

32 . Joseph Smith, “To the Elders of the Church of Latter Day Saints,” Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate 2 (November 1835): 209–12.

33 . Parrish wrote 248 words on the previous page (p. 36) of the journal (JSPJ1, 100–101).

34 . On 18 December 1835, Parrish wrote 13 manuscript pages (JSPJ1, 129–34), and on 27 March 1836, Parrish wrote 14 manuscript pages (Ibid., 200–11).

35 . The notation in the journal after the letters is “on this evening” (Ibid., 105).

36 . Ibid.

37 . JSPH1, 107.

38 . JSPJ1, 135.

39 . Ibid., 135–38.

40 . Ibid., 173.

41 . Ibid., 136.

42 . Ibid., 138.

43 . JSPH1, 67.

44 . Ibid., 69–71.

45 . Ibid., 101–105.

46 . Ibid., 107.

47 . Ibid.

48 . Ibid., 109–10.

49 . Ibid., 110.

50 . Ibid., 110–11.

51 . Ibid., 111.

52 . P. W. Pestman, The New Papyrological Primer (Leiden, NDL: E. J. Brill, 1994), 55–57.

53 . See Robin Scott Jensen, Robert J. Woodford, and Steven C. Harper, eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Revelations and Translations, Volume 1: Manuscript Revelation Books (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2011), 3–4, 407–408 (hereafter referred to as JSPRT1); JSPRT4, 111.

54 . JSPRT4, 200.

55 . See JSPRT4, 208, 210.

56 . “Book of Abraham Manuscript, circa July–circa November 1835–A [Abraham 1:4–2:6],” p. 4, The Joseph Smith Papers, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-abraham-manuscript-circa-july-circa-november-1835-a-abraham-14-26/4. A corresponding section of missing paper is not found on pages 3 or 4 of Book of Abraham Manuscript B (“Book of Abraham Manuscript, circa July–circa November 1835–B [Abraham 1:4–2:2],” p. 4, The Joseph Smith Papers, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-abraham-manuscript-circa-july-circa-november-1835-b-abraham-14-22/4), indicating the second leaves used in the two manuscripts did not come from the same sheet of paper, contrary to the assertion in JSPRT4.

57 . JSPRT4, 55.

58 . I have normalized the spelling of the title. The document may be found in JSPRT4, 116–83.

59 . JSPRT4, xxv.

60 . Ibid., 112.

61 . Ibid., 192.

62 . Ibid., 238n12.

63 . Ibid., 112.

64 . Ibid., 217.

65 . Ibid., 241n155.

66 . American Dictionary of the English Language (1967), s.v., “accord.”

67 . Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part 2, 3.1.269.

68 . JSPRT4, 54.

69 . Ibid., 112.

70 . Ibid., 113.

71 . Ibid., 191.

72 . Ibid., 113–14.

73 . Andrew H. Hedges, Alex D. Smith, and Brent Rogers, eds. Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, Volume 3: May 1843–June 1844 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2015), 127.

74 . Ibid., 128.

75 . JSPRT4, 112.

76 . Ibid., 192.

77 . Ibid., 193.

78 . Ibid., 203.

79 . Ibid., 217.

80 . Ibid., 112.

81 . Ibid., 184n12.

82 . Ibid., 185n21.

83 . Ibid., 184n14.

84 . JSPJ1, 67.

85 . JSPRT4, 56–71, 7483, 86–93.

86 . Ibid., 112.

87 . Ibid., xv.

88 . JSPJ1, 73, 111–12.

89 . Ibid., 76.

90 . Ibid.

91 . JSPH1, 51.

92 . JSPJ1, 81.

93 . Ibid., 86.

94 . JSPD4, 329–33.

95 . Ibid., 333–39.

96 . Ibid., 346–47.

97 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 11 September 1835, quoted in Bruce A. Van Orden, “Writing to Zion: The William W. Phelps Kirtland Letters,” BYU Studies 33, no.3 (1993): 563.

98 . JSPD5, 277–78.

99 . JSPRT4, 218.

100 . Ibid., 218.

101 . Book of Abraham, heading.

102 . JSPRT4, 95.

103 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 16 September 1835, quoted in Van Orden, “Writing to Zion,” 565.

104 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 11 September 1835, in ibid., 563.

105 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 16 September 1835, in ibid., 565–66.

106 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 27 October 1835, in ibid., 567.

107 . Ibid.

108 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 16 September 1835, in ibid., 568. The “[sic]”s are in the edition.

109 . Ibid., 571.

110 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 5 January 1836, in ibid., 571–72.

111 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 16 September 1835, in ibid., 565.

112 . Alex D. Smith, Christian K. Heimburger, and Christopher James Blythe, eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Documents, Volume 9: December 1841–April 1842 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2019), 413–18, hereafter referred to as JSPD9.

113 . See John W. Welch, “Timing the Translation of the Book of Mormon: ‘Days [and Hours] Never to Be Forgotten’,” BYU Studies 57, no.4 (2018): 11–50.

114 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 19–20 July 1835, quoted in Van Orden, “Writing to Zion,” 558.

115 . Joseph Smith, History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, vol. 2 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1948), 2:236.

116 . JSPH1, 49, 65, 68, 76.

117 . Doctrine and Covenants (1835) LXXXVI 4, quoted in Robin Scott Jensen, Richard E. Turley Jr., and Riley M. Lorimer, eds., Joseph Smith Papers: Revelations and Translations, Volume 2: Published Revelations (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2011), 530 (hereafter referred to as JSPRT2); Doctrine and Covenants (1835) XCVI heading, quoted in JSPRT2, 544; Doctrine and Covenants (1835) XCVIII 3, 7, 9, quoted in JSPRT2, 551–53.

118 . Rolf Krauss, Astronomische Konzepte und Jenseitsvorstellungen in den Pyramidentexten (Weisbaden: Harrassowitz, 1997), 14–66.

119 . For the general principles behind the phonetic reconstruction, see James P. Allen, The Ancient Egyptian Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 11–30.

120 . Dates for kings taken from Erik Hornung, Rolf Krauss, and David A. Warburton, Ancient Egyptian Chronology (Leiden, NDL: E. J. Brill, 2006), 490–95. Dates for individual Coffin Texts manuscripts taken from Harco Willems, Chests of Life (Leiden: Ex Oriente Lux, 1988).

121 . PT 263 §340d; 304 §469a. Pyramid Text (PT) references may be found in Kurt Sethe, Die AltaegyptischenPyramidentexte (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1908–1910).

122 . PT 264 §343a; 334 §543b; 359 §§594b, d-f, 595b, 596b, 597b, 599a-b, d, 600b.

123 . PT 265 §352a; 266 §359b; 359 §§594b, d-f, 595b, 596b, 597b, 599a-b, d, 600b; 437 §802a; 504 §1084b; 507 §1102d; 510 §1138d; 512 §1162c; 548 §1345c; 555 §1376c; 556 §1382a; 569 §1441a; 579 §1541a.

124 . PT 437 §802a; 504 §1084b; 507 §1102d; 510 §1138d; 555 §§1376c, 1377c; 569 §1441a; 609 §1704a; 613 §1737a.

125 . PT 304 §469a; 359 §§594b, d-f, 595b, 597b, 599a-b, d, 600b; 504 §1084b; 684 §2061c.

126 . PT 359 §596b; 437 §802a; 507 §1102d; 512 §1162c; 555 §§1376c, 1377c; 569 §1441a; 697 §2172c.

127 . CT 241 III 326 (A1C); 479 VI 42 (P. Gardiner II); 987 VII 194 (P. Gardiner II).Coffin Text (CT) references may be found in Adriaan de Buck, The Egyptian Coffin Texts (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1935–1961).

128 . CT 163 II 405 (T1L); 214 III 174 (T1C); 268 IV 1 (T1L).

129 . CT 418 V 253 (M3C).

130 . See Sethe, Die altaegyptischen Pyramidentexte, 1:v.

131 . JSPRT4, 3.

132 . Ibid., 25

133 . Ibid.

134 . Ibid., xxv–xxvi.

135 . Ibid., xxvn98.

136 . Ibid., 43.

137 . Ibid., 50.

138 . Ibid., 112.

139 . Ibid., 191.

140 . Ibid., 27–31.

141 . Ibid., 35–39.

142 . Ibid., 45.

143 . Ibid., 47.

144 . Ibid., 49.

145 . Ibid., 51.

146 . Ibid., 86–93.

147 . Ibid., 74–83.

148 . Ibid., 56–71.

149 . This is noted in Michael D. Rhodes, Books of the Dead Belonging to Tshemmin and Neferirnub (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2010), 26, 62–75.

150 . JSPRT4, 338–39.

151 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 9 September 1835, quoted in Van Orden, “Writing to Zion,” 561.

152 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 16 September 1835, in ibid., 565.

153 . Doctrine and Covenants (1835) LXXXVI 4, quoted in JSPRT2, 530; Doctrine and Covenants (1835) XCVI heading, quoted in JSPRT2, 544; Doctrine and Covenants (1835) XCVIII 3, 7, 9, quoted in JSPRT2, 551–53.

154 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 11 September 1835, quoted in Van Orden, “Writing to Zion,” 563.

155 . W. W. Phelps to Sally Phelps, 19–20 July 1835, in ibid., 558.

156 . JSPJ1, 67.

157 . JSPRT4, 56–71, 74–83, 86–93.

158 . Ibid., 112.

159 . Ibid., 185n21.

160 . Ibid., 112.

161 . Ibid.

162 . Ibid., 54.

163 . JSPJ1, 67–71; JSPD5, 20–21.

164 . JSPJ1, 71.

165 . JSPRT4, 194–201.

166 . Ibid., xxvi, 191.

167 . JSPJ1, 76.

168 . Ibid., 107.

169 . Ibid.

170 . Ibid., 109.

171 . Ibid., 110.

172 . Ibid., 110–11.

173 . JSPRT4, 45.

174 . Ibid., 47.

175 . Ibid., xxvi.

176 . JSPJ1, 107.

177 . Warren Parrish, “Letter to the Editor,” Painesville Republican (15 February 1838): [3].

178 . JSPRT4, 238n16.

179 . Ibid., 217. Cf. Ibid., 203.

180 . Ibid., 112.

181 . Andrew H. Hedges, Alex D. Smith, and Richard Lloyd Anderson, eds. Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, Volume 2: December 1841–April 1843 (Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2008),36, hereafter referred to as JSPJ2.

182 . Ibid., 36.

183 . Ibid., 39.

184 . Ibid., 40.

185 . Ibid., 42.

186 . Ibid.

187 . JSPD9, 231.

188 . JSPRT1, 16–19; JSPRT2, 30.

189 . JSPJ2, 42.

190 . JSPRT4, 245.

191 . Ibid., 285.

192 . Ibid., 243.

TREE OF LIFE, TREE OF HEALING

John Tvedtnes

Abstract: The late Hebrew scholar John Tvedtnes takes readers on a grand tour of Jewish and Christian stories and traditions that attest to the Tree of Life as not only a means to prolong life, but also to impart a healing power to individuals and to the earth itself. In a future day, it is said that the Saints will eat of its sweet fruit forever.

[Editor’s Note: Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article is reprinted here as a service to the LDS community. Original pagination and page numbers have necessarily changed, otherwise the reprint has the same content as the original.

See John Tvedtnes, “Tree of Life, Tree of Healing,” in “To Seek the Law of the Lord”: Essays in Honor of John W. Welch, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson and Daniel C. Peterson (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation, 2017), 495–520. Further information at https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/to-seek-the-law-of-the-lord-essays-in-honor-of-john-w-welch-2/.]

This is a tree which is a Tree of Life, And a Vine, a Vine of Life! Satisfying (fare) that is superior to all means of healing is that which thou hast brought, revealed and given to these souls! (Mandaean Prayerbook 375)[1]

The tree of life appears in both the first and last books of the Christian Bible. In the Genesis account, God removes Adam and Eve from the garden so they cannot eat the fruit of the tree of life (Gen. 3:22–24). In the book of Revelation, the tree’s fruit becomes available in the last days to all who obey the Lord (Rev. 2:7; 22:14). Both texts declare that the tree is “in the midst [middle] of the garden” (Gen. 2:9) or “in the midst of the paradise of God” (Rev. 2:7).

Genesis 3:22 recounts how the first couple, after eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge, became like God in being able to distinguish good and evil, and that, had they been able to eat the fruit of the tree of life, they would also have become immortal.[2] This is the earliest biblical mention of the tree as a means of prolonging life. The last such reference is in Revelation 22:1–2, where John describes the new Jerusalem descending from heaven, noting that “In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Rev. 22:2) and that its presence on earth would abolish death and pain (Rev. 21:4). This healing power is the subject of this paper.

Adam’s Illness

The pseudepigraphic Gospel of Nicodemus 3 (19) notes that, when Adam was on his deathbed, he sent his son Seth to procure oil from the tree of life with which to anoint him that he might “arise from his sickness.”[3] An angel appeared to Seth and asked him, “Do you desire, because of the sickness of your father, the oil that raises up the sick, or the tree from which flows such oil?” He told Seth to go to his father and tell him “that after the completion of 5,500 years from the creation of the world, the only-begotten Son of God shall become man and shall descend below the earth. And he shall anoint him with that oil [from the garden of Eden]. And he shall arise and wash him and his descendants with water and the Holy Spirit.”[4] One Latin version of the story has the angel telling Seth that “thy father Adam will not receive of this oil of compassion now, but after many generations of time. For the most beloved Son of God will come down from heaven into the world, and will be baptized by John in the river Jordan; and then shall thy father Adam receive of this oil of compassion, and all that believe in him.”[5]

Two other pseudepigraphic texts (Life of Adam and Eve and Apocalypse of Moses) recount this story. They declare that, when Adam fell ill just days before dying, his son Seth proposed that he (Seth) should beg God to give him fruit from the garden with which to heal his father. Adam told him to ask for the “oil of life,” also termed the “oil of mercy.” As in the Nicodemus account, an angel refuses to grant his request, but promises that the oil will be made available to mortals at a future time (Life of Adam and Eve 31, 36, 40–43, and Apocalypse of Moses 6, 9, 13).[6] Another Jewish tradition holds that the righteous will be given the “oil of life” at the resurrection.[7]

Other treatments of this oil broaden our view of its character. Speaking of Christ—whose Greek title means (as also the Hebrew meaning underlying the term Messiah) “anointed one”—Recognitions of Clement 1.45.5 declares, “Him first God anointed with oil which was taken from the wood of the tree of life: from that anointing therefore He is called Christ. Thence, moreover, He Himself also, according to the appointment of His Father, anoints with similar oil every one of the pious when they come to His kingdom, for their refreshment after their labors, as having got over the difficulties of the way; so that their light may shine, and being filled with the Holy Spirit, they may be endowed with immortality.”[8]

In his vision, the prophet Zechariah saw a menorah (lampstand)[9] like the one used in the tabernacle of Moses[10] and the temple of Solomon.[11] It was flanked by two olive trees that fed their oil into the lamps and which represented “the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth” (Zech. 4:1–3, 11–14).[12] The seven-branched menorah, as studies have shown, represents the tree of life.[13]

Noah and the Healing Trees

The Bible mentions one instance of healing by means of a tree, when the prophet Isaiah instructed the servants of Hezekiah, king of Judah, to prepare a poultice of figs to cover a boil that threatened his life (2 Kings 20:7; Isa. 38:21). In this connection, Methodius, bishop of Olympias (died ca. AD 311), identifying Christ with the vine (cf. John 15:1–6) and the Holy Spirit with the fig tree, held that Hezekiah was symbolically told to rely on the Spirit in order to be healed (Banquet of the Ten Virgins 10.5).[14]

Another early church father, Gregory of Nyssa (died after AD 385), argued that since only one of the trees in the garden of Eden was forbidden to Adam and Eve, the tree of life represents all trees bearing edible fruit. That is, every tree that sustains life is part of the tree of life (On the Making of Man 19.2–3.).[15] In a related vein, Jewish tradition holds that the healing qualities of various trees were made known to Noah and his predecessors by either the fallen angels (1 Enoch 7:1) or angels sent by God. Recension A of the medieval Book of Noah declares:[16]

And he [God] sent an angel, one of the angels of the Presence[17] from among the holy ones, named Raphael,[18] to restrain the outcast spirits beneath the heavens to no longer destroy the children of Adam.[19] And the angel did so and he locked them up in the house of judgment.[20] Only one of ten remained[21] to walk about in the earth before prince Mastemah,[22] to chastise among them the wicked, to strike and to afflict them with all sorts of afflictions and illnesses and to inflict pains. And [concerning] the cures of the ills of the children of Adam and all types of cures, the angel said to heal with the trees of the earth and the plants of the ground and its roots. And, moreover, he sent the princes of the spirits to show to Noah and to tell him the trees of healing with all their grasses and their vegetation and their herbs and their roots and their seeds, why they were created, and to teach him all the things of their cures for healing and for life. (Book of Noah, Recension A)[23]

This medical knowledge was transmitted in books. Recension A of the Book of Noah describes a book of cures possessed by Noah, while Recension C indicates that he had a book passed down from Enoch that contained other scientific information, notably about astronomy. It was Gregory Abu-l Faraj, a thirteenth-century Jewish convert to Christianity, also known as Bar Hebraeus, who wrote in his chronography that “Enoch made manifest before every man the knowledge of books and the art of writing.” He especially tied Enoch to medical knowledge by making him the teacher of Asclepius,[24] who was noted in Greek mythology for his healing powers. He further noted that Enoch, called Hermes Trismegistos[25] by the Greeks, “invented the science of the constellations and the courses (orbits?) of the stars” and “rejected the foods [which produced] impurities and drunkenness.”[26]

Returning to Recension A of the Book of Noah, we read that “the knowledge of healing increased in the earth, in all the nations that examined the books of healing, among the sages of India and the sages of Macedonia and the sages of Egypt, for the sages of India roved to find all the trees of medicine and spices.”[27] But God seems to have wanted the tree(s) of life to remain unrevealed until a later time, as indicated in the book of Revelation. The Noah account says:

And their wisdom increased until there arose Asclepinos,[28] one of the sages of Macedonia and forty men with him of the magicians learned in the ancient books and they went in the land and they traversed from beyond India to the land east of Eden to find some of the trees of life in order to magnify their glory among the sages of the land. And when they came to that place and they found the trees of medicine and trees of the tree of life, they put forth their hand to take them. And the Lord shone on them the revolving sword blade[29] and they all glowed with sparks of lightning[30] and not one man of them escaped. (Book of Noah, Recension A)

Ancient Babylonian tradition also ties the flood survivor, Utnapishtim (“he who lived/survived”) to a remarkable plant that was capable of renewing youth. He informed Gilgamesh about it, who got the plant, and then placed it on a rock while he bathed in water, whence the serpent stole it. Whether connected to this story or not, in many ancient traditions, the serpent is said to possess eternal life,[31] and has been identified as both Christ and the devil in various passages of scripture.

Ephrem of Syria, a Christian writer of the fourth century AD, frequently drew upon biblical imagery for the religious hymns he composed.[32] One of his favorite topics was Noah and the flood. He compared the Christian Church with the ark and the tide of worldly sin with the waters of the flood and compared the olive branch brought back to the ark by the dove (Gen. 8:11) with the concept of a healing plant. The first of his Nisbene Hymns reads,

In the ark Thou didst save a remnant; save in me, O Lord, yea in me a leaven. The ark upon the mountain brought forth; let me in my hands bring forth my imprisoned ones! O Lord, gladden Thou in me the imprisoned ones of my fortresses, Thou Who didst gladden those prisoners with the olive leaf! Thou sentest healing by means of the dove to the sick ones that were drowning in every wave; it entered in and drove out all their pains. For the joy of it swallowed up their sorrow, and mourning vanished away in its consolation. And as the chief of a host gives heartening to the fugitives, so the dove disseminated courage among the forsaken. Their eyes tasted the sight of peace, and their mouth hastened to open in Thy praise. As the olive leaf in the waves, save Thou me, that Thou mayest gladden in me the prisoners of my fortresses! (Nisbene Hymns 1:6–7)[33]

Bearing in mind the healing ability of the leaves of the tree of life as described in Revelation 22:2, it is likely that Ephrem was suggesting that the olive branch brought by the dove to Noah’s ark was from the tree of life, which brings healing and wholeness.[34] An unknown bishop of the early Church[35] used similar imagery in his Treatise Against the Heretic Novatian:

When, therefore, these so many and such malignant spirits are attacking and bestirring themselves for the destruction of the lapsed, a way of salvation is provided for the wounded, that with whatever strength they have they may drag themselves with their whole body, and betake themselves to their camp, wherein being received, they may heal their wounds with spiritual medicaments. Thus the dove received, after the intervention of a few days, is again sent forth from the ark; and returning, not only shows its firm footsteps, but moreover the signs of its peace and victory, in those olive leaves which it bore in its mouth. (A Treatise Against the Heretic Novatian 6)[36]

The anonymous author seems to have been acquainted with the events depicted in Recension A of the Book of Noah, which attributes the diseases of Noah’s offspring to evil spirits[37] and describes the use of trees as a means of curing them.[38]

The Christian use of olive oil to bless and cure the sick is first mentioned in Mark 6:13: “they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them.”[39] And subsequently described in the epistle of James: “Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him” (James 5:14–15).[40] In Roman Catholicism, the practice became especially important in the “extreme unction,” whereby a dying person is anointed not for healing, but for forgiveness of sins at the time of death. The concept is also found in the Latter-day Saint practice of anointing and blessing the sick: “whosoever among you are sick, and have not faith to be healed, but believe, shall be nourished with all tenderness, with herbs and mild food, and that not by the hand of an enemy. And the elders of the church, two or more, shall be called, and shall pray for and lay their hands upon them in my name; and if they die they shall die unto me, and if they live they shall live unto me” (D&C 42:43–33).

Living Waters

The tree of life is frequently associated with water, which also possesses healing qualities. John’s vision of the new Jerusalem, with “a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb” and “on either side of the river…the tree of life” with its healing leaves (Rev. 22:1–2) seems to be patterned on Ezekiel’s vision of water flowing from the latter-day temple (which the Lord identifies as his throne in Ezek. 43:7), becoming a river and, “at the bank of the river were very many trees on the one side and on the other” (Ezek. 47:1–7). Each vision is presented by an angel who measures either the temple (Ezek. chapters 40–47) or the city that replaces the temple (Rev. 21:15–17). Revelation 22:2 declares that “the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations,” while Ezekiel 47:12 says that “by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.”

In Ezekiel’s vision, water has healing qualities. The angel informs him “These waters issue out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, and go into the sea: which being brought forth into the sea, the waters shall be healed” (Ezek. 47:8). The sea east of Jerusalem is, of course, the Dead Sea, which today supports no life. At the time of its healing, the angel reported, “every thing that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live” and fish will inhabit the river and the sea (Ezek. 47:9–10).[41]

Zechariah’s vision of the future Jerusalem bears affinities with that of Ezekiel.[42] Zechariah 14:8 says that “living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former [Dead] sea, and half of them toward the hinder [Mediterranean] sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.” Ezekiel’s description is more precise, saying that the “waters issued out from under the threshold of the house eastward: for the forefront of the house stood toward the east, and the waters came down from under from the right side of the house, at the south side of the altar” (Ezek. 47:1). Similarly, Joel 3:18 notes that “a fountain shall come forth of the house of the Lord, and shall water the valley of Shittim.”[43]

The pseudepigraphic Apocalypse [Revelation] of Paul 22, patterned after John’s vision of the New Jerusalem, describes Paul’s vision of an unusual river and its associated trees:

And I looked round that land and I saw a river flowing with milk and honey; and at the edge of the river were planted trees full of fruit. And each tree was bearing twelve times twelve fruits in the year, various and different…And after that he took me up away from the place where I had seen these things and, behold, a river whose waters were very white, whiter than milk. And I said to the angel: What is this? And he said to me: This is Lake Acherusia where the city of Christ is.[44]

Although it is true that “living waters” (Hebrew mayim hayyim) typically denotes running water (as opposed to stagnant), in these passages, the water is the source of healing, bringing life everywhere it flows, and is clearly associated with trees whose leaves and fruit also bring healing. As noted, Jewish tradition holds that the tree of life is the source of water for the earth,[45] evidently an attempt to explain the ability of water to support life, which resembles the early Christian tradition that held that the efficacy of baptism in water was because Jesus had been baptized therein.[46]

Baptism, of course, washes away one’s sins. John the Baptist invited those coming to be baptized by him to “bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance” (Matt. 3:8), thus again tying baptism to a fruit tree. Similarly, Jesus compared his “baptism” to the cup of wine being drunk at the last supper and to his blood.[47]

Introducing another aspect, the Christian Ethiopic text known as The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, holds that Adam, after being expelled from the garden, prayed that God would allow him access to “the Water of Life that I may drink of it and live” (Conflict of Adam and Eve I, 41.12), identifying it with “the water that flowed from under the Tree of Life” (Conflict of Adam and Eve I, 41.10). The premortal Christ replied, “as regards the Water of Life thou seekest, it will not be granted thee this day; but on the day that I shall shed My blood upon thy head in the land of Golgotha.[48] For My blood shall be the Water of Life to you at that time, and not to just you alone, but to all your descendants who shall believe in Me” (Conflict of Adam and Eve I, 42.5–8).[49]

Like the water flowing from the tree of life in the garden, Christ is best known for his healing power. In effect, he replaces the tree and its waters. In Revelation 21:6, the risen Savior declares, “I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.” This idea is repeated in Revelation 22:17: “And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” The passage obviously derives from Isaiah 55:1, “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.” Jesus alluded to this passage in the temple during the feast of tabernacles, when prayers for rain were offered at the temple and when tree branches played a significant role in both the sukkot and the lulav.[50] “In the last day, that great day of the feast [of tabernacles], Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water” (John 7:37–38).

With the water of life often associated with the tree of life, it is interesting that Jesus declared himself to be the source of living water (John 4:10–14), the true vine (John 15:1–8), and the heavenly bread (John 6:27–35, 41), the latter two deriving from living plants. This may have been intended to demonstrate that he was the prophet promised by Moses (Deut. 18:15–19),[51] in whose day the Israelites received miraculous manna from heaven (Exod. 16:11–35) and water from the rock (Exod. 17:1–7; Num. 20:2–11) that Paul later identified with Jesus (1 Cor. 10:1–4). Likewise, John wrote that “the Lamb [Christ] which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters” (Rev. 7:17).[52]

Continuing the water imagery, in John 5:2–9, we find that Jesus healed a man who, along with others seeking a cure, waited beside a pool believed to have healing power.[53] On another occasion, he sent a blind man to wash his eyes in the pool of Siloam (John 9:6–7). Long before, in the Old Testament, we see the Syrian leper Naaman being healed by following the prophet Elisha’s instructions to immerse himself seven times in the Jordan River (2 Kings 5:1–14).

Christians rightly think of the waters of baptism as the source of spiritual healing. The apostle Paul compared baptism to the burial and resurrection of Christ, as well as being “planted” (Rom. 6:3–5; Col. 2:12).[54] From the Jewish side, Zohar Leviticus 97b declares that, prior to Israel’s receiving the Torah (law) on Mount Sinai, a dew descended from the “supernal holy waters” to purify the people, “That they might be worthy to be cleansed by the waters of that stream which is called ‘living waters’…When Israel drew near to Mount Sinai, that dew that descends from the supernal Point came down in its fulness and purifed them so that their filth left them.”[55] The apostle Paul may have had this tradition in mind when he wrote, “Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ”

(1 Cor. 10:1–4).[56]

Noah and the Cross

A number of early Christian Fathers believed that Noah’s ark, made of wood like the cross, prefigured the Church, through which comes eternal life.[57] Augustine of Hippo wrote that the ark represented the church “which is rescued by the wood on which hung the Mediator of God and men,” while the door placed in the side of the ark “signified the wound which was made when the side of the Crucified was pierced with the spear” (City of God 15.26).

Some early Christian writers went so far as to see the flood and the ark as symbols of Christ himself. In this, they follow the apostle Peter, who compared the flood to baptism (1 Pet. 3:20). Justin Martyr wrote, “For Christ, being the first-born of every creature, became again the chief of another race regenerated by Himself through water, and faith, and wood, containing the mystery of the cross; even as Noah was saved by wood when he rode over the waters with his household…I mean, that by water, faith, and wood, those who are afore-prepared, and who reopent of the sins which they have committed, shall escape from the impending judgment of God” (Dialogue with Trypho 138).[58] Two centuries later, Augustine of Hippo declared “That Noah, with his family is saved by water and wood, as the family of Christ is saved by baptism, as representing the suffering of the cross” (Reply to Faustus 12.14).[59] Hippolytus, another early Christian scholar, continued the concern with the ark:

the ark was a symbol of the Christ who was expected. For that ark was the means of the salvation of Noah and his sons, and also of the cattle, the wild beasts, and the birds. And Christ, too, when He suffered on the cross, delivered us from accusation and sins, and washed us in His own blood most pure. And just as the ark returned to the east, and neared Mount Kardu, so also Christ, when the work was accomplished and finished which He had proposed to Himself, returned to heaven to the bosom of His Father, and sat down upon the throne of His glory at the Father’s right hand. (On the Pentateuch Fragment V, On Genesis 8:1).[60]

Cyril of Jerusalem compared the cross to the olive tree from which the dove brought a sprig to Noah:

Of this dove, the dove of Noe, according to some, was in part a figure. For as in his time by means of wood and of water there came salvation to themselves, and the beginning of a new generation, and the dove returned to him towards evening with an olive branch; thus, say they, the Holy Ghost also descended upon the true Noe, the Author of the second birth, who draws together into one the wills of all nations, of whom the various dispositions of the animals in the ark were a figure:—Him at whose coming the spiritual wolves feed with the lambs…The spiritual dove therefore, as some interpret, came down at the season of His baptism, that He might shew that it is He who by the wood of the Cross saves them who believe, He who at eventide should grant salvation through His death. (Catechetical Lectures 17.10)[61]

To these Christian thinkers, the wood of Noah’s ark and the water on which it floated were sources of spiritual rescue from death.

The Tree and the Cross

For many Christians, the tree of life and the cross of Jesus coalesce. In a number of early texts, Jesus is himself said to be the tree of life.[62] In other early texts, the cross is the tree of life, though it is often said to have been made of wood from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.[63] In Book of the Rolls f.94a–b, we read that “the tree was the Cross which was planted in the middle of the earth…God planted the tree of life in the middle of Paradise and it was in the form of the cross which was stretched upon it, and it was the tree of life and salvation.”[64] In the second century, Justin Martyr wrote:

And from the sayings of Jeremiah they [the Jews] have cut out the following: “I [was] like a lamb that is brought to the slaughter: they devised a device against me, saying, Come, let us lay on wood on His bread, and let us blot Him out from the land of the living; and His name shall no more be remembered.” And since this passage from the sayings of Jeremiah is still written in some copies [of the Scriptures] in the synagogues of the Jews (for it is only a short time since they were cut out), and since from these words it is demonstrated that the Jews deliberated about the Christ Himself, to crucify and put him to death, He Himself is both declared to be led as a sheep to the slaughter, as was predicted by Isaiah,[65] and is here represented as a harmless lamb.” (Dialogue with Trypho 72)[66]

The quote used by Justin is from the Septuagint version of Jeremiah 11:19.[67] Following Justin, Tertullian interpreted the “wood” as the cross and the “bread” as the body of Christ (Against Marcion 2.4.40).[68] Elsewhere, he noted that Christ bore the cross “on his shoulder” in fulfillment of the wood laid on the bread in Jeremiah’s prophecy (An Answer to the Jews 10). Both Justin (First Apology 41) and Tertullian (An Answer to the Jews 10) drew attention to the Septuagint reading of Psalm 95:10,[69] which includes wording they said was omitted by the Jews, “God reigned from the tree.” This, they claimed, was an allusion to Christ’s suffering and death on the cross. Tertullian again drew attention to the fact that Christ bore the cross “on his shoulder,” thus placing the wood atop his body, as symbolized by the bread of the eucharist.[70]

Turning to the creation account, Cave of Treasures fol. 6a col. 2 declares that “Eden is the Holy Church, and the Paradise which was in it is the land of rest, and the inheritance of life, which God hath prepared for all the holy children of men,”[71] while fol. 7b col. 1 says “That Tree of Life which was in the midst of Paradise prefigured the Redeeming Cross, which is the veritable Tree of Life, and this it was that was fixed in the middle of the earth.”[72]

Drawing on Revelation 22:2, the third century writer Victorinus explained that “The tree of life on either bank [of the river] sets forth the Advent of Christ, according to the flesh, who satisfied the peoples wasted with famine, that received life from One by the wood of the Cross, with the announcement of God’s word” (Commentary on the Apocalypse of John).[73] Reflecting a similar view of the cross as an instrument of healing, a homily attributed (perhaps falsely) to Gregory Thaumaturgus has Christ saying, “It becometh me to ascend the cross, and to be pierced with its nails, and to suffer after the manner of that nature which is capable of suffering, and to heal sufferings by my suffering, and by the tree to cure the wound that was inflicted upon men by the medium of a tree” (spurious 4th homily).[74] Thus, the cross, like the tree of life, has healing power and cures the ills brought upon mankind by Adam’s partaking of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. This idea is also expressed in the pseudepigraphic Gospel of Nicodemus, where Christ rescues Adam and his posterity from Hades, saying, “Come all with me, as many as have died through the tree which he [Adam] touched: for, behold, I again raise you all up through the tree of the cross.”[75] Likewise, Cyril of Jerusalem wrote of Christ, “He is bruised and wounded, but He healeth every disease and every infirmity. He is lifted up and nailed to the Tree, but by the Tree of Life He restoreth us” (3rd Theological Oration On the Son).[76]

The healing power of the tree of life is also described by early writers who drew attention to the incident at Marah (meaning “bitter”), where Moses made the water potable by casting in a tree to make it sweet (Exod. 15:23–25).[77] According to Pseudo-Philo 11:15, on the holy mountain God “showed Moses the tree of life, from which he cut off and threw into Marah, and the water of Marah became sweet.”[78] Christian writers tended to compare this tree with the cross. Tertullian, for example, identified “the ‘tree’ of the passion of Christ, whence life, hanging” with the tree “wherewith Moses sweetened the bitter water; whence the People, which was perishing of thirst in the desert, drank and revived; just as we do, who, drawn out from the calamities of the heathendom in which we were tarrying perishing with thirst (that is, deprived of the divine word), drinking, ‘by the faith which is on Him,’ the baptismal water of the ‘tree’ of the passion of Christ [i.e., the cross], have revived” (An Answer to the Jews 13).[79]

Much later, Ambrose used similar imagery, saying, “Marah was a fountain of most bitter water: Moses cast wood into it and it became sweet. For water without the preaching of the Cross of the Lord is of no avail for future salvation, but, after it has been consecrated by the mystery of the saving cross, it is made suitable for the use of the spiritual layer and of the cup of salvation. As, then, Moses, that is, the prophet, cast wood into that fountain, so, too, the priest utters over this font the proclamation of the Lord’s cross, and the water is made sweet for the purpose of grace” (On the Mysteries 3.14).[80]

Jerome, alluding to the twelve springs and 70 palm trees of Elim, where the Israelites camped after leaving Marah (Num. 33:8–9), wrote that “As wood sweetens Marah so that seventy palm-trees are watered by its streams, so the cross makes the waters of the law life-giving to the seventy who are Christ’s apostles” (Letter 69 to Oceanus, 6).[81] Clearly, this story from the exodus found relevance for these writers as they gazed through their Christian lenses.

The Serpent and the Cross

Though a tie between the serpent and the cross may be unexpected, one exists. In Genesis 3, the serpent is associated with the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which brought death (mortality) into the world. He tempted Eve to eat the fruit of the tree by telling her that “God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:5). That this part of the serpent’s speech was the truth is clear from Genesis 3:22, where the Lord himself says, “Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever,” Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden and cherubim, accompanied by a flaming sword, prevented their return.

The serpent served a very different role in the time of Moses, whose rod turned into a serpent as a sign to the king of Egypt (Exod. 4:2–4; 7:9–10, 15). In addition, during the exodus, “the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died…And Moses prayed for the people. And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived” (Num. 21:6–19). According to Book of the Bee 30, this pole was the rod with which Moses brought water out of the rock.[82] Augustine of Hippo went farther:

The bitter waters [of Marah] are sweetened by wood, as hostile people become friendly by learning to honor the cross of Christ. The twelve fountains watering the seventy palm trees [at Elim] are a figure of apostolic grace watering the nations. As seven is mutiplied by ten, so the decalogue is fulfilled in the sevenfold operation of the Spirit. The enemy attempting to stop them in their way [the Amalekites] is overcome by Moses stretching out his hands in the figure of the cross. The deadly bites of serpents are healed by the brazen serpent, which was lifted up that they might look at it. (Reply to Faustus 12.30)[83]

It is not surprising that some of the early Church Fathers considered the brazen serpent to be symbolic of Christ’s abolition of the death caused by the serpent by dying on the cross. For example, Tertullian wrote, “Why, once more, did the same Moses, after prohibiting the likeness of everything, set up the golden serpent on the pole; and as it hung there, propose it as an object to be looked at for a cure? Did he not here also intend to show the power of our Lord’s cross, whereby that old serpent the devil was vanquished,—whereby also to every man who was bitten by spiritual serpents, but who yet turned with an eye of faith to it, was proclaimed a cure from the bite of sin, and health for evermore?” (Against Marcion 3.18;[84] see also his An Answer to the Jews 10). Other early Christian writers also made the tie, including Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho 91) and Augustine of Hippo (Reply to Faustus 14.7).

The identification of Moses’ serpent with the sacrifice of Christ was already made in John 3:14–15: “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.”[85] Sadly, according to 2 Kings 18:4, the brazen serpent of Moses became an object of worship to generations of Israelites, on account of which Hezekiah, king of Judah (ca. 715–687 BC), destroyed it.[86] Their distant neighbors, the Greeks, believed that serpents had healing powers, which they reportedly taught to the famous physician Asclepius. The Asclepian wand displays a serpent entwined around a pole—a symbol still used in the medical profession in our day.

Food for the Righteous

Christian scriptures proclaim that Christ will give to the righteous the fruit of the tree of life when it is restored to the earth (Prov. 11:30; Rev. 2:7; 22:14).[87] Of the righteous person who inherits the heavenly kingdom, Clement of Alexandria wrote, “it is in his power to be a citizen of heaven, and to cultivate Paradise, and walk about in heaven and partake of the tree of life and immortality” (Exhortation to the Heathen 10).[88] Decades later, Hippolytus wrote that “The fruit of righteousness and the tree of life is Christ. He alone, as man, fulfilled all righteousness. And with His own underived life He has brought forth the fruits of knowledge and virtue like a tree, whereof they that eat shall receive eternal life, and shall enjoy the tree of life in paradise, with Adam and all the righteous” (On Proverbs 10).[89] Not surprisingly, the same idea is expressed in early extracanonical Jewish and Christian writings.[90]

Commenting on the healing properties of the leaves of the tree of life in John’s vision of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 22), Hilary of Poitiers has written the following in compelling language:

But because the tree of Life in the sacrament of Baptism is in every case one, supplying to those that come to it on every side the fruits of the apostolic message, so there stands on either side of the river one tree of Life. There is one Lamb seen amid the throne of God, and one river, and one tree of Life: three figures wherein are comprised the mysteries of the Incarnation, Baptism and Passion, whose leaves, that is to say, the words of the Gospel, bring healing to the nations through the teaching of a message that cannot fall to the ground.

And all things whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. Never again shall His gift and His statutes be set at naught, as they were in the case of Adam, who by his sin in breaking the Law lost the happiness of an assured immortality; but now, thanks to the redemption wrought by the tree of Life, that is, by the Passion of the Lord, all that happens to us is eternal and eternally conscious of happiness in virtue of our future likeness to that tree of Life. For all their doings shall prosper. Being wrought no longer amid shift and change nor in human weakness, for corruption will be swallowed up in incorruption, weakness in endless life, the form of earthly flesh in the form of God. This tree, then, planted and yielding its fruit in its own season, shall that happy man resemble, himself being planted in the Garden, that what God has planted may abide, never to be rooted up, in the Garden where all things done by God shall be guided to a prosperous issue, apart from the decay that belongs to human weakness and to time, and has to be uprooted. (Homilies on Psalms [Psalm 1], 17)[91]

John Tvedtnes earned degrees in Anthropology, Middle East Area Studies, Linguistics, and Hebrew, and studied Egyptian and Semitic languages at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He taught at the University of Utah, the BYU Salt Lake Center, and Jerusalem Center before joining the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, which became BYU’s Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. John has lectured at several other universities and has presented dozens of symposium papers in Israel and the United States. Though most of his ten books and 300+ articles address LDS subjects, his writings have been published by four universities and several professional societies. John retired in 2007 as senior resident scholar for BYU’s Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship.

1 E. S. Drower, The Canonical Prayerbook of the Mandaeans (Leiden: Brill, 1959), 269–70.

2 See also Alma 12:21–26; 42:2–6.

3 This passage suggests that the tree of life is an olive tree; other sources identify it with the almond tree, the fig tree, and even the grapevine.

4 Edgar Hennecke and Wilhelm Schneemelcher, eds., trans. R. McL. Wilson, New Testament Apocrypha (2nd ed., Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1991), 1:522–23.

5 Latin second version, 4, in Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., Anti-Nicene Fathers (reprint Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 8:456.

6 James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983), 2:270–75.

7 Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, trans. Henrietta Szold (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1937) 1:94.

8 Roberts and Donaldson, Anti-Nicene Fathers, 8:89. The shining light concept derives from the fact that olive oil was used in oil lamps in the time of Christ. In early Christianity, anointing with oil was tied to anointing by the Holy Ghost. See the author’s article “Olive Oil: Symbol of the Holy Ghost,” in The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5, ed. Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch (Salt Lake City: Deseret and FARMS, 1994).

9 The King James Version of the Bible unfortunately uses the anachronistic term candlestick. The lampstand burned olive oil, candles not yet having been invented.

10 Exod. 25:31–35; 35:14; 37:17–23; 39:37; 40:4, 24–25; Lev. 24:4; Num. 3:31; 4:9; 8:1–4. Like the burning bush from which the Lord spoke to Moses (Exod. 3:1–4), the menorah is topped with flames.

11 1 Chron. 28:15; 2 Chron. 13:11. For the seven-branched menorah in the heavenly temple, see Rev. 1:12–13, 20; 2:1.

12 The term “anointed ones” denotes Messiahs and may be the source of the idea of two Messiahs, one of Aaron and one of Israel/Judah in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and of Judah and Joseph in later Jewish tradition. In Rev. 11:3–4, two “candlesticks” and two olive trees represent the two latter-day prophets who will be killed in Jerusalem and raised up again. See D&C 77:15.

13 See, for example, Zofja Ameisenowa and W. F. Mainland, “The Tree of Life in Jewish Iconography,” Journal of the Warburg Institute 2, no. 4 (April 1939): 326–45; Leon Yarden, The Tree of Light: A Study of the Menorah (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1971); Simo Parpola, “The Assyrian Tree of Life: Tracing the Origins of Jewish Monotheism and Greek Philo,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 52, no. 3 (July 1993): 161–208; Joan E. Taylor, “The Asherah, the Menorah and the Sacred Tree,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 20, no. 66 (1995): 29–54.

14 The Talmud gives a recipe for “blood rushing to the head,” mixing leaves from willow, myrtle, olive, poplar, rosemary, and two uncertain ingredients called shurbina and yabla (Tob. Gittin 68a).

15 This view does not account for the fact that, at the time he expelled Adam and Eve from the garden, the Lord placed cherubim to ensure that they could not eat its fruit (Gen. 3:22–24; Alma 12:21; 42:2–3; Moses 4:28–31).

16 Three recensions of the Hebrew Book of Noah were published in Amsterdam in 1854 by Adolph Jellinek in volume three of his six-volume Bet ha-Midrasch, reprinted in two-volumes in 1967 by Wahrmann in Jerusalem. The English translation used here is my own.

17 In Jewish tradition, there are either four or seven “angels of the Presence” who, unlike the other angels, stand in God’s presence. The term ‘presence’ is found in Isa. 63:9; Abr. 1:15; D&C 133:53; cf. Luke 1:19; 2 Ne. 9:8; D&C 76:25; Moses 5:58. These are the archangels, among whom Michael, Gabriel, Raphael and Uriel are almost always included in the lists found in early Jewish texts. Of these four, only Uriel is not named in D&C 128:21.

18 Raphael means “God heals” or “healer of God.” In Jewish tradition, he is the angel charged with healing the sick.

19 Cf. Tobit 6:1–8; 8:1–9; 11:1–15, where we read that the angel Raphael instructed Tobias to prepare a medication from the liver of a fish, which he used to drive away an evil spirit, then used the fish’s gall to heal his blind father Tobit. The medieval Chronicles of Jerahmeel 23:1–3 places the binding of the evil spirits prior to the flood, writing of the “demons, spirits, and imps in thousands and myriads, and whomever they lighted upon they injured and killed outright, until Methuselah appeared and besought the mercy of God. After fasting for three days, God gave him permission to write the ineffable name of God upon (his sword?), through which he slew ninety-four myriads of them in a minute, until Agrimus [the elder of the demons]…came to him and entreated him (to stop); he then handed over to him the names of the demons and imps. And so he placed their kings in iron fetters, while the remainder fled away and hid themselves in the innermost chambers and recesses of the ocean.” Moses Gaster, The Chronicles of Jerahmeel (reprint, New York: Ktav, 1971), 49.

20 A number of early texts suggest that the fallen angels were imprisoned until the day of judgment. See 1 Enoch 6–10, portions of which are cited in the New Testament epistle of Jude (verses 6, 14–15). The apostle Peter wrote of the imprisoned spirits who had been disobedient in the time of Noah (1 Pet. 3:19–20). The Arab chronographer Jacfar Muhammad bin Jarir al-Tabari (AD 839–923) wrote of one Oshahanj (whom he identified with Noah’s ancestor Mahalaleel), saying that “he subdued Iblis [the devil] and his armies and forbade them to mix with human beings. Writing a document on a white sheet, he imposed covenants upon them enjoining them not to confront any human being. He threatened them in case they did. He killed the rebels among them and a number of ghūls. Fearing him they fled into deserts, mountains, and [river] valleys.” Franz Rosenthal, trans., The History of al-Tabari, vol. 1: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood (Albany: SUNY Press, 1989), 342. The concept of evil spirits living in deserts and other desolate places is widespread in ancient and medieval lore and is also found in the Bible.

21 Pistis Sophia 15–16 speaks of the angels who transgressed and mutinied against God, bringing sorceries to mankind, and notes that Christ took away a third of their power. This evidently refers to the third of the host of heaven who fell with Satan, as described in Revelation 12:4. In a variant tradition, it is Methuselah who placed the kings of the demons born to Adam and his first wife Lilith (unknown from the Bible) in iron fetters, while the rest went into hiding in the ocean (Chronicles of Jerahmeel 23:3). The binding of the fallen angels with chains is also mentioned in 1 Enoch 53:3–5; 54:1–6; 56:1–4; 69:28 and 2 Baruch 56:12–15. According to 2 Enoch 7:1–4, the fallen angels are kept under guard and are tormented. In the Gospel of Bartholomew 4:12 (cf. 1:20), Beliar (from Belial, a name often given to the devil in early Jewish and Christian documents) is kept in fiery chains, guarded by a large number of angels. The account is repeated in book 8 of the Apostolic History of Abdias. Jude wrote that “the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he [God] hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day” (Jude 1:6). He further spoke of the “wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever” (Jude 1:13), followed by a quote attributed to Enoch (Jude 1:13–15). The seven “fallen stars” or “evil angels” that had sinned and had been imprisoned are mentioned in 1 Enoch 18:13–18; 21:1–6; 86:1–89:9; 90:20–27. The chains with which they were bound are mentioned in 1 Enoch 88:1–3. Peter also wrote that “God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; and spared not the old world, but saved Noah…bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly” (2 Pet. 2:4–5). In his vision, Enoch saw angels preparing chains for Satan and angels of punishment holding nets of iron and bronze (1 Enoch 53:3–5). Peter may have taken the idea from Enoch, for the Enoch story in Moses 7:57 is worded very much like 1 Peter 2:4–5. For chains and the lake of fire and brimstone, see Alma 12:17.

22 Mastemah (“enmity”) is one of the names of the devil in ancient Jewish texts. In this passage, Mastemah is preceded by the article, giving us “the prince of enmity.” The Book of Mormon calls the devil “the enemy of all righteousness” (Mosiah 4:14; Alma 34:23; Moro. 9:6).

23 Just before this, the text speaks of Raphael: “And he sent an angel, one of the angels of the Presence from among the holy ones, named Raphael, to restrain the outcast spirits beneath the heavens to no longer destroy the children of Adam. And the angel did so and he locked them up in the house of judgment. Only one of ten remained to walk about in the earth before prince Mastemah, to chastise among them the wicked to strike and to afflict them with all sorts of afflictions and illnesses and to inflict pains.”

24 Aesculapius in his text.

25 Trismaghistos in his text.

26 Ernest A. Wallis Budge, The Chronography of Gregory Abu’l Faraj (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1932), 5.

27 The diseases that afflict people vary widely from one region to another and hence one would expect that the cures also vary. Thus, in the Book of Mormon we read, “And there were some who died with fevers, which at some seasons of the year were very frequent in the land—but not so much so with fevers, because of the excellent qualities of the many plants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of diseases, to which men were subject by the nature of the climate” (Alma 46:40). Among modern medicines derived from trees are quinine (for Malaria) and aspirin (from the bark of the Yew tree).

28 This is Asclepius, a hero from Greek mythology who later become the god of medicine and healing.

29 The cherubim who guarded the east entrance of the garden of Eden had a revolving flaming sword (Gen. 3:24).

30 Lightning is also mentioned in Recension C of the Book of Noah.

31 Sir James George Frazer collected numerous accounts from around the world in volume 1 (of 3) of his 1919 book Folk-Lore in the Old Testament.

32 For a discussion, see Tryggve Kronholm, Motifs from Genesis 1–11 in the Genuine Hymns of Ephrem the Syrian (Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala Universitet, 1978), Coniectanea Biblica: Old Testament Series 11.

33 Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series (reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 13:168. A number of texts dealing with the flood consider Noah and his families to be prisoners in the ark.

34 A number of early texts indicate that the tree of life was the olive tree. See Tvedtnes, “Olive Oil: Symbol of the Holy Ghost,” 427–59.

35 Novation, against whose teachings the document is addressed, lived in Rome AD 210–280.

36 Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 5:659.

37 The New Testament also identifies evil spirits as the cause of various physical afflictions (see, for example, Matt. 8:16–17; 10:1, 8; Mark 1:32–34; 3:15; 6:13; Luke 6:18–19; 8:35–36; 9:1; 13:32; Acts 5:16; 8:7).

38 We may compare the oil to the balm of Gilead of which the prophet Jeremiah wrote as a medicine to recover health (Jer. 8:22; 46:11; 51:8). The balm of Gilead was one of the commodities taken to Egypt by the caravaneers who acquired Joseph and sold him as a slave (Gen. 37:25). Jerome wrote that “the Ishmaelitish merchantmen bring down to the Egyptians perfume and incense and balm (of the kind that grows in Gilead good for the healing of wounds),” Letter 79 to Salvina, 3, in Schaff and Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 6:164.

39 In Luke 10:34, the good Samaritan pours wine and oil on the wounds of the man he rescued.

40 Because of this passage, olive oil came to be associated with baptism and in early Christianity, baptism in water was followed by anointing with oil. Hugh Nibley has suggested that this was a reflection of the ancient temple initiation, i.e., washing and anointing. See his “Christian Envy of the Temple,” Jewish Quarterly Review 50 (1959–60): 97–123, 229–240, reprinted in Nibley, When the Lights Went Out (Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1970), 55–88 and in Nibley, Mormonism and Early Christianity (Salt Lake City: FARMS and Deseret, 1987), 391–434. In the early days of the Latter-day Saints, baptism sometimes replaced anointing and prayer as a remedy for illness as well as a means of forgiveness of sins. For example, Joseph Smith recorded, “My dear Emma was worse. Many fears were entertained that she would not recover. She was baptized twice in the river, which evidently did her much good. She grew worse again at night, and continued very sick indeed. I was unwell, and much troubled on account of Emma’s sickness” (History of the Church 5:167). Latter-day Saints see baptism as a sign of faith in Christ and repentance of one’s sins, baptism representing forgiveness of those sins, which is demonstrated by Christ healing people by saying, “Thy sins be forgiven thee” (e.g., Matt. 9:2–5).

41 For a discussion of the healing of the Dead Sea, see the author’s, “Science and Genesis,” in Science and Religion: Towards a New Dialogue, vol. 2, Wilford M. Hess and Raymond T. Matheny, eds., (Geneva, IL: Paladin House, 1979).

42 Both Zechariah and John wrote that there would be no nighttime in Jerusalem when the Lord comes to reign (Rev. 21:23–25; 22:5; Zech. 14:6–7).

43 . Shittim was situated near the Moabites, who lived across the Dead Sea from the land of Israel (Num. 25:1). It was from here that Joshua sent the two spies to Jericho (Josh. 2:1). See also Josh.3:1 and Micah 6:5.

44 Hennecke and Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, 2:726. The Acherusian lake, which figures in some early Christian texts (e.g., Gospel of Bartholomew and Apocalypse of Peter) as the place where the resurrected dead are baptized prior to ascending to heaven. See the discussion in the author’s “Baptism for the Dead in Early Christianity,” in The Temple in Time and Eternity, ed. Donald W. Parry and Stephen D. Ricks (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1999).

45 Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 1:70. Later tradition holds that the tree of life derives its powers from the water (Zohar Leviticus 34a–34b).

46 The tradition is most prominent among early Syrian writers, such as Ephraim. Salminius Hermias Sozomen (died ca. 448) wrote of a tree named Persis in the Egyptian city of Hermopolis, of which the branches, bark, and leaves could heal diseases. It gained this power when Jesus, as a young child, was brought to the place by Mary and Joseph, who were fleeing King Herod. (Ecclesiastical History 5.21).

47 Matt. 20:22–23/Mark 10:38–39; 1 Cor. 11:5.

48 Christian tradition holds that Christ was crucified atop the burial place of Adam and that his blood dripped down the cross and into the crypt, where it touched Adam’s skull. This is the explanation of the Semitic name Golgotha, which means “skull” (Matt. 27:33; Mark 15:22; John 19:17). Luke 23:33 translates this name into its Greek equivalent, kranion. The name Calvary derives from the Latin word for “skull,” drawn from the Vulgate version of the Bible prepared in Latin by St. Jerome.

49 S. C. Malan, The Book of Adam and Eve, also called The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan (London: Williams and Norgate, 1882), 43–45.

50 The sukkah (the plural, sukkot gives its name to the festival) is a simple outdoor temporary dwelling with overhanging tree branches (Lev. 23:42–43; Neh. 8:14–17), while the lulav is the palm frond carried during the celebration of the feast. For an in-depth discussion of the festival, see the author’s article “King Benjamin and the Feast of Tabernacles,” in By Study and Also by Faith, Essays in Honor of Hugh Nibley, vol. 2, John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks, eds., (Salt Lake City: Deseret and FARMS, 1990).

51 That Jesus was this promised prophet is affirmed in Acts 3:18–16; 7:37; 1 Ne. 22:20–21; 3 Ne. 20:23; 21:11, 20; JSH 1:40.

52 Cf. Jer. 2:13 and 17:13, where the Lord declares himself to be “the fountain of living waters.”

53 Cf. the Roman Catholic pilgrimages to the spring at Lourdes, France, in search of healing.

54 One is also reminded of the description of the righteous person in Ps. 1:3: “And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.”

55. Harry Sperling et al., The Zohar (New York: Rebecca Bennet Publications, 1958), 5:122.

56 The Book of Mormon prophet Nephi wrote of the path and rod of iron seen by his father in vision, saying that it “led to the fountain of living waters, or to the tree of life, which waters are a representation of the love of God [and] that the tree of life was a representation of the love of God” (1 Ne. 11:25). Gen. 2:10 notes that the primordial river has its source in Eden, while later Jewish tradition claims that it flowed from beneath the tree of life itself. Throughout The Zohar, the tree of life is the Torah, but sometimes is only the right side of that tree. The first set of tablets are held to have been taken from the left side, the second from the right.

57 Cyprian (Epistle 74), Augustine of Hippo (Tractate 120 on John 19–20; Against Faustus 32), Jerome (Letter 15 to Pope Damasus; Letter 123 to Egeruchia), Ambrose (Duties of the Clergy 1.18.78), Hilary of Poitiers, (Homilies on Psalms [Psalm 1], 14).

58 Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1:268.

59 Philip Schaff, ed., Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series (reprint, Peabody, Ma: Hendrickson), 4:188. The ark would be the cross of suffering, while baptism denotes the burial and resurrection of Christ (Rom. 6:3–11; Col. 2:12–14).

60 Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 5:198

61 Schaff and Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 7:126.

62 Shepherd of Hermas, Similitudes 8.3; Hippolytus, On Proverbs 10; Asterius, Commentary on the Psalms, 1:4-5; Methodius, The Symposium of the Ten Virgins 9; Bakhayla Mika’el (Zosimas), The Book of the Mysteries of the Heavens and the Earth; Clement of Alexandria (Stromata). See the discussion in Jeanette W. Miller, “The Tree of Life, A Personification of Christ,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 93–106.

63 Various Jewish and Christian texts claim that the rod possessed by Adam and passed down to his offspring was a branch of the tree of life or the tree of knowledge. With it, Moses called upon God to bring the plagues upon Egypt. Replanted, it grew into a tree that Joseph the carpenter used to make the cross on which his stepson Jesus was crucified. There are many variants in the accounts.

64 Margaret Dunlop Wilson, Apocrypha Arabica (London: C. J. Clay, 1901), 8.

65 Evidently an allusion to Isa. 53:7.

66 Roberts and Donaldson, Anti-Nicene Fathers, 1:234–35.

67 The KJV reads, “But I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter; and I knew not that they had devised devices against me, saying, Let us destroy the tree with the fruit thereof, and let us cut him off from the land of the living, that his name may be no more remembered.”

68 Ibid., 3:418. See also Cyprian (died ca. AD 246), Treatise 12 2.15, 20.

69 Corresponding to Ps. 96:10 in the Hebrew and English Bibles.

70 Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; John 6:31-35, 50-51, 55-58; 1 Cor. 10:16-17; 11:23-24; Moro. 4:3; 3 Ne. 18:3-7; D&C 20:77.

71 E. A. Wallis Budge, The Book of the Cave of Treasures (London: Religious Tract Society, 1927), 62. See also Cave of Treasures 17a col. 1-2, ibid., 111-12.

72 Ibid., 63. The apostle Peter noted how Christ’s crucifixion brought healing, writing that Christ “bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed” (1 Pet. 2:24). He here draws on the messianic prophecy in Isa. 53:5.

73 Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 7:359.

74 Ibid., 6:70.

75 See chapter 8 in the Greek text in Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 8:437.

76 Schaff and Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, 7:309.

77 Cf. 2 Kings 2:19–22.

78 James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983), 2:319.

79 Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 3:170.

80 Schaff and Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, 10:319.

81 Ibid., 6:145.

82 Ernest A. Wallis Budge, The Book of the Bee (Oxford: Clarendon, 1886), 50–51.

83 Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, 4:193.

84 Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 3:337.

85 The Book of Mormon prophet Nephi similarly declared, “as the Lord God liveth that brought Israel up out of the land of Egypt, and gave unto Moses power that he should heal the nations after they had been bitten by the poisonous serpents, if they would cast their eyes unto the serpent which he did raise up before them, and also gave him power that he should smite the rock and the water should come forth; yea, behold I say unto you, that as these things are true, and as the Lord God liveth, there is none other name given under heaven save it be this Jesus Christ, of which I have spoken, whereby man can be saved” (2 Ne. 25:20). Other Book of Mormon passages that identify the brazen serpent with Christ include Alma 33:18 and Hel. 8:13–15.

86 The name given to the brazen serpent was Nehushtan, a term related to the Hebrew words nahash (“serpent”) and nehoshet (“copper” and copper alloys, usually bronze).

87 In the Book of Mormon, see 1 Ne. 15:27–28, 36; Alma 5:34–36, 62. In Lehi’s vision, the tree of life bears a white fruit that is especially delicious (1 Ne. 8:10–13; 15:21–22). The people who came to the tree did so by holding onto an iron rod that symbolized the word of God (1 Ne. 8:19–25, 30; 1 Ne. 15:23–24; for an in-depth discussion of the rod, see the author’s “Rod and Sword as the Word of God,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 5, no. 2 [Fall 1996], republished in Pressing Forward with the Book of Mormon, John W. Welch and Melvin J. Thorne, eds., [Provo: FARMS, 1999].). Alma likened the word of God to a seed planted within one’s heart and nourished by faith until it becomes “a tree springing up unto everlasting life. And because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst” (Alma 32:28–43; see also 33:23).

88 Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, 2:198.

89 Ibid., 5:173.

90 Testament of Levi 18:10–11; 4 Ezra 7:123; 8:52; 1 Enoch 24:4; 25:4; 26:5–6; Apocalypse of Elijah 5:4–6; Midrash Rabbah Exodus 25a; Gregory Nazianzen, Oration 2, 25.

91 Schaff and Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, 9:240.

THE INCLUSIVE, ANTI-DISCRIMINATION MESSAGE OF THE BOOK OF MORMON

David M. Belnap

Abstract: Attitudes of superiority lead to societal conflict. The racial interpretation of a few Book of Mormon verses has contributed to these attitudes and conflicts, yet hundreds of inclusive messages are found in more than half of the book’s verses. God’s message, love, mercy, and justice are for all people. Righteous people did not think themselves above others, nor did they persecute others or start wars. War is tragic and is caused by wickedness. Conspiracies are a great evil. Righteous people were kind in their attitudes and actions, regardless of others’ social status or ethnicity. Some Book of Mormon people even gave their lives or put their lives at risk to act kindly, and some of these went from hating others to giving up their lives on behalf of others. The inclusive messages in the Book of Mormon are consistent with the position advocated by current Latter-day Saint leaders condemning all racism and disavowing racist hypotheses such as those derived from a few Book of Mormon verses (i.e., that skin color is related to righteousness). The inclusive messages also are consistent with the view that skin color in the Book of Mormon is not literal but is metaphorical. The Book of Mormon instructs us that the right way to interact is with love and respect, through examples of people respecting and reaching out to others, promises to all people, condemnation of unkindness and anti-Semitism, calls to all people to repent, and emphasizing the flaws of one’s own group and not those of others.

Conflict between nations, tribes, ethnicities, economic classes, and other social divisions has led to tremendous human suffering. Confrontations range from all-out war to subtle oppression and persecution. A primary cause is the view that another person’s ethnicity, economic status, educational level, gender, or other social, physical, spiritual, or mental distinction is inferior to one’s own. These views usually lead to overt or subtle discrimination (i.e., prejudicial conduct towards others based on attitudes of superiority). Racism, xenophobia, casteism, nationalism, chauvinism, and anti-Semitism are common forms of discrimination. Among the plethora of social problems currently in the world, discrimination abounds, and its reduction or elimination would improve the lives of everyone on earth.

The Book of Mormon claims to be an ancient book written for our day, and some of its ancient authors claimed to have seen our day.[1] As stated on its title page, the book professes to be for all people to convince each one of us “that Jesus is the Christ” and that we should accept his gospel. If we do, we are promised personal happiness and peace with others.[2] If the Book of Mormon claims to be for our day, then the book’s teachings should help us overcome discrimination — this unrelenting issue of our time.

Yet, many perceive the book to be racist.[3] A separation of people into two nations included a statement that God put “a skin of blackness” upon the people of one nation as part of a curse for their disobedience, according to the non-cursed recordkeeper (2 Nephi 5:21). This statement along with words in seven other verses[4] have been perceived to indicate that dark skin pigmentation is a sign of unrighteousness or divine disfavor and light skin the opposite. Some have used these words to justify racist attitudes.[5] Many people struggle with these words[6] or refuse to consider the book’s other messages. Some believe the book is a product of racist attitudes common in the United States in the 1800s, when the book was first published. The racial interpretation of the Book of Mormon has increased, not diminished, conflict.

Counter to the racist impression, more than three thousand Book of Mormon verses directly or indirectly impart an inclusive, anti-discriminatory message (Table 1).[7] People today may perceive the cursing as a racist declaration or a license to discriminate, but righteous Book of Mormon people did not. Wicked behavior of the cursed group was excused, but that of the non-cursed, recordkeeping group was severely criticized. Several times the cursed people were righteous examples or were more righteous than the non-cursed people. People of the two nations were considered brethren. Love of all was preached and practiced. Kind acts occurred between nations and within each nation, including outreach to the other nation and help to the poor within a nation, and some selfless people lost their lives or put their lives at risk. Although often at war, the two nations had significant peaceful interactions. Unkind actions and attitudes toward other groups were identified as evil, including exploitations, class distinctions, persecutions, and attitudes of superiority. War was tragic and caused by wickedness. Intermingled in these messages are messages especially relevant for today. God loves and invites all people. God is fair to all. Prophecies extend his blessings worldwide to modern Jews, other Israelites, descendants of Book of Mormon people, and all other people (Gentiles). The promised blessings will be fulfilled if people choose to follow the Lord. Those who fight against the Lord will incur his wrath, regardless of ethnicity or heritage. Anti-Semitism is condemned. Conspiracies are extremely wicked. The book contains a powerful example of redemption from discriminatory attitudes.

In addition to helping us overcome discrimination in our day, these examples and lessons are consistent with the idea that light and dark skin in the Book of Mormon are metaphorical and are inconsistent with a book that is merely a product of 1800s attitudes. Because the racially interpreted language has been an obstacle to clearly seeing the inclusive messages, the difficult words will be addressed first.

Cursing, Skin, Disavowal, and Metaphors

Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse. … Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.[8]

The Book of Mormon opens with a journey to a promised land and a family fight. Serious discord, including violence and death threats,[9] continued until the natural death of Lehi, the family patriarch, sometime after their arrival in the new land. At that time, the death threats became more ominous, and one brother, Nephi, was directed by God to move away from his conspiring brothers and take people who were loyal to him (2 Nephi 5:1–9). The division led to two “Lehite” nations, Nephites and Lamanites, named respectively after brothers Nephi and Laman, the first principal leaders of the two groups. Not only did these two nations become enemies and have wars, but according to the Nephite record (the Book of Mormon), the Lamanites were cursed by God (2 Nephi 5:20–25). This was more than simply the breakup of an extended family.

Because some passages on cursing have been interpreted in modern racial terms, these and other verses on appearance and cursing are pertinent to discussions of what the book says about interethnic relations. In the Book of Mormon, Lamanite cursing is mentioned twelve times (Table 2), other relevant references to cursing are mentioned seventeen times (Table 2), and appearance or skin is mentioned forty- six times (Table 3).

Lamanite Cursing and Racial Interpretations

In the Book of Mormon, cursing came when people chose not to follow the Lord and usually entailed being cut off from God. Curses could be removed by coming back to the Lord. These principles were taught numerous times (e.g., Table 2).

The Lamanites were “cut off from the presence of the Lord” (2 Nephi 5:20), but another aspect of their cursing has been commonly interpreted to be racial (2 Nephi 5:21–25).[10] Nephi records that the Lamanites, who “were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome,” now had “a skin of blackness” put upon them by God to keep them from mixing with the Nephites. The Lamanites would be “loathsome” to Nephites, “save they shall repent of their iniquities.” Lamanites became “idle” and “full of mischief and subtlety.” In today’s vernacular, these statements seem cruelly insensitive and blatantly racist. They also suggest dark skin pigmentation is a sign of unrighteousness or divine disfavor. As historians have noted, these verses “sound like the Jacksonian view of Indians common to most Americans in 1830” or “[seem] to be a straightforward articulation of nineteenth-century racial ideology.”[11] Hence, many view the Book of Mormon as a product of 1800s attitudes.[12]

The apparent racial component of the cursing is enhanced by racial interpretations of seven other Book of Mormon verses. There, skin color also is mentioned or assumed. The mother-to-be of Jesus was prophesied as “exceedingly fair and white” (1 Nephi 11:13). Another prophecy described latter-day Gentiles coming to America as “white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful,” like the Nephites (1 Nephi 13:15). Nephi’s brother Jacob mentioned “the cursing which hath come upon [the Lamanite’s] skins” and urged the Nephites to “revile no more against [the Lamanites] because of the darkness of their skins” (Jacob 3:5, 9). He mentioned that Nephites’ sins were worse than those of the Lamanites, and he feared “unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God” (Jacob 3:8). In the record of a Nephite-Lamanite battle, the book stated that “the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression” (Alma 3:6). After some Lamanites were converted to the Lord and lived righteously, the curse was removed, “and their skin became white like unto the Nephites” (3 Nephi 2:15).[13]

Keeping the racial interpretation, Book of Mormon readers have interpreted these passages in at least nine ways that might be less offensive to modern racial sensibilities.

1. The “curse” differed from the “mark,” i.e., the punishment or curse was separation from God, and the mark was a skin color change and was separate from the curse.[14]

2. “Correct traditions, not skins, were the issue” (inferred from the statement that the mark was given to prevent the Nephites from believing “incorrect traditions which would prove their destruction” [Alma 3:8]).[15]

3. God made a racial divide anciently to separate people, but today no such distinction exists.[16]

4. Skin color change could have been something that simply occurred naturally, for example by intermarriage with non- Lehites who lived with or around the Lamanites and had a darker complexion.[17]

5. Nephi and other writers were angry, distressed, or mistaken when they wrote racist passages.[18]

6. Those passages “collide with current sensibilities and speech,” but “reflect the cultural perceptions and customs of ancient people in response to an unusual color change in their family”; the “significance … is merely historical, not doctrinal.”[19]

7. The Book of Mormon overturns traditional racism by making the dark-skinned group conquerors over the light- skinned group and by promising the dark-skinned group blessings and victory over others in the latter days.[20]

8. In the Book of Mormon, race is “a mutable commodity … the ‘skin of blackness’ that covers them may be removed or transferred elsewhere.”[21]

9. Although some words are or appear racist, the Book of Mormon’s message is anti-racist.[22]

All these interpretations raise the troubling idea, stated by Jared Hickman, of “God’s willingness to work with anti-black racism in order to maintain the purity of tradition.”[23] Put another way, why is racism in a holy book written for our time, when racism would be such a divisive issue?

On the other hand, these nine ideas suggest that a racist interpretation of those eight verses is inconsistent with the message in the rest of the book. Labeling racially interpreted passages as “ugly,” Peter Coviello nevertheless suggests “the reading of The Book of Mormon as plainly and conventionally racist is, while not exactly untenable, nevertheless a serious misapprehension of the text.”[24] He added,

The Book of Mormon may be less an exemplification of colonizing racism (and racist historiography) than a sustained performed critique of it, in which it is exactly the Nephites’ imperiousness, their incapacity to recognize themselves as anything other than chosen and holy and their foes as anything other than benighted, that dooms them. It is, we could say, a vast chastisement of the self-blindedness of imperial arrogance.

Coviello is not alone in his assessment. Acknowledging the difficult passages, Ahmad Corbitt asserts “that the Book of Mormon is … the most racially and ethnically unifying book on the earth.”[25] The book “declares that God, our Eternal Father, seeks to save all of His children, without regard to color or race,” he states, and “makes this point more explicitly, repeatedly, and forcefully than any other volume of scripture.” The book “provides examples of righteous people from contrasting cultures reaching across differences of color and tradition to rescue their brothers and sisters with the gospel of Jesus Christ.” “In spite of its frank documentation of racist feeling,” John Tvedtnes states, “the Book of Mormon is not in itself a racist document. In fact, it advocates and even idealizes the exact opposite: rather than promoting concepts of racial inferiority, the events and teaching within it clearly suggest that people of different ethnic backgrounds and traditions can truly overcome old hatreds and misconceptions and attain peace, happiness, and unity through the gospel of Jesus Christ.”[26]

Disavowing Racism and Interpreting Metaphorically

In December 2013, senior leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles) stated emphatically that any connection between a person’s literal skin pigmentation and his or her spiritual state was an incorrect idea:

Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed- race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.[27]

Although refuting the connection of literal skin color to righteousness level, the church leaders did not give an interpretation of the skin color statements in the Book of Mormon.

Consistent with the church leaders’ disavowal of previous racial interpretations, several researchers have proposed that those Book of Mormon passages can, or should, be interpreted metaphorically. Their conclusions are based on reasonings from the scriptures, from ancient Middle Eastern cultural traditions, and from English usage. The disavowal and metaphorical reasonings suggest our modern society has interpreted these passages with our own racial biases and not how the Book of Mormon authors intended.

Marvin Perkins asserts that Book of Mormon references to light or dark skin are idioms referring to one’s emotional or spiritual state.[28] He noted that very similar words are used in nine Old Testament verses (King James Version). Job lamented, “My skin is black upon me” (Job 30:30). Jeremiah noted, “Our skin was black like an oven because of the terrible famine” (Lamentations 5:10). In the 1979 and 2013 Latter-day Saint editions of the Bible, the following three verses are accompanied by footnotes stating that black or blackness is a “Hebrew idiom meaning ‘gloom’”: (1) Prophesying about the “day of darkness and of gloominess” that will accompany the coming of the Lord, the prophet Joel said, “The people shall be much pained: all faces shall gather blackness” (Joel 2:1–6). (2) In another prophecy of destruction, Nahum said, “The faces of them all gather blackness” (Nahum 2:10). (3) Jeremiah stated, “I am black” (Jeremiah 8:21). Two verses in the Song of Solomon ask for consideration despite a person’s “blackness”: “I am black, but comely” (Song of Solomon 1:5). “Look not upon me, because I am black” (Song of Solomon 1:6). Two other verses suggest that “black” refers to being dejected or to spiritual deficiency (Jeremiah 14:2; Lamentations 4:8). Perkins extends the Hebrew idiom to the Book of Mormon and argues that this is evidence that the Book of Mormon is an ancient book. Therefore, he says, black people or black skin metaphorically refers to a poor spiritual or emotional state. References to white people or white skin, he reasons, are metaphors for righteousness.[29] He states, “The words ‘black’ and ‘white’ do not refer to race in the scriptures.”[30] He adds that the division of people into races is a modern invention.[31]

Beginning in a May 1950 church magazine, Hugh Nibley reasoned the Lamanite mark was artificial and related black and white to Arabic culture.[32] Reasoning from Alma 3, Nibley said, “Here God places his mark on people as a curse, yet it is an artificial mark which they actually place upon themselves.” He then said, “The mark was not a racial thing. … Thus t he difference between Nephite and Lamanite is a cultural, not a racial, one.”

The cultural picture may not be the whole story of the dark skin of the Lamanites, but it is an important part of that story and is given great emphasis by the Book of Mormon itself. There is no mention of red skin, but only black and white. With the Arabs, to be white of countenance is to be blessed and to be black of countenance is to be cursed; there are parallel expressions in Egyptian and Hebrew.

In a reformatted publication of his article in 1952, Nibley noted that the black, dark, and white skin colors mentioned in the Book of Mormon were “being used as the Arabs use them.”[33] In 1967, Nibley further pressed the connection to Middle Eastern culture.

The Lamanite and Nephite division was tribal rather than racial. … The dark skin is mentioned as the mark of a general way of life, it is a Gypsy or Bedouin type of darkness, “black” and “white” being used in their Oriental sense (as in Egyptian), black and loathsome being contrasted to white and delightsome.[34]

Given that the Book of Mormon claims to be from Israelite and Semitic people who emigrated from the Middle East, reasonings from the Bible and Middle Eastern traditions are valid. Therefore, the metaphorical interpretation of skin color by Perkins and Nibley is reasonable.

John Tvedtnes also mentioned metaphorical reasonings based on a comparison to Arabic culture and that the word white was often used symbolically when the Book of Mormon was first published in 1830.[35] He stated,

The Qur’an, a seventh-century Semitic text, also speaks of the day of judgment as “the day when some faces will be white and some faces will be black” (3:106). This could be taken as a reference to purity and righteousness on the one hand and impurity and wickedness on the other, or to salvation and damnation, but certainly not to race, since Islam has always been reasonably color-blind. Modern Arabic still uses the idiom sawwada wajhuhu to describe the act of discrediting, dishonoring, or disgracing a person, but its literal meaning is “to blacken the face” of someone.[36]

In Joseph Smith’s day, use of the word white to designate purity was well attested, Tvedtnes noted. Half of the six definitions of “white” in Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language concern purity.[37] “Only two concern color.”

In 1830, metaphorical usage of the adjective black also was well established. Webster’s 1828 dictionary gives five definitions for the adjective black.[38] Three of these definitions are figurative.

Our own culture uses analogies to color or skin type that are metaphorical and non-racial that are relatable to skin color in the Book of Mormon. Armand Mauss stated, “Differences between Lamanites and Nephites can be understood in terms primarily cultural and religious, rather than racial.”[39] People, he said, could read white and black or dark skins in a figurative manner, much like people speak of thick or thin skins. Ethan Sproat suggested uses of white and black people in the Book of Mormon could be interpreted “in the same symbolic sense that we might describe an envious person as green, a sad person as blue, or an embarrassed person as red.”[40]

Nancy Bentley suggested a religio-cultural difference.[41]

The two populations also follow an ethnological schema structured not by race but by religio-cultural institutions. The difference in skin color between the Nephites and Lamanites does not mark a difference between separate biological races; all are equally the ‘seed’ of Lehi. Rather, the Lamanites, in failing to elect the path of Christian worship … also fail to practice the arts of a supposedly higher civilization. … When the Lamanites refuse the enlightened, family-based spirituality introduced by Lehi and Nephi, they make themselves tribal.

She adds, “Even race is a matter of choice.” “Free agency not only inaugurates the original population difference of the Lamanites; that power of agency remains a live factor in Lamanite identity, as when the voluntary conversion of a group of Lamanites to Nephite teachings makes their skin become ‘white.’”

Brant Gardner proposed a symbolic interpretation based on whether someone was in or out of the group.[42] The assumption of literal skin color differences, he states, is “based on an understandable but unfortunate reading of 2 Nephi 5:21. … The condition of darkness comes with dwindling in unbelief. When that occurs, darkness falls — on their hearts and metaphorically on their skins.” People inside one’s group (insiders) are viewed favorably and outsiders unfavorably. “[A]ncient society saw reality as communally related. The group was the meaning, and individuals who did not conform were considered deviant.”[43] Because in the Book of Mormon “the mark/curse can be removed by simply traversing [the insider/outsider] boundary” (i.e., simply by repenting), Gardner says, “I conclude that it is unlikely that the mark or curse had anything to do with pigmentation.”[44]

Douglas Campbell noted that the Book of Mormon prophesied that Gentiles (anyone not a Jew or Israelite) would be brought to America by the Lord (1 Nephi 13:12–15; 2 Nephi 1:6); these people were of all “colors” ranging from fair-skinned Scandinavians to dark-hued Africans.[45] Therefore, he reasoned, if all these people were “white” like the Nephites (1 Nephi 13:15), then “whiteness” must be metaphorical.

Ethan Sproat proposed a metaphorical interpretation involving clothing instead of human skin pigmentation.[46] Noting that “nothing in the text of the Book of Mormon itself positively or unambiguously indicates that the various-colored or cursed skins are definitely human flesh” and that all other uses of the indefinite article a with skin in the Book of Mormon and King James Bible refer to a form of clothing, he suggests that “a skin of blackness” (2 Nephi 5:21) refers to animal skins and not human epidermis. As further evidence, he notes that one sentence before stating “the skins of the Lamanites were dark” (Alma 3:6), the book states the Lamanites “were naked, save it were skin which was girded about their loins” (Alma 3:5). Therefore, one can reasonably deduce that “skins” in the second sentence refers to the skin covering mentioned in the previous sentence. Sproat postulated that skins represent ritual clothing, and after being cursed, the Lamanites wore “a sort of garment with powerful rhetorical signals for the Nephites.”[47]

Adam Oliver Stokes proposed that “skin of blackness” denotes spiritual darkness, not physical pigmentation.[48] He relates that phrase (from 2 Nephi 5:21) to “scales of darkness,” which “Nephi later predicts will fall away as the Lamanites come to see Jesus as the Christ” (2 Nephi 30:5–6). He notes the Book of Mormon claims to be a Semitic text, and “using Semitic languages as an interpretive guide,” he finds “scales” and “chaff” as words that can be translated into the English word “skin.” Therefore, he reasons “skin of blackness” is an impermanent covering like “‘chaff’ or ‘scales’ that fall off wheat when it is ripe for harvest.”

Descriptors such as white, fair, delightsome, black, dark, and loathsome “may be understood in an empirical sense (i.e., describing the physical appearance of [Nephite and Lamanite] bodies),” Steven Olsen notes; but, he adds, “the Book of Mormon also allows for a metaphorical interpretation (i.e., symbolizing the spiritual condition of their souls).”[49] He notes Jacob clearly used the term filthiness metaphorically in describing both the Nephites and Lamanites (Jacob 3:9). They are morally impure, not unwashed. This could also mean “that Nephi and Jacob use allusions to skin color also in a metaphorical sense.” Mormon did the same. Olsen gives other reasons for a metaphorical understanding. “Other anatomical metaphors [were] used to make spiritual points … [including] ‘stiff’ necks, ‘blind’ eyes, ‘deaf’ ears, ‘high’ heads, and ‘past feeling.’“[50] In the same verse where “skin of blackness” is given, “Nephi uses human anatomy in a metaphorical sense” by saying the Lamanites had “hardened their hearts.” “A figural reading of such phrases is consistent with literary conventions of biblical writers.” Often Nephites become Lamanites and Lamanites become Nephites, but “Mormon’s narrative … hardly ever mentions a corresponding change in physical appearance.” A symbolic marking, a red mark put by Nephite defectors on their foreheads (Alma 3:4), “would not be necessary if ethnic identity were determined by racial (genetic) more than cultural (behavioral and value-based) criteria.” When Mosiah’s sons and others go to preach to the Lamanites, “the main differences that the missionaries find during their fourteen-year mission are cultural, not racial.” Olsen concludes, “[T]hese distinctions between the Nephites and Lamanites suggest that the boundary between the two groups is defined by moral values, not genetics, and that the curse of the covenant is manifest primarily in spiritual and behavioral, not physical, terms.”

As noted by several authors, a Book of Mormon statement once thought to indicate white epidermis was changed by Joseph Smith and clearly is metaphorical.[51] After Lehite descendants are converted in a future day, the record prophesies, “their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a pure and a delightsome people” (2 Nephi 30:5–6). Joseph Smith substituted the word “pure” for “white” in the 1840 edition of the Book of Mormon. This change emphasizes the metaphorical meaning of “white” to mean spiritually “pure.”[52]

Metaphorical readings bring consistency to other Book of Mormon verses connecting lightness, delightsomeness, darkness, filthiness, and similar words to a person’s or a people’s spiritual state. In a vision, Nephi saw righteousness associated with white garments and “dwindling in unbelief” and “all manner of abominations” connected to darkness, filthiness, and idleness (1 Nephi 12:10–11, 15–16, 20–23). During a magnificent spiritual experience, Jesus’ Lehite disciples prayed, and “they were white, even as Jesus” (3 Nephi 19:25, 28–30). After Christ’s visit and all the people had been converted to the Lord, they “became an exceedingly fair and delightsome people” (4 Nephi 1:10). Mormon prophesied that the Lehite descendants, “once a delightsome people,” would become darker and filthier than was known throughout the Book of Mormon, “because of their unbelief and idolatry” (Mormon 5:15, 17). Moroni pleads with unbelievers to turn to the Lord, “that perhaps [they] may be found spotless, pure, fair, and white” (Mormon 9:6). The prophecy that the Gentiles would be “white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful” is connected to a time when they “did humble themselves before the Lord” and “the Spirit of the Lord … was upon [them]” (1 Nephi 13:15–16).[53] Brant Gardner notes, Jacob’s point about Lamanite skins being whiter than Nephite skins at the day of judgment (Jacob 3:8) only makes sense if black and white skin metaphorically refers to spiritual state.[54] Ethan Sproat noted that interpreting the pre- cursed “white” and “fair” Lamanites (2 Nephi 5:21) as racial does not match with the only other usages describing “people as white and fair” (1 Nephi 11:13; 1 Nephi 13:15; Mormon 9:6), which are metaphorical.[55] Douglas Campbell noted that nearly all uses of white in the book are figurative.[56]

Figurative meanings of white, black, filthy, delightsome, darkness, and other “appearance” words are consistent with the Lord’s direct teaching that he cares about our inner or spiritual beauty, not our outward or physical beauty. Isaiah said the Lord will judge righteously; he will “not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears” (2 Nephi 21:3–4; Isaiah 11:3–4). God told the Old Testament prophet Samuel, “man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” (1 Samuel 16:7). As the Book of Mormon teaches, God invites all people and is fair to all (Table 4). Physical ability or appearance is never a requirement for salvation. From their context, some Book of Mormon verses clearly refer to physical appearance (e.g., Mosiah 19:13–14; Alma 32:2–3; Ether 8:8–10). However, the meanings of most “appearance” words are consistent with spiritual or inner beauty (Table 3), for example:

- Isaiah’s statement “the show of their countenance doth witness against them, and doth declare their sin to be even as Sodom” (2 Nephi 13:9; Isaiah 3:9).

- Alma’s question “have ye received [God’s] image in your countenances?” (Alma 5:14, 19).

- The comment that righteous Nephites were “exceedingly fair and delightsome” (4 Nephi 1:10).

- Mormon’s prayer that his brethren “may once again be a delightsome people” (Words of Mormon 1:8), and his lament “O ye fair ones, how could ye have departed from the ways of the Lord!” (Mormon 6:17, 19).

- Nephi’s vision of Mary being “exceedingly fair and white” and “most beautiful and fair” (1 Nephi 11:13–15, 18).

- The Lord’s statement that he would not suffer “cries of the fair [Nephite] daughters … against the [Nephite] men” (Jacob 2:32).

Put another way, certainly God cared about all Nephite women, not just those deemed physically attractive. Certainly God cared about the spiritual beauty of his son’s mother-to-be, not her physical appearance. Isaiah emphasized spiritual ugliness, the people’s terrible sins.[57] The comment in 4 Nephi and statements by Mormon and Alma are linked to redemption from sin through Jesus Christ (Words of Mormon 1:8; Alma 5:14–27; 4 Nephi 1:2–18; Mormon 6:17–22). The scriptures do not tell us to become physically beautiful. Indeed, the Book of Mormon shows that physical attractiveness is not necessarily connected to spiritual beauty. A Jaredite woman used her physical attractiveness as part of a conspiracy (Ether 8:8–10) and other apparently physically beautiful Jaredites were living in sin (Ether 7:4; Ether 13:17). The Messiah himself was prophesied to have “no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him there is no beauty that we should desire him” (Mosiah 14:2; Isaiah 53:2). This prophesy must refer to physical appearance because Christ’s inner beauty is, of course, most beautiful and desirable of all. Finally, the Book of Mormon condemns a group of Nephites who regarded some of their poor peers as filthy (because of their outward appearance) and forbids them entry into a house of worship (Alma 32:2–3).

Amy Easton-Flake linked white and dark to symbolism in Lehi’s dream and Nephi’s vision (1 Nephi 8, 11–14).[58] There, a beautiful fruit tree symbolizes the love of God, and people are invited to come to the tree and partake of the fruit. This symbolizes accepting the gospel. Mists of darkness appear that distract people from the tree and symbolizes earthly temptations and cares that seduce people from living the gospel. Also, filthy water is seen, which symbolizes hell. She states, “The color white is synonymous with partaking of the fruit: the fruit is white, the tree is white, and individuals who partake of the fruit are made white through the blood of the Lamb.” On the other side, “By calling the people a ‘dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people’ [1 Nephi 12:23], Nephi connects them to symbols of hell — the filthy water and the dark mist.” Refuting a racial connection, Matthew Bowen adds, “‘A dark and loathsome and a filthy people’ are to be connected — rather than to race, genetics, or ethnicity — to the filthy water and the ‘mist[s] of darkness’ of Nephi’s vision or ‘the symbols or hell’ symptomatic of ‘unbelief.’“[59] He argues that “Jacob’s allusion to ‘white’ skin color” (Jacob 3:8) and Mormon’s description of converted Lamanites becoming white-skinned and exceedingly fair (3 Nephi 2:15–16) are additional allusions to Nephi’s vision.

Three incidents where one might surmise that skin color was different between Nephites and Lamanites do not clearly say or imply a physical difference. Two incidents occur when Ammon, a Nephite, lived among the Lamanites and served King Lamoni; Ammon was easily distinguished as a Nephite (Alma 19:18, 20:10). The record is unclear how the distinction was made. A difference in skin color should not be assumed. Lamanites and Nephites could have had unique modes of dress or other outward characteristics. The people recognizing Ammon’s nationality may have simply known a Nephite was living with the king or may have heard a rumor of such. On a third occasion, as noted by Brant Gardner,[60] the Nephite captain Moroni searched for “a man who was a descendant of Laman” among his army in a plot to retrieve Nephite prisoners of war (Alma 55:4–15). He found one person, also named Laman, who had escaped to live with the Nephites. Moroni had Laman and others deliver wine to the Lamanite army guarding the Nephite prisoners. They presented themselves falsely as Lamanite soldiers who had escaped from the Nephite army. The ethnicity of Laman’s companions (all were part of the Nephite army) is not specified, but if they were lighter skinned, they would have been easily recognized as Nephites. As Gardner noted, this ruse suggests the Lamanites and Nephites had the same skin color. “The reason for having a Lamanite [to lead the scheme] could plausibly be language or accent, but not skin color.”

The Book of Mormon mentions changes in spiritual state without any mention of skin color. When thousands of Lamanites were converted, “the curse of God did no more follow them” (Alma 23:18). No changes in skin are mentioned. After Christ appeared to the Lehite people, they were all converted to the Lord and lived in great happiness (3 Nephi 26:17–21; 4 Nephi 1:1–18). The record notes that no “-ites” were present. As the conversion occurs, no skin change is recorded. When wickedness again appears after a long period of righteousness, the people split again into Lamanites and Nephites. But this time, no mention is made of changes in skin color, even though the division again is because of wickedness, “even as it was in the beginning” (4 Nephi 1:20, 35–39). Indeed, no mention is made of skin color throughout the rest of the book.

The racialized interpretation of white and black skin in the Book of Mormon has been pervasive and long lasting. In today’s racially sensitive society, one can easily assume the metaphorical interpretations are attempts to make the book more palatable to current sensibilities.

The church’s disavowal and evidences for a metaphorical understanding suggest earlier popular sensibilities were the problem, not today’s. “Interpretations that have appealed to prevailing sensibilities were precisely what led nineteenth-century Euro-American readers to assume that the text of the Book of Mormon was somehow referring to flesh pigmentation,” Ethan Sproat wrote.[61] “The nineteenth-century view seriously handicaps our perception,” Kevin Christensen noted.[62] The problem is not that white was used as a metaphor for righteousness and black for wickedness, but that, somewhere in the racialization of our modern society, light and dark epidermis was tied to goodness and evil, respectively. The tragedy is that literal interpretation has contributed to attitudes of superiority.[63] As is clear from church leaders and more than three thousand verses in the Book of Mormon, attitudes of superiority and unkindness toward others are inconsistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Lamanites Excused and Exemplary, Nephites Condemned

Neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers. (Jacob 3:9)

And Ammon said unto [the Lamanite queen]: Blessed art thou because of thy exceeding faith; I say unto thee, woman, there has not been such great faith among all the people of the Nephites. (Alma 19:10)

In our day, scornful or pejorative words are a common way attitudes of superiority are manifest. The Nephite recordkeepers included descriptions of the Lamanites that have been taken in this way. But, as Peter Coviello notes, “The Book of Mormon is something other, and something stranger, than the reflexive reproduction of nineteenth-century racism for which it is very, very easy to take it.”[64] This includes not only skin color, but also disparaging remarks.

Nephite Negative Views of the Lamanites

After the Lamanite-Nephite separation, the Lamanites were described with uncomplimentary terms. They were “loathsome,” “idle,” “full of mischief and subtlety,” “wild,” “ferocious,” “blood-thirsty,” nearly naked, and “full of idolatry and filthiness”; they ate “beasts of prey” and “raw meat” (2 Nephi 5:22, 24; Enos 1:20; Mosiah 10:12; Alma 17:14–15). “They loved murder and would drink the blood of beasts” (Jarom 1:6).[65] “They were a lazy and an idolatrous people” (Mosiah 9:12). They were “hardened,” indolent,” and “delighted in murdering the Nephites, and robbing and plundering them” (Alma 17:14–15; Mosiah 10:17). They “sought to obtain [riches] by murdering and plundering” (Alma 17:14). They delighted “in all manner of wickedness and plunder, except it were among their own brethren” (Mosiah 24:7).[66]

Several Latter-day Saint scholars and at least one leader have professed that these labels are prejudicial. Brant Gardner states that negative Nephite descriptions of the Lamanites were likely a result of the way people typically view outsiders.[67] People outside one’s own group are often given labels that are unflattering or even pejorative. Gardner adds, “Such prejudice is not surprising.” Armand Mauss said, “Demonizing of the ‘other’ has been a recurrent process in all of human history.”[68] Christopher Conkling wrote, “[A]ny ancient record not reflecting some of that racial or tribal bias would probably not qualify as an authentic ancient record.”[69] John Tvedtnes[70] and John Sorenson[71] made similar points. Tvedtnes added, “The Lord himself does not use such language to describe the Lamanites.”[72] Dan Belnap noted, “The Nephites held disdain for the Lamanite people and culture in general.”[73] Lamanites also viewed the Nephites with disdain.[74] Matthew Bowen added, “Nephite pejoration of the name Laman and Lamanites reinforced negative Nephite attitudes toward and traditions regarding the Lamanites.”[75] After many Lamanites were converted, they changed their name to “Anti-Nephi-Lehies … and were no more called Lamanites” (Alma 23:16–17). Bowen noted the Nephites also gave them a new name, “people of Ammon.”[76] President Dieter F. Uchtdorf noted that both Nephites and Lamanites had views of each other that “fed their hatred for one another.”[77] Certainly, like all people, both Nephites and Lamanites were susceptible to prejudice.

As internal evidence that negative statements about Lamanites are inaccurate or at least do not describe all Lamanites, some scholars noted a discrepancy between those statements and what is stated elsewhere about the Lamanites. For example, about the mission of Mosiah’s sons and others to the Lamanites, Christopher Conkling wrote the following.

[I]f we read the account of Ammon and Aaron’s 14-year mission among the Lamanites [Alma 17–29] side by side with Alma’s mission among the Nephites [Alma 4–16], what the records show is that the Lamanites were almost as civilized, decent, receptive, and, yes, hostile, dishonest, murdering, and persecuting as Alma’s Nephites. They had highways, transportation, government, religious buildings, planned cities, various religious customs, government officials, soldiers, outlaws and renegades, and kings and subkings (or “chiefs”), just as the Nephites had, and were not quite as uncivilized as the Nephites originally feared.[78]

Steven Olsen and Brant Gardner made similar observations.[79] In addition, John Sorenson noted that the apparent superior population growth of the Lamanites would be unlikely in a society made up of only hunter- gatherers.[80] “They must have had a productive agricultural base to gain and maintain such numbers as they displayed.”

Unless we do not understand some aspect of Nephite culture that is different from our own, the assertion appears true that Nephite prejudice is manifest in the uncomplimentary descriptions of Lamanites. Our own tendencies to denigrate enemies or people different from us — with similar terms — suggests that Book of Mormon people likely did the same.

The seemingly constant wars between Lamanites and Nephites likely made scornful views difficult to resist. After stating the Lamanites “loved murder” and drank animal blood, Jarom said that “they came many times against us, the Nephites, to battle” (Jarom 1:6–7). Zeniff, a Nephite who courageously fought to protect Lamanites from Nephite aggression (Mosiah 9:1–2), described Lamanites negatively only when they attacked his Nephite settlement (Mosiah 9:10–19; 10:6–20).[81] The Nephites considered the Lamanites enemies (Omni 1:2; Alma 22:34). In our day, World War II, the Cold War, the Global War on Terrorism, and other wars have stimulated scorn. Of course, speaking well, or at least not speaking pejoratively, of someone who has been trying “many times” to harm us or our fellow citizens is difficult. Loving one’s enemy has always been a hard commandment to live. Our language is evidence of that fact.

Nephite prejudice against the Lamanites was undoubtedly present. On at least two occasions, Nephites wanted to destroy Lamanites (Mosiah 9:1; Alma 26:23–25). The Nephites’ negative views of the Lamanites clearly was a reason for one proposed action (Alma 26:24– 25). Jacob also pointed out that the Nephites hated the Lamanites (Jacob 3:5). The Lamanite prophet Samuel noted animosity towards him, in part because of his ethnicity (Helaman 14:10).

On the other hand, Book of Mormon authors present the proposition of destroying the Lamanites and the hateful attitudes toward the Lamanites as wrong. Were those authors and righteous Book of Mormon people also scornful and prejudicial? Were they like people today who do good in some aspects of their lives but are cankered by attitudes of superiority?

Because the negative statements are brief and lack context, perhaps we have misread the negative words and the authors’ intent.[82] What a writer writes and a reader reads are often not the same, even if the two belong to the same culture and use the same language. Given our vastly different culture and language as compared to the ancient Book of Mormon society, the writer-reader gap is undoubtedly very large.[83] The Book of Mormon writers often remind us that they wrote only a few things, that words were inadequate, or that the full history was written elsewhere.[84] Perhaps the Book of Mormon authors were describing that some Lamanites had a particular characteristic and intended it as respectful people today, for example, might describe people who live primitively or people who participate in groups that use violence. The descriptions are not meant to put people down but are meant to, respectively, tell how people live and show what the obstacles to peace really are. Enos, who wrote a long list of uncomplimentary Lamanite characteristics in his brief book (Enos 1:14, 20), prayed “with many long strugglings” for them (“my brethren”) and mentioned Nephite efforts to reach out to the Lamanites and presumably have good relations with them (Enos 1:11–20).

Given that the Nephite attitude of loathsomeness would or should disappear when Lamanites “shall repent of their iniquities” (2 Nephi 5:22), perhaps disgust was based on evil Lamanite behavior that was repulsive, not nationality, physical appearance, or primitive lifestyles. This appears to be true at least for righteous Nephites. They embraced converted Lamanites (Alma 27:20–27; Helaman 6:3). The sons of Mosiah and colleagues embraced Lamanites before their conversion (Mosiah 28:1–9; Alma 17–23). Today, similar attitudes often are seen towards repulsive, unethical behavior found in those who engage in illegal, destructive, or costly behaviors. Though people are tempted otherwise, the disgust is against the people’s acts, not the people or their ethnicity. People who change from repulsive lifestyles are celebrated.

Nevertheless, Book of Mormon writers warned us not to think they and the book are perfect. “If there are faults they are the mistakes of men,” we are told on the title page and in the text (Mormon 8:17). In addition to admitting imperfections (Mormon 8:12) or possible errors (1 Nephi 19:6) in the record, Nephi and Moroni acknowledged “weakness in writing” and Moroni said the Gentiles would mock it (2 Nephi 33:1, 11; Ether 12:23, 25, 40). “Condemn me not because of mine imperfection,” Moroni writes, “neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been” (Mormon 9:31; Mormon 8:12). If the Nephite writers used prejudicial statements, then this is one such imperfection from which we should learn to do better, as Moroni counseled.

On the other hand, judging the Nephite’s negative descriptions of the Lamanites as prejudicial needs to be tempered by other parts of the record. Some statements are self-labelling. After being converted to the Lord, a large group of Lamanites said they no longer killed others, stole things, or were “idle.” They covenanted “that rather than shed the blood of their brethren they would give up their own lives; and rather than take away from a brother they would give unto him; and rather than spend their days in idleness they would labor abundantly with their hands” (Alma 24:18). The Lamanite king Anti-Nephi-Lehi labeled their previous traditions and actions wicked (Alma 24:7–15; 27:6, 8). Anti-Nephi- Lehi’s father, who was the previous Lamanite king, sent a proclamation to his people. In the proclamation, he mentioned “the wicked traditions of their fathers” and wanted his people to know they should not murder, plunder, steal, commit adultery, or commit “any manner of wickedness” (Alma 23:3).[85] More significantly, elsewhere (1) Nephites are condemned more often and more severely for their wickedness than the Lamanites, are described with nearly all of the same negative terms, and are condemned with dozens of terms not used for the Lamanites; (2) many Lamanites are given as examples of righteousness; (3) positive assessments of Lamanites over Nephites are given (even when Lamanites were unrighteous); and (4) Lamanite attitudes and actions are excused or partially excused. These features are inconsistent with a prejudicial record.

Nephites Condemned More Than Lamanites with Similar and Additional Terms

In the Book of Mormon, Nephites are more often and more severely condemned than are Lamanites. The Lamanites are described as wicked or negative characteristics are given 54 instances in 193 verses (Table 5). Nephites are labeled as wicked or are labeled negatively 146 instances in 715 verses (Table 6), almost three times more instances and almost four times the number of verses. More impressively, if the actual number of characteristic words or phrases used are tallied (tables 5–7), condemnation of the Lamanites pales in comparison. Negative characteristics of Nephites (1160) are stated six times more often than those of the Lamanites (192).[86] Nephites are labeled as wicked 293 times compared to only 41 times for Lamanites, more than seven times more often.

Nephites were also given 33 of the 36 negative labels used for the Lamanites (Table 7). For 26 of these, the Nephites are labeled more than or equal to the number of times the Lamanites are labeled, 21 are double or higher. Nephites also were angry (Nephites 45 : Lamanites 3);[87] blood-thirsty (6:7); cannibalistic (3:1); contentious (57:1); cunning (13:10); choosing darkness (6:2); seeking to destroy the church, prophets, or Nephite government (24:8); ferocious (2:4); filthy (6:4); hardhearted or hardened (43:9); hateful (1:12); idle (1:3); idolatrous (8:3); impenitent (2:1); lazy or indolent (2:3); lying and deceptive (17:2); guilty of malice (4:1); materialistic (23:3); murderers (33:13); plundering and robbing (12:11); rebellious against God (8:3); rejected the gospel or prophets (57:8); stealing and thieving (7:2); stiffnecked (12:2); subjugators (10:10); unbelievers (14:3); uncivilized (1:8); vain (11:1); vengeful (4:1); weak (3:3); committing whoredoms (22:1); wicked (293:41); and wild (2:4). Nephites receive these descriptions a total of 752 times compared to 188 times for Lamanites, four times more often overall.

Three Lamanite characteristics not used for Nephites are loathsome, mischief, and human sacrifice (Table 7). These three unique labels are used a total of four times (once, once, and twice, respectively). “Loathsome” also was used to describe what the surviving Lamanites and Nephites would become after the book ends (Table 7).[88]

Nephites are severely condemned in ways not used for Lamanites. Jacob addressed his fellow Nephites and told them they were “filthy” (Jacob 3:3). The first Nephi told his people they were stiffnecked (2 Nephi 25:28). Alma told another group of Nephites they were hard-hearted, stiffnecked, wicked, and perverse, and he said they were “a lost and a fallen people” (Alma 9:8, 30–32). Abinadi told king Noah and his priests, “I perceive that ye have studied and taught iniquity the most part of your lives” (Mosiah 13:11). Mormon inserted two comments into the narrative that, in addition to the wickedness of the Nephites he is describing, may have reflected his frustration and sorrow with his own generation’s descent into extreme wickedness. When Nephites were in “great wickedness” and “ripening for destruction” (Helaman 11:36–37; Helaman 13:1), he inserted a blistering attack on the “unsteadiness of the hearts of the children of men” (Helaman 12:1–8). He said people are foolish, vain, evil, quick to do iniquity, slow to do good, and “less than the dust of the earth,” which obeys God. Later, he compared the conduct of one Nephite group to repulsive animal behavior: “The more part of the people had turned from their righteousness, like the dog to his vomit, or like the sow to her wallowing in the mire” (3 Nephi 7:8). Another prophet Nephi called wicked people of his day “fools” and told them they should “howl and mourn, because of the great destruction which at this time doth await you, except ye shall repent” (Helaman 9:21–22). Conspicuously, unlike most preaching to wicked Nephites (e.g., Mosiah 12–13; Alma 9:8–33; Helaman 7–8; Helaman 13–15, see also Table 6), Nephite sermons to wicked (unconverted) Lamanites were not harsh. Ammon and Aaron had respectful conversations with Lamanite kings and did not criticize them (Alma 18:14–42; 22:1–18; see also Helaman 5:20–26).

Nephites are severely condemned with words not used for Lamanites. Nephites were labeled with an additional 66 terms not used for Lamanites (Table 7). Nephites had blind eyes, deaf ears, false hearts, and impure minds. Harshness was needed to keep them in the right way. They were quick to forget God, slow to do good, led by Satan, setting at naught God’s commandments, trampling God underfoot, in an awful state, ripening for destruction, led astray or leading others astray, in a polluted state, and worse than prophet-killers of old. They had perverted the ways of the Lord, aligned themselves with a wicked order (Nehor), forgotten God, and destroyed their government. They had false Christs, prophets, and preachers. Nephites were carnal, depraved, fallen, lost, loveless, merciless, without order, past feeling, without principle, and unsteady. They were guilty of babblings, bloodshed, boasting, brutality, corruption, wearing costly apparel, cursing God, denying, dissension, envying, being poor examples, flattery, foolishness, seeking gain, hypocrisy, inequality and attitudes of superiority, intrigue, being “lawyers,” mocking sacred things, neglecting the needy, taking offense, persecuting others, seeking power, desiring praise of men, being prideful, priestcraft, rape, rioting, living riotously, being scornful, selling themselves for naught, sorceries, stubbornness, torture, breaking trust, and being wine-bibbers.[89] Nephites received these descriptions 408 times.

The book’s focus is on Nephite sins, not Lamanite ones. Nephite prophets continually urged the Nephites to repent of their wickedness. The prophet Jarom noted that much needed to be done among the Nephites “because of the hardness of their hearts, and the deafness of their ears, and the blindness of their minds, and the stiffness of their necks” (Jarom 1:3). Alma taught a wicked group of Nephites that the day of judgment would be more tolerable for the Lamanites than for that group unless they repented (Alma 9:14–25). Nephi, the son of the second Helaman, lived in a time of wickedness among the Nephites (Helaman 4:21–26, 5:2–4, 11:1–2). He repeatedly warned the Nephites to repent to avoid destruction (Helaman 7, 8:25–26, 9:21–22, 10:11–18). Samuel, a Lamanite prophet, also warned the wicked Nephites that they faced destruction if they did not repent (Helaman 13–15). He was driven out twice (Helaman 13:1–2; 16:6–8, 10–12). Christopher Conkling noted, “Book of Mormon prophets rarely blamed their people’s problems on outside aggressors, but rather on internal [Nephite] dissent and sinfulness.”[90]

The book ends with Nephite annihilation, not Lamanite destruction, and partial annihilation of Nephites occurred at other times throughout the book. Wickedness caused their destruction. Amaron noted, “The more wicked part of the Nephites were destroyed” (Omni 1:5). Wicked people in the land of Ammonihah were destroyed (Alma 16), and many wicked people died before Christ visited the Lehite people (3 Nephi 8–9). Prophecies predicted the final destruction of the Nephites because of their wickedness (1 Nephi 12:19; Alma 45:9–14; Helaman 15). Prior to their final destruction, the Nephites “persisted in their wickedness continually,” and the wickedness among all the people was extreme (Helaman 3:16; 4 Nephi 1; Mormon 1–6, 8). As Peter Coviello wrote, the Book of Mormon tells “about imperial hubris and the steep decline of a once-righteous people overthrown by their own pride.”[91]

Lamanites as Examples of Righteousness

The Lamanites are examples of righteousness 19 times (Table 8). Christ mentioned the Lamanites had great faith “at the time of their conversion” (3 Nephi 9:20). Presumably the Lord could have mentioned many Nephite examples, but he chose a Lamanite one instead. That is an important endorsement, as Matthew Bowen noted.[92] During a time of “great inequality in all the land,” a few Lamanites were steadfast in the faith and “would not depart from it” (3 Nephi 6:14). To the Nephites, Jacob pointed out that the Lamanites were monogamous and chaste and that fathers, mothers, and children loved each other (Jacob 3:5–7). When the Nephites cast out the prophet Samuel and were “in great wickedness,” “the Lamanites did observe strictly to keep the commandments of God” (Helaman 13:1). On another occasion, most Nephites were “exceedingly wicked” and were ripening for destruction, but most Lamanites were righteous, “insomuch that their righteousness did exceed that of the Nephites, because of their firmness and their steadiness in the faith” (Helaman 6:1–2, 15–40). When Ammon and colleagues reached out to the Lamanites, several spectacular examples of righteousness among the Lamanites followed (Alma 18–19, 21–27). For example, King Lamoni had a vision and saw the Lord. His wife, the queen, showed great faith. Their servant Abish had “been converted unto the Lord for many years” through “a remarkable vision of her father.” Lamoni, the queen, and Abish helped convert their fellow Lamanites. Many saw and conversed with angels. Thousands were converted to the Lord, including the head king of the Lamanites, Lamoni’s father, and his whole household. Righteousness abounded among the Lamanites. The converted Lamanites buried their weapons of war and many suffered death rather than use those weapons again, as the converts would rather die than “take the life of their enemy.” They were called “a highly favored people of the Lord.”

Lamanites and Nephites Compared — Lamanites Equal or Better

The spiritual state of the Nephites and Lamanites is compared 16 times (Table 9); mostly, the Lamanites were more righteous. The queen of the land of Ishmael and wife of King Lamoni exercised more faith than had been seen “among all the people of the Nephites” (Alma 19:10). Lamanites showed greater love (Alma 26:32–33) and more courage (Alma 56:45) than the Nephites. Twice, most Lamanites were righteous, while Nephites were mostly wicked (Helaman 6–7, 13). Another time, a few Lamanites were steadfast in the faith and would not depart from it, whereas most others were wicked (3 Nephi 6:14–18). At a time of great wickedness among the Nephites, the Nephites were told that the Lamanites were blessed because they so diligently followed the Lord when converted, but that the Nephites would be cursed and destroyed if they did not repent (Helaman 15). Alma told a group of wicked Nephites this life and the final judgement would be better for the Lamanites unless the Nephites repented (Alma 9:15, 23). For seven of the 16 comparisons, Nephites were deemed more wicked than the Lamanites, even though the Lamanites were not converted to the Lord. The Nephite prophet Jacob recorded that the Nephites began to be somewhat wicked and prideful during the reign of the second Nephite king (Jacob 1:15–16). Jacob told the Nephites their sins were worse than the sins of the Lamanites: “Ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren” (Jacob 2:22–35). He pointed out that the Lamanites were sexually chaste, unlike the Nephites: “The Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate … , are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father — that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them … their husbands love their wives, and their wives love their husbands; and their husbands and their wives love their children” (Jacob 3:3–10). Nephite dissenters were “more hardened and impenitent, and more wild, wicked and ferocious than the Lamanites” (Alma 47:36; 24:28–30; 21:3). Mormon noted a similar pattern at the end of the Book of Mormon, that “[Nephite] wickedness doth exceed that of the Lamanites” (Moroni 9:20). Only twice out of the 16 comparisons were the Lamanites not in a better state than the Nephites; at these times, the two nations were both wicked (Helaman 4:21–26; 4 Nephi 1:43, 45).[93]

Interestingly, the Nephites were accused of committing sexual sins (whoredoms and similar words) 22 times but the Lamanites only once (Table 7). The one Lamanite accusation is implied, unlike the Nephite accusations.

Saying cursed, uncultured people are living better than one’s own uncursed, cultured group is especially inconsistent with a discriminatory message and with the book being a product of 1800s attitudes or Nephite bigotry. Put another way by John Tvedtnes, “If Joseph Smith’s racism is reflected in the Book of Mormon, why does that volume have large numbers of Lamanites becoming righteous — indeed, more righteous than the Nephites?”[94]

Another sign of inclusiveness is in a prominent war story. Sons of converted Lamanites joined the Nephite army and helped protect the Nephite nation against attacking unconverted Lamanites (Alma 53, 56–58). In all of their intense battles, none of these sons lost their lives, yet many valiant Nephites who fight alongside them were killed (Alma 57:25– 26). A bigoted author would suppress, not highlight that fact.

Lamanite Attitudes and Actions Excused

Many people who are caught up in wicked lifestyles know of no other way. This is the attitude of righteous Nephites toward the Lamanites. Seven times, the Nephite record points out that Lamanite unbelief, cursing, evil deeds, hatred toward Nephites, or ignorance was because of the traditions and iniquity of the Lamanites’ fathers (Table 10). Although not completely excusing Lamanite beliefs and behavior, the verses suggest understandable reasons for Lamanite attitudes and actions. Four of these statements (Jacob 3:7; Alma 9:16; Alma 60:32; Helaman 15:4, 15) are in the context of reprimands to the Nephites that told them the Lamanites have a long tradition that accounted for their attitudes and behavior, but the Nephites had no excuse for their sinful views and conduct. Another statement came from Nephites questioning whether Lamanites could be turned from the long-held “traditions of their fathers” (Alma 26:24). Two other statements were comments about the Lamanites being cursed or not believing “because of the traditions of their fathers” (Mosiah 1:5; Alma 17:15).

Denigrating Words Inconsistent with Book’s Message

For those of us who profess the Book of Mormon to be the word of God, we certainly have no justification to use pejorative or denigrating words. Other parts of the book make clear that we are to love all people. Our modern culture, thankfully, generally disapproves of denigrating descriptions. Latter-day Saint leaders encourage us to speak with kindness and avoid disparaging remarks.[95]

The overall Book of Mormon emphasis on Nephite wickedness and de-emphasis of Lamanite wickedness is inconsistent with a discriminatory message and consistent with an inclusive message. If the authors of the book were discriminatory, one would expect Lamanite wickedness to be highlighted, not Nephite wickedness. Lamanites would be the ones to become dangerously wicked and be destroyed, not the Nephites. The Nephites were the group who warranted the severest condemnation, and they were the ones who were, and were prophesied to be, destroyed. The Lamanites were promised to continue, even if they were wicked. “Because of their firmness when they are once enlightened,” the Lord would bless the Lamanites and “prolong their days, notwithstanding their iniquity … even if they should dwindle in unbelief” (Helaman 15:10–16).

Whatever the meaning of the unflattering descriptions of the Lamanites, righteous Nephites did not behave in prejudicial ways toward the Lamanites. In other words, if the Nephite words were as discriminatory as they appear, righteous Nephites acted differently from these words. The acts of both righteous Nephites and Lamanites show that they rose above ethnic strife. They were kind, however loathsome the other people may have appeared. Discriminatory people or authors do not (1) sincerely refer to despised people as “brethren,” preach kindness and equality for all, and sacrifice for the good of a scorned group; (2) condemn harmful acts and attitudes against detested people; or (3) prophesy bounteous future blessings upon despised people. Acts of kindness were not just international; intranational acts, such as help to people in need, occurred, too. The Book of Mormon also condemns extreme wickedness (war and conspiracies) that are tools of oppression, and the book contains a powerful story of redemption from prejudicial attitudes. These messages are given, in total, hundreds of times. Hence, given this overwhelming message of inclusiveness, perhaps we should reserve judgment on the motives or prejudice of the Nephite authors when they wrote negative statements about the Lamanites.

Love and Respect for Others

We see that God is mindful of every people, whatsoever land they may be in; yea, he numbereth his people, and his bowels of mercy are over all the earth. (Alma 26:37)

Doth he cry unto any, saying: Depart from me? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; but he saith: Come unto me all ye ends of the earth, buy milk and honey, without money and without price. (2 Nephi 26:25)

Through precept and example, the Book of Mormon teaches that people should love and respect others. This point is made 248 times by the Nephites respectfully referring to Lamanites as “brethren,” the repeated teaching that “all are alike unto God” or God is fair, several attempts of Nephites and Lamanites to reach out to the other nation, and many acts of inter-group kindness.

“Lamanites, Our Brethren”

Despite many Nephite-Lamanite conflicts and their view of the Lamanites as loathsome, the Nephites respectfully referred to the Lamanites as brothers. Fifty-nine times, Lamanites are labeled “brethren” and sometimes “beloved brethren” (Table 11). As noted by John Tvedtnes, this is not “a term that one would expect to find in a society that holds racist views toward a neighboring people.”[96] If the record were a racist creed, if the Nephites were racist, or if Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon based on his own or his society’s racist ideology, one would not expect a despised person to be labeled a brother. One would expect disparaging terms or silence, not a term of endearment.

Although one might expect endearing terms in times of joy, peace, or prayer (Enos 1:11; Mosiah 28:1; Alma 17, 19, 26, 27; 3 Nephi 2:12), that term of endearment was used even when Nephites were threatened by the Lamanites. The first Nephi notes, “[We] had wars and contentions with our brethren” (2 Nephi 5:34). Jacob laments that the Lamanites “our brethren” hated him and his people (Jacob 7:24, 26). Gideon, a Nephite warrior, called Lamanites “our brethren” while they were holding him and other Nephites in bondage (Mosiah 22:3). Some battles are described as a fight between “brethren,” and the Nephites lament having to again fight their brothers (Alma 43:29; Alma 48:21, 23; Alma 49:7; Helaman 11:24). Even when defeated in a battle by the Lamanite army, the chief leader of the Nephite army wondered if his nation would succumb into “the hands of their brethren” (Alma 59:11). At the close of the record, Moroni was in hiding from the Lamanites because they would kill him if they find him. Yet, five times he referred to them as “my brethren”; two of those times he called them “beloved brethren” (Moroni 1:4; 10:1, 8, 18–19). Another time, when he thought he had finished writing, he bade farewell “unto my brethren whom I love” (Ether 12:38). Labeling the Lamanites as “brethren” denotes that righteous Nephites cared about the Lamanites. The righteous people seemed to remember that whatever differences existed between the two nations, they were part of one family. This is a powerful lesson for us today.

Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris were intimately acquainted with Joseph Smith and were vital to the preparation of the Book of Mormon for publication. They were selected as special witnesses, were shown a heavenly vision, and provided a signed statement that is included in every published copy of the Book of Mormon (Testimony of Three Witnesses). Included in their short testimony is a brief phrase that the Nephites and Lamanites were “brethren.” This was a key message they took from the manuscript. Including this phrase would be inconsistent if they or Joseph Smith were including racist ideology in the book.

“All Are Alike unto God”

One hundred and sixteen times a reader of the Book of Mormon encounters the teaching that the gospel message is for all, God loves all, or God is fair to all (Table 4). This message is found throughout the book.

“All nations, kindreds, tongues, and people” are included in God’s call to repent and follow Christ. In other words, all homelands, lineages, languages, and faiths[97] are included. The phrase “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people” suggests all are included regardless of how people may be characterized.

Never was the gospel intended just for Jews, Nephites, Lamanites, or other Israelites. For example, the Lord will manifest himself to all nations, both Jews and Gentiles (1 Nephi 13:42). The “salvation of the Lord” will come to “all the earth,” and “every nation, kindred, tongue, and people shall be blessed” (1 Nephi 19:17). “The knowledge of a Savior shall spread throughout every nation, kindred, tongue, and people” (Mosiah 3:20). Over and over again, the reader is told that the “gate of heaven is open unto all” who will believe in Christ (Helaman 3:27–30) or something similar. No one is turned away. “All men are privileged the one like the other, and none are forbidden” (2 Nephi 26:24–28). “[God] inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile” (2 Nephi 26:33). He asks his servants to take the gospel “unto the ends of the earth” (3 Nephi 11:41). He will gather his people from “all nations” (3 Nephi 21:28–29).

The Book of Mormon clearly states that God loves every member of the human race. For example, “[O]ne being is as precious in [God’s] sight as the other” (Jacob 2:21). After many Lamanites were converted to the gospel, a leader of that effort noted, “[W]e see that God is mindful of every people” (Alma 26:37). We learn God imparts his word not only to men but also to women and children (Alma 32:23). The Holy Ghost is available to all who diligently seek the Lord (1 Nephi 10:17–19).

The Book of Mormon teaches that God treats all people fairly. For example, we learn that lineage is not the test God uses: “As many of the Gentiles as will repent are the covenant people of the Lord; and as many of the Jews as will not repent shall be cast off” (2 Nephi 30:1–2). “If my people shall sow filthiness they shall reap the chaff thereof in the whirlwind; and the effect thereof is poison” (Mosiah 7:29–32). God’s test is righteousness, not lineage. “The Lord esteemeth all flesh in one”; the righteous are favored, and the wicked are not (1 Nephi 17:30–43). This is shown throughout the book as the Nephites choose wickedness or righteousness. This applies also in our day, as we are told that anyone who fights against Zion, Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female, “shall perish” (2 Nephi 10:13–17). God commands “all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in [Christ]” (3 Nephi 11:32–34). The Gospel is available freely to “whosoever will come” and partake (Alma 42:27). “We see that [the Lord’s] arm is extended to all people who will repent and believe on his name” (Alma 19:36). The Lord “remember[s] one nation like unto another” and “speak[s] unto all nations of the earth” (2 Nephi 29:7–8, 11–12). All will be resurrected and stand before God to be judged (Alma 12:8). This latter point provides various messages, but here the important messages are that God will raise everyone from the dead and will judge everyone fairly. We will not be judged by someone with human biases.

Therefore, God treats all his children fairly and loves them equally, and we are asked to also love everyone (2 Nephi 31:20). In the Book of Mormon, righteous Nephites and Lamanites did that by reaching out to others outside and inside their own nations.

Outreach

The Book of Mormon mentions Nephite efforts to reach out to the Lamanites and vice versa (Table 12). Six efforts are described.

Outreach efforts began shortly after the Nephite-Lamanite split. Jacob, Nephi’s brother, reported “many means were devised to reclaim and restore the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth; but it all was vain” (Jacob 7:24). Jacob’s son Enos reported the Nephites “did seek diligently to restore the Lamanites unto the true faith in God,” but their efforts were not successful either (Enos 1:14, 20).

The first successful effort involved a small band of Nephites who went to preach to the Lamanites (Mosiah 28:1–9; Alma 17–29). Near the end of Mosiah’s reign as king of the Nephites, his sons refused the kingdom and asked Mosiah’s permission to go with others to the Lamanites on a mission to bring peace to the land and to let the Lamanites also “rejoice in the Lord their God” (Mosiah 28:2). Mosiah consented and the small group traveled to Lamanite territory. The group suffered much, but they also met with phenomenal success. Thousands of Lamanites were converted. They “never did fall away” (Alma 23:6). Moroni called the mission a great miracle (Ether 12:15).

A second mission to the Lamanites was also successful (Helaman 5–6). Brothers Lehi and Nephi preached to the Lamanites, and most Lamanites became “a righteous people” (Helaman 6:1). They were even more righteous than the Nephites.

Lamanites then returned the favor by preaching to the Nephites “with exceedingly great power and authority” (Helaman 6:4–9). Many Lamanites participated in this effort. Their efforts resulted in “bringing down many … into the depths of humility, to be the humble followers of God.”

Later, Samuel, a Lamanite prophet, attempted to preach to the Nephites (Helaman 13–16). He was at first rejected by the Nephites, but the Lord asked him to try again. Barred from entering the city, Samuel preached from the city wall. He prophesied of Christ and warned the Nephites of destruction if they did not repent. Some Nephites believed his words and were baptized, though most still rejected him. Some Nephites tried to kill him, and he fled to “his own country” (Helaman 16:7).

Kindness from One Group to Another

Despite frequent armed battles, Nephites and Lamanites also exhibited kindness toward each other. Kind actions toward an enemy are especially difficult but are an important way Christ taught us to act (Matthew 5:44– 47, 3 Nephi 12:44–45). The Book of Mormon gives 67 examples where Nephites helped Lamanites or vice versa, where people were kind to others in different or unfortunate circumstances within their own nation, or where the society was fair and just (Table 13). Twenty of these instances involved risk of death or actual death to those who were kind.

Zeniff and other Nephites fought to protect Lamanites. Apparently as part of a Nephite attempt to attack Lamanites (“that our army might come upon them and destroy them”), Zeniff spied on the Lamanites (Mosiah 9:1–2). “But when [he] saw that which was good among them [he] was desirous that they should not be destroyed.” He proposed that the Nephite group make a treaty with the Lamanites instead of attacking them. His leader would not agree, and bloodshed among the Nephite army ensued. Zeniff survived, but “the greater number of [the Nephite] army was destroyed.”

Kind deeds are mentioned during the first successful mission of Nephites to the Lamanites (Mosiah 28; Alma 17–28). Sons of Mosiah “did plead with their father many days” for permission to serve the Lamanites (Mosiah 28:5). They would suffer much. To the Lamanite king Lamoni, the Nephite Ammon said he wanted to live among the Lamanite people, “perhaps until the day I die,” and be a servant to the king (Alma 17:23). Assigned to watch over the king’s flocks, Ammon protected them from plunderers. He also impressed the king by remembering to do other assigned duties after returning from watching the flocks. Ammon and King Lamoni become close friends through Lamoni’s conversion. Later, they journeyed together and confronted Lamoni’s father, who was king over the entire Lamanite nation. Lamoni’s father ordered Lamoni to kill Ammon. Lamoni refused. When Lamoni’s father tried to kill Lamoni, Ammon protected Lamoni and gained advantage over Lamoni’s father. Ammon had no desire to kill Lamoni’s father and used his advantage only to gain freedom for Lamoni and Ammon’s fellow missionaries who were imprisoned. Lamoni’s father was impressed with Ammon’s actions and desired to learn what Ammon and his missionary partners were preaching. Those partners met with Lamoni’s father and offered to become his servants. He refused their offer but asked instead that they “administer unto [him]” (Alma 22:3). Eventually thousands of Lamanites were converted; these Lamanites became friendly with the Nephites, opened correspondence with them, and viewed them as brethren. The converted Lamanites took an oath to never use weapons of war again.

After moving to Nephite territory, the converted Lamanites helped Nephites. When poor Zoramites (a subgroup of Nephites) were rejected by other Zoramites, the converted Lamanites nourished them, gave them land, and ignored threats from the Zoramite leader (Alma 35:6–9). The converted Lamanites, by then known as the people of Ammon, provided support to the Nephite army in place of serving in the army. Several years later, however, the Nephite army was in desperate need, and the people of Ammon were “moved with compassion” and offered to break their oath to never use weapons; instead, their sons, who never made the same promise, served in the army and fought valiantly (Alma 53, 56–58). During the long war, the people of Ammon received other Lamanites captured during the war (Alma 62:16–17, 27–29).

Nephite attitudes and actions toward the Lamanites during wars showed respect for Lamanite lives. When faced with an invading Lamanite army, the Nephites were reluctant to go to war; “they were sorry” (Alma 48:21–23). Captain Moroni, leader of the Nephite army, “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). During a war, the Nephite leader Pahoran said, “We would not shed the blood of the Lamanites if they would stay in their own land” (Alma 61:10). In addition, Captain Moroni would not kill intoxicated Lamanites (Alma 55:19).

Notable deeds occurred during the second successful mission of Nephites to the Lamanites and the Lamanite mission to the Nephites (Helaman 5–6). Converted Lamanites laid down their weapons and their hatred. They returned captured land to the Nephites. Nephite people who belonged to the church were very happy the Lamanites had converted, and the two groups of believers fellowshipped and rejoiced together. Fellowshipping and rejoicing together suggests a partnership of the two groups. Peace and prosperity blessed both the Nephites and Lamanites; Nephites could travel in Lamanite lands, and Lamanites could travel among the Nephites.

Peace was achieved at other times, too. After another great conversion, most Lamanites and Nephites “did belong to the church,” “and they did have exceedingly great peace in the land” (Helaman 11:21– 22). On another occasion, to protect themselves, righteous Lamanites and Nephites united into one nation (3 Nephi 2:11–16, 3:14). After the war, the victorious Nephite-Lamanite nation gave land to their former enemies, who promised to “keep the peace” (3 Nephi 6:3). The most significant peace came after Christ’s visit and the gospel was preached successfully to everyone (3 Nephi 26:19; 4 Nephi 1:2–18): No “-ites” existed. “No contentions and disputations” occurred. “They had all things common among them.” The people were righteous and happy. In other words, the differences that existed (international, ethnic, economic, and so forth) were not important. The people were united, and all had their needs met. The people viewed each other as God wants us to do.

One account mentions that a group of wicked Nephites, who were living in Lamanite lands, developed good relations with the Lamanites (Mosiah 24:1–7). These Nephites taught the Lamanites the Nephite language and to keep records. The Lamanites prospered and developed good relations with that Nephite group.

On other occasions, Nephite leaders prayed and wrote for the benefit of the Lamanites or the Gentiles. The prophet Enos prayed for Lamanites (Enos 1:11–17). He prayed “with many long strugglings.” He asked the Lord to preserve the Nephite records for the benefit of the Lamanites in a future day. But Enos was not alone in wanting this. The Lord told him that his fathers also asked for the same thing (Enos 1:18). Jarom wrote that he and others wrote “for the intent of the benefit of our brethren, the Lamanites” (Jarom 1:2). Moroni, the last writer of the Book of Mormon, prayed for the Gentiles (Ether 12:36).

Righteous Nephites showed concern for Lamanites on other occasions. A group of Nephites separated from the main Nephite nation and lived among the Lamanites for many years. This separatist group suffered hardships at the hands of the Lamanites. During one such occasion, Gideon called Lamanites “our brethren” (Mosiah 22:3). The separatist group later returned to the Nephite nation. After the written account of the separatists was read to the Nephite nation (Mosiah 25:4–7), the Nephites were concerned for the spiritual welfare of their brethren, the Lamanites (Mosiah 25:11). No mention was made of anger over injustices committed by the Lamanites. All that is written is sorrow for loss of life and happiness for deliverance (Mosiah 25:8–10).

When Jacob chastised his fellow Nephites for sexual sins, he used righteous behavior of the Lamanites as an example of how the Nephites should act (Jacob 3:3–9). He did not disparage the Lamanites, but he emphasized their righteous, chaste behavior.

Righteous Nephites were kind to others within their own nation. Nephites were concerned for all the people among them who were in need (Alma 1:27, 30). If a person needed help, he or she received it: “They were liberal to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, whether out of the church or in the church, having no respect to persons as to those who stood in need.” After a time of war and loss of fathers and husbands, surviving widows and children were supported (Mosiah 21:17). By example, King Benjamin and King Mosiah showed that a righteous ruler is not above the people he or she serves (Mosiah 2:12–14, 6:7). Despite evil actions of others, righteous Nephites helped “the poor and the needy” (Alma 4:13). The record reports a time of “no inequality among [the Nephites]” (Alma 16:16). When the son of a former chief judge starts a rebellion, he is indicted and sentenced to death as others not of his heritage or status would be (Helaman 1:7–8).

Righteous Nephites were kind to those who did not share their faith. The Nephites nourished Sherem, who collapsed after preaching against Christ, for many days (Jacob 7:15). When Alma and others were about to preach to a group of wicked Nephites, he prayed for success and God’s help and noted “their souls are precious” (Alma 31:34–35).

When facing wicked Nephites, the Lamanite prophet Samuel also gave an example of showing kindness to one’s enemy. He calls the Nephites “beloved brethren” and “brethren” (Helaman 15:1, 4), even though some of the Nephites were trying to kill him (Helaman 16:2).

The Nephite record ends with examples of kindness from Nephites to the Lamanites. Mormon’s last words were encouragement to the Lehite descendants to believe in Christ (Mormon 7). Lamanites would soon kill him as a result of the war. Later, his son Moroni wrote respectfully to the Lamanites, even though he was hiding from them (Moroni 1; 10:1– 23). One would expect people who are under threat of death from a group to write spitefully about that group or to at least say something in anger about them, but not Mormon and Moroni. After all they had seen and done in fighting Lamanites and being hunted by them, Mormon’s (Mormon 7) and Moroni’s (Moroni 1–10) counsel to follow Christ was accompanied by examples of doing just that by following Christ’s counsel to “love your enemies” (Matthew 5:44–47, 3 Nephi 12:44–45).

The accounts between the books of Mosiah and Moroni show that war was a continual presence in the lives of many, if not most, Nephites and Lamanites. Remarkable, then, are the times when righteous Nephites and Lamanites were able to put aside the hard feelings that war naturally brings.

Unkindness, Persecution, and Oppression Condemned

Because some of you have obtained more abundantly than that of your brethren ye are lifted up in the pride of your hearts, and wear stiff necks and high heads because of the costliness of your apparel, and persecute your brethren because ye suppose that ye are better than they. And now, my brethren, do ye suppose that God justifieth you in this thing? Behold, I say unto you, Nay. But he condemneth you, and if ye persist in these things his judgments must speedily come unto you. (Jacob 2:13–14)

In addition to promoting international and intranational kindness, the Book of Mormon condemns unkindness and persecution against other groups. Persecution or unkind acts are censured 106 times.[98]

Unkind Acts and Attitudes of Nephites

Whenever Nephites or former Nephites act in unkind ways toward the Lamanites or others, these acts are labeled or presented as evil. Forty- three instances are found in the Book of Mormon record (Table 14).

Unkindness toward Lamanites occurred when Nephites went to Lamanite territory. After protecting Lamanites from Nephite aggression and his “austere” and “blood-thirsty” Nephite leader (Mosiah 9:1–2), Zeniff led a group of Nephites to live in Lamanite lands. Under Zeniff’s son Noah, this group became wicked. Among their wicked deeds were (1) boasting of their prowess over the Lamanites and delighting in shedding blood (Mosiah 11:18–19), (2) kidnapping Lamanite women (Mosiah 20:1– 5), and (3) attacking Lamanites three times (Mosiah 21:2–13).

Unkind actions by Nephites against Lamanites also occurred during the mission of Ammon and colleagues to the Lamanites. Before Ammon and colleagues left for Lamanite territory, some Nephites mocked the mission and instead proposed exterminating the Lamanites (Alma 26:23–25). After many Lamanites accepted the gospel, converted Lamanites were assaulted by their unconverted countrymen (Alma 24). Over one thousand converts were killed. Most of those doing the killing were former Nephites (Alma 24:28),[99] and those ex-Nephites instigated the killing spree (Alma 24:1). The Lamanite army then attacked the Nephites and were defeated, and this influenced many Lamanites in the army to also become converted to the Lord (Alma 25:1–6). Former Nephites, who were also in the Lamanite army, killed converted Lamanite soldiers (Alma 25:7–8). After returning home, ex-Nephites stimulated another round of killing converted Lamanites (Alma 27:1–4).

Five years before the sign of Christ’s birth appeared in the Americas, the prophet Samuel preached to the Nephites (Helaman 13–16). At this time, the Nephites were mostly wicked. Samuel was a Lamanite. As he preached to them, he noted that part of the reason the Nephites were angry with him was “because I am a Lamanite” (Helaman 14:10). The Nephites also tried to kill him (Helaman 14:10; 16:2, 6–8).[100]

Unkind, intranational actions were also deemed evil. The Zoramites were part of the Nephite nation. Wicked Zoramites would not allow poor people among them to enter synagogues, even though the poor had help build the structures; the people were “esteemed as filthiness” (Alma 32:2–5). After many Zoramites were converted by the ministry of Alma and colleagues, wicked Zoramites cast the converted Zoramites out of the land (Alma 35:3–6, 8). Multiple times “unbelievers” persecuted “believers” (Mosiah 24:8–11; Mosiah 26:38; Mosiah 27:1–2, 32; Alma 1:19–20; 4 Nephi 1:29). Some persecutions included death threats (3 Nephi 1:9) and actual killings (Alma 14:7–10). The opposite oppression was also condemned when people in the church “persecute[d] those that did not believe” (Alma 1:22; 4:6–15). Persecution of prophets and gospel preachers was condemned (Mosiah 11, 12, 17; Alma 8:13; Alma 14; Alma 38:3–4; 3 Nephi 6:20–30; 3 Nephi 7:14, 19). Although preaching any belief was legal among the Nephites (Alma 1:17, 30:12), Nehor killed someone who opposed his ideas (Alma 1:2–15). In contrast to the dissenter Sherem, who “was nourished for … many days” by Nephites (Jacob 7:15), the dissenter Korihor was trampled to death by a group of Nephites (Zoramites) who had separated from the main group of Nephites (Alma 30:59) and were perverting the ways of the Lord (Alma 31:1).

Do Not Persecute or Oppress Others, Love and Help Them

Persecuting another person because of his or her beliefs, economic condition, education level, clothing, or any other characteristic is explicitly condemned by the Book of Mormon, and so is oppression of others who are different. Instead, people should love and help others. Fifty-two entries make these points (Table 15).

Persecution typically results when one person or group has an attitude of superiority. These attitudes are evil, according to the Book of Mormon. The prophet Jacob taught that class distinctions and attitudes of superiority are wrong, that “one being is as precious in [God’s] sight as the other”; Jacob reprimanded those who persecute others because “ye were proud in your hearts, of the things which God hath given you” (Jacob 2:13–14, 20–21). When his people pressed him to become their king, the prophet Alma quoted the Lord, “Ye shall not esteem one flesh above another, or one man shall not think himself above another” (Mosiah 23:7). The Nephite church directed its people to avoid “pride” and “haughtiness” and “that every man should esteem his neighbor as himself” (Mosiah 27:4). Alma’s son, Alma, became a leader of the Nephites. The attitudes of superiority he saw among his people were labeled evil (Alma 4:6–9, 12–13, 15). In his sermon to the Nephites, he denounced the attitude of “supposing that ye are better one than another” (Alma 5:54). Later, he encountered a group of Nephites who worshipped in a manner that expressed their belief that they were better than others; this attitude and practice was condemned (Alma 31:12–30). He counseled his son Shiblon not to say he was better than others but rather to pray for forgiveness and to bless others (Alma 38:14). Other accounts again condemn the attitude of lifting oneself above another, which so often occurred because people became wealthy.[101] Class distinctions are evil (3 Nephi 6:10–15; Alma 1:26). An example of the right attitude is described as priests “not esteeming [themselves] above [their] hearers … neither was the teacher any better than the learner” (Alma 1:26). Another good example is King Benjamin. He said, “I  … am no better than ye yourselves are” (Mosiah 2:26).

Persecution of others is expressly condemned. In the days of king Mosiah, the church strictly commanded that no persecutions of others occur among them, so all people would be equal. (Mosiah 27:3).[102] Freedom of conscience was decreed, as Nephite “law could have no power on any man for his belief” (Alma 1:17; 30:7–12). Even Anti-Christ doctrine could be legally preached (Alma 30:12). This freedom was based on the idea that God’s commandments prohibited laws “which should bring men on to unequal grounds” (Alma 30:7). A strict church law was given that people of the church should not persecute others outside or inside the faith (Alma 1:21). Despising people who are poor or dress coarsely is wrong (Alma 32:2–5). Persecution of others was labeled “a great evil” (Helaman 3:34; 3 Nephi 6:10–15; Alma 5:54). “Smiting … brethren upon the cheek” (persecuting others), oppressing the poor, and withholding substance from people in need are evil acts (Helaman 4:12; Alma 4:6–9, 12–13, 15).

Persecution of others, attitudes of superiority, and class distinctions were signs a Book of Mormon society was turning away from righteousness. This was stated multiple times (Jacob 1:15–16, 2:13– 14; Alma 4:6–9, 12–13, 15, 5:53– 54; Helaman 6:16–17; 3 Nephi 6:10–15). For example, as the Book of Mormon people began to descend into their final period of wickedness, the record notes that class distinctions formed again (4 Nephi 1:26).

When Jesus Christ visited the Book of Mormon people, he said that people in the church were not to forbid any person from worshipping nor were they to cast any person out (3 Nephi 18:22–25, 28–33). “Whosoever breaketh this commandment suffereth himself to be led into temptation,” Christ said. He had prayed and invited all to come to him, and people should do the same for others. He told them not to cast someone out even if he or she was unworthy to partake of the emblems of the Lord’s sacrifice (sacramental bread and wine). Christ encouraged people to continue to minister to that person and pray for them, “for ye know not but what they will return and repent, and I shall heal them; and ye shall be the means of bringing salvation unto them.”

The Book of Mormon denounces slavery. Benjamin, a righteous Nephite king, forbade slavery among his people (Mosiah 2:13). After the Nephites abolished monarchical government, slavery was forbidden by law (Alma 27:9).

Riches should be used to bless others and help the less fortunate (Jacob 2:13–14, 16–21). People who have means should freely help those who are in need (Mosiah 18:27–29) and those who are poor (Mosiah 4:16– 26). Withholding substance from the poor is denounced (Alma 5:55). Amulek noted that if a person did not help the needy, then his or her prayers to God were in vain (Alma 34:28–29).

Persecuting others will bring the Lord’s condemnation upon a person. The prophet Alma taught the Nephites that mocking or persecuting another person disqualified one from being saved (Alma 5:30–31). Warnings are given to those who are “puffed up” because of riches or learning (2 Nephi 9:30, 42; 28:9–15). Pride and haughtiness will be put down (2 Nephi 12:11–17; 20:33). Judgment will come against those who “turn aside the stranger” (3 Nephi 24:5). Mormon also noted that sin and transgression cause great inequality (Alma 28:13). Inequality is labeled evil or a sign of evil (3 Nephi 6:10–15; Alma 4:6–9, 12–13, 15). Moroni condemned modern day persecutions and oppressions (Mormon 8:36– 37, 39–40). Two forms of oppression get additional emphasis, exploitation of others and smiting evil people.

Exploitation of Vulnerable People: Women, Lamanites, and the Well-To-Do

Some people use vulnerable people to achieve their own wicked aims. For example, vulnerable people are often used to do the “dirty work” involved in some crime. Other people are easy prey for fraudulent schemes. These exploitive acts are especially appalling. Often, the vulnerable person is of a different ethnic group, gender, age, or economic class than that of the exploiter. Exploitation occurs in our day[103] and at least eleven times in the Book of Mormon (Table 16). Through examples of exploitation of Lamanites and women by Nephites and one example from Jaredite history, the Book of Mormon condemns exploitation of vulnerable people.

When the Nephite prophet Jacob chastised Nephite men for sexual sins, he included a statement from the Lord condemning the exploitation of women for sexual purposes (Jacob 2:31–35). The Lord said, “I will not suffer … that the cries of the fair daughters of this people … shall come up unto me against the men of my people. … For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness.” Exploiting the tender feelings of these women for “whoredoms” would bring great condemnation on the perpetrators. Interestingly, Jacob and the Lord condemned the men, not the exploited women. Presumably then, the sexual liaisons were not consensual, at least as we understand that today. Jacob also mentioned that the men had deeply hurt their families. “Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children” (Jacob 2:35). Exploitation affects more than just the perpetrator and person being exploited.

Most of the exploitation in the Book of Mormon occurred when former Nephites used Lamanites to kill or attack Nephites or other Lamanites. The Lamanites’ hatred of the Nephites, based on the Lamanites’ belief that they had been wronged by the Nephites, was “a great national resource, a source of energy and resolve that malicious rulers could call upon to serve their selfish interests,” as Richard Bushman wrote.[104] Hatred “was ingrained in their national identity” and was easily exploitable. Lamanite hatred was exploited for the gain of wicked Nephites nine times (Table 16).

Three incidents occurred after successful missionary efforts. Twice, former Nephites (Amalekites and Amulonites) induced unconverted people to kill converted Lamanites (Alma 24:1–2; 27:2, 12). A third incident occurred after some Zoramites became upset that other Zoramites had been converted to the Lord. The angry Zoramites “began to mix with the Lamanites and to stir them up also to anger” (Alma 35:8–13). The result was another war between the Nephites and Lamanites in which Zerahemnah, the leader of the Lamanite army, also appointed ex-Nephites as chief captains over the Lamanites to “preserve their hatred toward the Nephites” (Alma 43:4–8, 44). The ex-Nephites induced the Lamanites to fight fiercely (Alma 43:43–44). The expendable Lamanites did not have any armor for protection, but their ex-Nephite leaders did have some form of armor or at least something more than a loincloth, which was all the Lamanites wore against the heavily armored Nephites (Alma 43:19–21).

Despite an attempt to keep him from reaching the Lamanites, Amalickiah, a Nephite dissenter, stirred Lamanites to anger and started another war with the Nephites (Alma 46:30–33; 47:1–35; 48:1–6; 49). Before starting the war, Amalickiah conspired to become king of the Lamanites. Then, “he did inspire their hearts against the Nephites” (Alma 48:2) and a war began. Amalickiah did not come with the Lamanite army, however, and the army was repelled by fortifications the Nephites had built. The record notes that if he had come, he perhaps would have ordered an attack on the heavily fortified city of Ammonihah, “for … he did care not for the blood of his people” (Alma 49:10). Instead, the Lamanites attacked another fortified city and suffered heavy losses. After the Lamanite army was defeated, Amalickiah was “exceedingly angry with his people” and swore to drink the blood of the leader of the Nephite army (Alma 49:25–27). Six years later, Amalickiah incited the Lamanites again to come to war, and a six-year war began (Alma 51:9– 12). Amalickiah was killed at the beginning of the war, and his brother Ammoron became king of the Lamanites (Alma 52:3).

Ammoron used the “tradition of their fathers” to justify the war, but he revealed how he exploited the Lamanites for his own gain (Alma 54:16–24; Alma 55:1; Alma 60:32). In a letter to Moroni, the Nephite military leader, Ammoron wrote, “Your fathers did wrong their brethren, insomuch that they did rob them of their right to the government when it rightly belonged to them,” and he justified the war “to obtain their rights to the government.” In other words, the first Laman was older than the first Nephi and should have been the leader of the Lehites, but Nephi became the leader. Hence, Ammoron argued, the Lamanites were justified in coming to war. Despite this reasoning, Ammoron and his brother were happy to have control of the government for themselves. They were ex-Nephites, presumably not descendants of Laman, the supposed true heirs of government leadership. Given this and their earlier attempt to gain control of the Nephite government (Alma 46), Ammoron’s attempt to help the Lamanites gain their rights to government was really to help him have rights to the government. Moroni recognized that Ammoron “had a perfect knowledge of his fraud.”

Nephite dissenters incited the Lamanites to attack the Nephites four additional recorded times. Eight years after the end of the six-year war started by Amalickiah, other Nephite dissenters exploited Lamanites again, and the Lamanites suffered heavy losses (Alma 63:14–15). In the Book of Helaman, three wars were started by ex-Nephites inciting Lamanites (Helaman 1:14–17; 4:1–5; 11:24).

The nearly constant mention of wickedness among the Nephites might lead one to think the Nephite prophets did not tolerate points of view different from their own, as the dissenters were identified as troublemakers. But, as mentioned, righteous Nephites condemned persecution of those who did not believe as they did, and the Nephites had freedom of conscience. The goal of the prophets was to use the Lord’s words to convince people to be part of the church. Unlike most “dissenters” today, Nephite dissenters did not simply want their own beliefs. They sought control of the government and exploited others to start wars in the process (Alma 60:15–17, 32). They were not merely nice people who did not believe any more.

Not all exploitation is of people who have less wealth, power, or opportunity or who are of a different ethnicity. A sexual and power-hungry exploitation occurred among apparently well-to-do Jaredites (Ether 8:7–12). A physically fair woman used her attractiveness to induce Akish, a friend of her grandfather, the king, to kill her grandfather so her father could become king. She also exploited her power-hungry father, Jared, who agreed to her plan. The record is unclear what personal benefit Jared’s unnamed daughter received from this, but these acts had disastrous consequences for the Jaredite nation. This is also a lesson that all people may be vulnerable in some way.

“By the Wicked That the Wicked Are Punished”

Followers of Christ are expected to live a high standard in their conduct with others, even with their enemies. “Love your enemies … do good to them that hate you,” Jesus personally taught the Book of Mormon people (3 Nephi 12:43–45), as he had previously taught the Jews (Matthew 5:43– 45). Although taught to defend themselves, Nephites were “taught never to give an offense” and only to “raise the sword” in self-defense to “preserve their lives” (Alma 48:14). One reason to avoid giving offensive or using force is that preaching is more effective than force (Alma 31:5).

The Book of Mormon warns against retaliation and particularly against the idea that one can become God’s punisher. The prophet Moroni taught, “He that smiteth shall be smitten again” (Mormon 8:19– 20; 3:15). Do not revile against others who do evil things to you, “lest ye become sinners like unto them,” said Amulek (Alma 34:40). And, lest any person think that he or she can be the instigator of punishing the wicked and still be righteous, the prophet Mormon wrote that wicked people are punished by other wicked people. His statement should give anyone pause who thinks he or she is justified in harming a person or group he or she thinks, or even knows, is wicked. Mormon wrote, “But, behold, the judgments of God will overtake the wicked; and it is by the wicked that the wicked are punished; for it is the wicked that stir up the hearts of the children of men unto bloodshed” (Mormon 4:5).[105] A prophecy of calamity coming as a result of wickedness does not mean the perpetrator of that calamity is justified. For example, Isaiah noted that the Assyrians, whom the Lord would use to punish wicked Israel, would be punished afterwards (2 Nephi 20:5–19).

How we treat other people is important. The Book of Mormon makes clear that we cannot hurt, persecute, exploit, or smite others if we want peace and the Lord’s blessings. This lesson is especially appropriate for our day, for the Lehite descendants, Jews, and Gentiles, who all have need to follow the Lord.

All are Promised Blessings, But All Must Repent

Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thy habitations; spare not, lengthen thy cords and strengthen thy stakes; For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left, and thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles and make the desolate cities to be inhabited. … For a small moment have I forsaken thee, but with great mercies will I gather thee. (3 Nephi 22:2–3, 7)

I would speak somewhat unto the remnant of this people who are spared … Know ye that ye are of the house of Israel. (Mormon 7:1–2)

Like a parent who favors one child above another, one would expect a discriminatory text to favor or promise more or better things to one group than another. The mistakes of the favored child are overlooked and those of the despised child are emphasized. That is not the case in the Book of Mormon. The number of times promises are given to each group is not equal but the substance of those promises is. All people are truly “alike unto God” (2 Nephi 26:33). All are loved, and all are wanted in the Lord’s kingdom. All are worth saving, despite the wickedness and abominations that all have committed.

The Book of Mormon categorizes the human family into four groups: Lamanites, Nephites, Israelites (or Jews), and Gentiles.[106] The Lamanites and Nephites are a subset of the Israelites or Jews. The rest of the human family is labeled “Gentiles.” The Nephite nation was destroyed at the end of the Book of Mormon, and surviving Nephites became Lamanites (Mormon 6:15; Moroni 1:1–2, 9:24).

Each of these three surviving groups received significant promises throughout the Book of Mormon (tables 17–19). These promises include special assignments from the Lord to build his kingdom in the day the Book of Mormon would come forth. The promises further the theme that God loves all (Table 4).

Many promises come from Isaiah’s prophecies. Joseph Spencer noted that the Isaiah record in First and Second Nephi points to the gospel going forth to all people: “Nephi sees … [a] sequence of Isaianic texts to be likenable to ‘all men’ and to give reasons to rejoice for ‘all men.’ … The eventual redemption of Israel is inseparable from the ultimate redemption of the whole world.”[107] Isaiah’s prophecies relate to each of the three groups, as the Book of Mormon explains.

Each group had times of righteousness. Nineteen examples of Lamanite righteousness are given in the Book of Mormon (Table 8). Examples of Nephite righteousness are found throughout the book, and examples of Jewish and Israelite righteousness are found throughout the Bible. In the Book of Mormon, Gentile righteousness is prophesied (Table 17). Among the good deeds foretold is that the Gentiles will help bring the gospel forth and will help the Jews and the Lehite descendants.

However, each group also had periods of wickedness, and each was invited to return to God. A lesson for all is that no group can expect the Lord’s blessings if they transgress his laws. The Lord has no favorites — God is fair. “If my people shall sow filthiness they shall reap the chaff thereof in the whirlwind” (Mosiah 7:29–32). A particular warning is to the Gentiles who, the Book of Mormon prophesies, would be dominant in the latter days. They are particularly warned to repent, and anti-Semitism, which the Gentiles have perpetrated, is especially condemned.

Promises to the Gentiles

Thirty-eight times in the Book of Mormon, the Gentiles receive promises from the Lord (Table 17). For example, they were prophesied to come to America, receive deliverance from all other nations, and have God’s power with them, but they would scatter the Lehite descendants and stumble; they would then receive the gospel, bring forth the Book of Mormon, and bring the gospel and “other books” to the Lehite descendants and the Jews (Title Page; 1 Nephi 10, 13, 15; 2 Nephi 10; 3 Nephi 21:5–6, 23:1–4, 26:8, 29:1; Ether 12:22, 13:11–12). The Messiah would be a light unto the Gentiles (1 Nephi 21:6; 2 Nephi 21:10). They would receive the Holy Ghost (3 Nephi 20:27). The Gentiles would be important helpers in building the Lord’s kingdom; they “shall be great in the eyes of [God]” in gathering the House of Israel (1 Nephi 21, 22; 2 Nephi 6, 10; Jacob 5, 6). The Gentiles would be blessed in the Americas, which would be a land of liberty to them and would be where “the Lord God will raise up a mighty nation among the Gentiles” (1 Nephi 22:7; 2 Nephi 10:10–11). If they accept the gospel, the Gentiles would be blessed and numbered with the Lehites and with Israel (1 Nephi 14:1–2, 5–6; 2 Nephi 6:12; 3 Nephi 16:4–15). The Lord’s people would inherit the Gentiles (3 Nephi 22:3). Mormon prophesied that the Gentiles would sorrow over the destruction of the Nephites and “for the calamity of the house of Israel” and that the Gentiles would receive the blessings the Nephites forfeited (Mormon 5:9–11, 19).

Promises to the Jews and House of Israel

Seventy-six times, the Book of Mormon lists promises made to the Jews or the House of Israel (Table 18). For example, multiple times throughout the first three books of the Book of Mormon (1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, and Jacob), the reader is told God would remember the Jews and Israel. The Jews would return to Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity (2 Nephi 6:8–9, 25:10–11), which would occur shortly after Lehi’s family left Jerusalem. Later, despite the scattering and scourging that would occur, “the Lord will set his hand again the second time to restore his people from their lost and fallen state” (2 Nephi 25:16–18). The House of Israel would be “scattered upon all the face of the earth,” and then “they should be gathered again” after the Gentiles receive the gospel (1 Nephi 10:12–14). The Lord would bless those who “still wait for the coming of the Messiah”; they “shall not be ashamed” (2 Nephi 6:7, 13). The Lord would destroy their enemies (2 Nephi 6:14–18). Abinadi (Mosiah 12, 15), Jesus (3 Nephi 15, 16, 20–24), Mormon (3 Nephi 5, 28, 29; 4 Nephi 1:49; Mormon 3, 5), Ether (Ether 13:3–12), and Moroni (Mormon 8, 9; Ether 4; Moroni 10) also spoke of promises to the Jews and the house of Israel.

Promises Specific to Lehite Descendants or Lamanites

The Book of Mormon says the Nephites and Lamanites are also part of the house of Israel. Therefore, the Lehite descendants share in the promises made to the Israelites. In addition, promises were made specifically to the Lamanites and to the Lehite descendants. These descendants are believed to be native peoples of the American continent, and also Polynesia.[108] As noted by Elizabeth Fenton and Jared Hickman, “The Book of Mormon is undeniably and deeply concerned with the status of indigenous peoples on the American continent.”[109] The additional promises to the Lamanites and Lehite descendants are given in 50 passages (Table 19).

Several promises specifically about the Lamanites were given. The Nephite prophet Jacob taught that because the Lamanites were monogamous and chaste, the Lord would be merciful to them; “one day they shall become a blessed people” (Jacob 3:5–6). The Lord would be merciful to the Lamanites, “he will lengthen out their days and increase their seed” (Helaman 7:24). Despite “the curse of God … upon them,” “the promises of the Lord were extended unto them on conditions of repentance” (Alma 17:15). The Lord will bless the Lamanites “because of their firmness when they are once enlightened” (Helaman 15:10–16).

Other promises connect Lehite descendants and Gentiles. Although God was angry with the Lehites and they were smitten by the Gentiles, God will not let the Gentiles destroy the Lehites (1 Nephi 13:11–14, 30–31). God would soften the Gentiles, and they would help the Lehites; Gentiles “shall be like unto a father to [the Lehite descendants]” (2 Nephi 10:18–19). The Lehites would receive the gospel through the Gentiles (1 Nephi 13:38, 15:13–17, 22:7–8; 2 Nephi 26:14–16, 30:3–6; 3 Nephi 21:1–7, 26:8; Mormon 7:8–10; Ether 12:22). “They shall be a pure and a delightsome people” through the help of the Gentiles (2 Nephi 30:3– 6). The land of America was a land for the inheritance of the Lehites (e.g., 3 Nephi 16:16, 20:14). Lehites will build the New Jerusalem, and the Gentiles will assist the Lehites (3 Nephi 21:23–24). “If the Gentiles do not repent” after scattering the Lord’s people, then Lehites will overpower the Gentiles (3 Nephi 20:15–17). Interestingly, the Book of Mormon’s focus is on the Lehite descendants receiving the gospel from the Gentiles, not on Lehites adopting Gentile culture (a frequent criticism of modern efforts to help native people).

Wickedness of Lehites

Wickedness of the Lamanites and especially the Nephites is well documented in the Book of Mormon, as already mentioned (tables 5–7). The record also prophesied that, after the Nephite nation was destroyed, descendants of the survivors would “dwindle in unbelief” and would be smitten (1 Nephi 12:20–23; 1 Nephi 13:11–12, 14, 30–31, 35; Mormon 5:15–18).

Interestingly, the Lord said the greatest wickedness among Israel was that of the degenerate Nephites and Lamanites at the end of the record (Mormon 4:12). The Nephites had been blessed and protected by the Lord. The Lamanites had become righteous as well, at times more so than the Nephites. But what both groups became was more wicked than anytime before, even more wicked, the Lord’s statement suggests, than the Jews at Jerusalem of Lehi’s day or at the time of Christ — two instances of Jewish wickedness mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

Wickedness of Jews or Israel and Its Horrible Ramifications

Forty-three times, the Book of Mormon notes or prophesies wickedness among the Jews or Israel, and terrible consequences are foretold in most of those instances (Table 20). The Book of Mormon begins with Lehi warning his fellow Jews to repent, and they tried to kill him (1 Nephi 1). Some instances speak specifically of Jews but give the general gospel teaching that wickedness leads to negative consequences (e.g., 2 Nephi 13, 15:1–25; 16:5, 9–12; 18:6–8; 19; 20:1–6). Other verses simply point out wickedness among the Jews or house of Israel without specifying consequences (e.g., Jacob 4:14–15, 6:4; Mosiah 3:14–15). The record notes the Jews would reject or slay the Messiah, and this would result in terrible consequences; they would be “scourged by all people,” “hated among all nations,” “smitten and afflicted,” and “scattered among all nations” (e.g., 1 Nephi 10:11–13; 19:13–14; 22:5 and 2 Nephi 6:8–11; 10:3–6; 25:2, 6, 9–10, 12–15, 18).

Because of this wickedness, some have assumed that persecuting Jews is justified. People have interpreted New Testament verses in anti-Semitic ways, and some preached that the Jews forfeited their opportunity to be God’s covenant people — hence through supersessionism, the Gentiles are now God’s covenant people.[110]

The Book of Mormon clearly states otherwise. As mentioned, persecuting others is evil, and God’s punishments are done by wicked people. In addition, anti-Semitism is condemned, and the Gentiles (who are responsible for most if not all anti-Semitism) are warned specifically to repent, in part, because of their persecution of the house of Israel. The Lord has not given up on his chosen people. He will gather them (Table 18).

Anti-Semitism Condemned

Anti-Semitism has resulted in many terrible persecutions in our day. The Book of Mormon condemns anti-Semitism eleven times (Table 21).

Under no conditions is anti-Semitism justified. “Every nation which shall war against thee, O house of Israel, shall be turned one against another, and they shall fall into the pit which they digged to ensnare the people of the Lord. And all that fight against Zion shall be destroyed” (1 Nephi 22:13–14, 19). “The Mighty God shall deliver his covenant people”; their enemies will be destroyed (2 Nephi 6:7, 13–18). Anyone who fights against Zion, Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female, “shall perish” (2 Nephi 10:13–17). “He that shall breathe out wrath and strifes … against the covenant people of the Lord who are the house of Israel … the same is in danger to be hewn down and cast into the fire” (Mormon 8:21–22). Nephi urged his readers to “respect the words of the Jews” or those words and other scriptures will condemn those who do not (2 Nephi 33:14).

In case anyone might be unclear about “house of Israel” or “Zion,” the Book of Mormon clearly states that persecution of Jews is evil. “Ye need not any longer hiss, nor spurn, nor make game of the Jews, nor any of the remnant of the house of Israel; for behold, the Lord remembereth his covenant unto them” (3 Nephi 29:8–9). The Lord warns the Gentiles that his promises to Abraham and the house of Israel will be fulfilled. For example, “O ye Gentiles, have ye remembered the Jews, mine ancient covenant people? Nay; but ye have cursed them, and have hated them, and have not sought to recover them. But behold, I will return all these things upon your own heads; for I the Lord have not forgotten my people” (2 Nephi 29:5). Anti-Semitism is emphatically condemned. No justification exists for persecuting Jews — or anyone else.

As noted by Bradley Kramer and Matthew Bowen, the Book of Mormon clarifies any anti-Semitic interpretation of the Bible.[111] “The Book of Mormon joins with the New Testament in order to clarify its message with respect to Jews,” Kramer wrote. Verses condemning anti-Semitism “make it very difficult for Christians to interpret the New Testament anti-Semitically.” In addition, “The Book of Mormon effectively affirms the overall goodness of Jews, confirms their ongoing place in God’s covenant, and does so despite charges of Christ-killing and the addition of believing Gentiles into that covenant.” Bowen adds that the Book of Mormon states the Jews are to be thanked not persecuted. As their name suggests, “Jews are to be ‘praised out of a feeling of gratitude,’ i.e., ‘thanked’ for their painstaking efforts to preserve the scriptures.” The Book of Mormon “suggests that we are accountable for not only our actions but our attitudes towards the Jews and the scriptures that we have through their ‘travails,’ ‘labors,’ ‘pains,’ and ‘diligence unto [the Lord]’ (2 Nephi 29:4).”

Gentiles, Repent!

The Book of Mormon calls upon modern Gentiles to repent 17 times (Table 22). The admonitions include prophecies of Gentile wickedness.

Some of the 17 instances include general comments about the wicked state of the Gentiles. The Gentiles “do stumble exceedingly,” “Satan hath great power over them,” and they are in an “awful state of blindness” (1 Nephi 13:29–34). “Turn, all ye Gentiles, from your wicked ways” (3 Nephi 30). Moroni noted general wickedness in our day and included a condemnation that latter-day people do not care for others in need; he warned that “the sword of vengeance hangeth over you” (Mormon 8:27–41).

Other admonitions to repent are gentler invitations. The Gentiles will be blessed if they repent and “fight not against Zion” (2 Nephi 6:12, 28:32). Gospel knowledge should help the Gentiles repent “that [they] may not bring down … the wrath of God upon [them] as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done” (Ether 2:11, 8:23–25). The Lord will show the Gentiles their weakness and will “prove them” (Ether 12:28, 35). Coming “clean before the Lord” will bring “greater things” (Ether 4:6, 13).

Stern warnings to repent are given because the Gentiles smote the house of Israel and are wicked. Gentiles smote “those who have dwindled in unbelief,” and the Gentiles are in a state of wickedness (2 Nephi 26:19–22). Gentiles have persecuted the Jews, and God “will return all these things upon [their] own heads” (2 Nephi 29). During his visit to the Lehites, Christ taught, “Wo … unto the unbelieving of the Gentiles,” for the Gentiles are prideful above all others, the Lord allowed Gentiles to smite Israelites, and if Gentiles do not repent, they will be smitten; if they repent, “they shall be numbered among my people” (3 Nephi 16:8–15). Twice more Christ reiterated the same message, “If the Gentiles do not repent after the blessing which they shall receive, after they have scattered my people,” “I will return their iniquities upon their own heads” (3 Nephi 20:15–28; 3 Nephi 21:12–25). Mormon wrote that the Lehite descendants “should be counted as naught” among the Gentiles and be driven and scattered, and therefore the Gentiles need to repent (Mormon 5:9, 20–24).

Nancy Bentley noted that the Book of Mormon “demonstrated that the ‘white’ civilization of the Nephites could fall into darkness and bring on genocidal disaster. And according to ancient prophecy, modern Americans risked the same course of population destruction.”[112]

Passages criticizing Gentiles and calling them to repentance are inconsistent with the idea that the Book of Mormon is a construct of racial ideas of 1800s America. If the book were a product of American racist views of Joseph Smith’s time, why would the book condemn the Gentiles, the group to which all Americans except Jews and Native Americans belonged? Why would the book promise God’s wrath upon unrepentant Gentiles for their persecution of Jews and natives? If he were racist, why would Joseph Smith condemn his own ethnic group? (Of course, people have interpreted the book in racial and racist terms, and this has created attitudes that have not only hurt people but also have marred the perception of the book.)

Extreme Wickedness

And it is impossible for the tongue to describe, or for man to write a perfect description of the horrible scene of the blood and carnage which was among the people, both of the Nephites and of the Lamanites; and every heart was hardened, so that they delighted in the shedding of blood continually. And there never had been so great wickedness among all the children of Lehi, nor even among all the house of Israel, according to the words of the Lord. (Mormon 4:11–12)

In our day, war and conspiracies have resulted in terrible discrimination. War is the ultimate result of unchecked wickedness and the opposite of how God wants us to interact. The Book of Mormon also labels conspiracies or “secret combinations” as another form of extreme wickedness. Conspiracies are another tool of hate and intolerance. Conspiracies and war destroyed the Jaredite and Nephite civilizations.

Armed Conflict

Through the many Book of Mormon passages on armed conflict (Table 23), we learn that, although defensive war is often necessary to protect one’s life and liberty, war is tragic, occurs because of wickedness, and is a senseless waste of human lives and effort. Moroni, the last Nephite prophet, wrote the Jaredite account (Ether) after he witnessed the destruction of the Nephites. The tone of his words emphasizes the futility and tragedy of war, and he specifically noted the wickedness that often leads to war.

War makes living righteously more difficult and acting wickedly much easier. Survival becomes more important than loving one’s neighbor. For example, people usually start using denigrating words for their enemy instead of speaking respectfully, which usually lasts long after the conflict is over. Entrenched, negative views were behind the proposal to attack the Lamanites instead of sending missionaries (Alma 26:23– 25). People are hardened by war, as occurred after the six-year Nephite-Lamanite war (Alma 62: 41, 44–45). Killing others to survive lowers resistance for other evil acts, and people can become bloodthirsty. This occurred in the final wars of the Jaredites and Nephites. Mormon wrote, “Every heart was hardened, so that they delighted in the shedding of blood continually” (Mormon 4:11). In their final war, “the Spirit of the Lord had ceased striving with [the Jaredites], and Satan had full power over the hearts of the people” (Ether 15:19). The Jaredites “were drunken with anger, even as a man who is drunken with wine” (Ether 15:22). Rape, torture, and plundering often is rampant during war, as was seen in the final Nephite-Lamanite conflict (Moroni 9:9–10, 16).

War began shortly after Lehi died and the family divided and continued throughout the book (Table 23). Nephi reported preparations for war and “wars and contentions with our brethren” (2 Nephi 5:14, 34). Nephite-Lamanite wars were reported in the small, succeeding books of Jacob (7:24–26), Enos (1:14, 24), Jarom (1:7–9), Omni (1:2, 10, 24), and Words of Mormon (1:13–14). There we read of “much war and contention,” “much bloodshed,” and the deaths of “many thousands of the Lamanites.” More detail is given about Lamanite- Nephite conflicts beginning with the Book of Mosiah. From this point to the end of the Book of Mormon, 23 armed confrontations occurred between the Nephites and Lamanites.

Twenty single battles or short conflicts are mentioned (Table 23). Twelve of these involved Lamanites attacking Nephites and the defeat of the Lamanite army (Mosiah 9, 10, 11; Alma 2, 3, 16, 25, 28, 35, 43, 44, 48, 49, 63; Helaman 1). One Lamanite attack evolved into a civil war (Helaman 11). One short conflict involved a successful attack by the Lamanites against a group of Nephites (Mosiah 19). In another conflict, Lamanites captured a different Nephite group without bloodshed (Mosiah 23). Four conflicts were caused by Nephite aggression. Three of these times, a group of Nephites, in bondage to Lamanites, tired of subjugation and tried unsuccessfully to repel their captors (Mosiah 21). The fourth incident was precipitated by a small group of Nephites kidnapping Lamanite women; Lamanites retaliated by attacking other Nephites (Mosiah 20). The twentieth short conflict was a preventative measure by the Nephites, who “drove all the Lamanites who were in the east wilderness into their own lands” (Alma 50:1–12). This latter conflict was the only one by righteous Nephites that could be considered an offensive action. But even then, its stated purpose was to remove Lamanite squatters, to prevent the land from being used for the next anticipated Lamanite attack, and no bloodshed is mentioned.[113]

Three great, extended wars between the Nephites and Lamanites are mentioned (Table 23). The first lasted six years and is documented in 12 chapters of the Book of Alma (Alma 51–62). Lamanites, led by Nephite dissenters, attacked the Nephites and captured many cities. Eventually the Nephites regained the captured territory. The second war was again stimulated by Nephite dissenters (Helaman 4). Lamanites attacked and captured the Nephite capital and “almost all their lands”; this war lasted five years, and the Nephites regained only half the land lost. The Book of Mormon tragically concludes with the third great war (Mormon 1–6, 8; Moroni 1, 9). Both nations were grossly wicked, and the Nephite nation was destroyed. This last war lasted decades, and years passed between some battles.

Many armed conflicts in the Book of Mormon were intranational (Table 23). More than 14 civil wars were fought among the Nephites.[114] At least 20 civil wars occurred among the Jaredites.

Forty passages discuss motivations for war and attitudes about war (Table 23). For example, the devil encourages contention, but Christ’s doctrine does the opposite (3 Nephi 11:28–30). In vision, Nephi saw a connection of the final Lamanite-Nephite war to two symbols of evil from his father’s dream, the “fountain of filthy water” and a river that represented the depths of hell (1 Nephi 12:15–16). Unrighteous attitudes helped induce conflict. Many Lamanites hated the Nephites (e.g., Mosiah 1:14; Enos 1:14), and this hatred was based on the Lamanite belief that the first Nephi had wronged his brothers Laman and Lemuel and their descendants (e.g., Mosiah 10:11–17; Alma 20:10, 13). The desire for power motivated some to war (e.g., Alma 43:7–8, 29; 44:2). To reduce the likelihood of civil war, King Mosiah proposed that the Nephite government have judges instead of kings (Mosiah 29:1–11). Jaredites chose a king despite the warning that “surely this thing leadeth into captivity” (Ether 6:21–28). Wicked, frustrated, or angry Nephite settlers started conflicts with Lamanites (Mosiah 20, 21). Revengeful Nephites attacked Lamanites (Mormon 3, 4). Righteous Nephites and Lamanites successfully repelled attacks from others when they were motivated to protect themselves and their liberties and stayed close to God (e.g., Alma 43, 46, 48–49; 3 Nephi 2–4). The righteous leader Gidgiddoni would not start a war because then “the Lord would deliver us into their hands” (3 Nephi 3). Gidgiddoni said the opposite would occur if “we will wait till they shall come against us.”

The Book of Mormon teaches that living the gospel will bring the opposite of war — true peace.[115] When the Lord’s kingdom is established worldwide, “nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more” (2 Nephi 12:4), and “they shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea” (2 Nephi 21:9). Jesus taught the Book of Mormon people, “Blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God” (3 Nephi 12:9). Indeed, when all Lehites were converted to the Lord, no contention was found “because of the love of God which did dwell in the hearts of the people” (4 Nephi 1:2, 15).

Secret Combinations

Conspiracies have been a means of discrimination. These acts involve a group acting to commit a crime in secret. The criminal act may be carried out by one person, but he or she is supported by a group. Also, a secret, organized group may commit a crime as a group, or a disorganized group or mob forms and commits a crime, often in uncontrolled anger. Regardless, members of these groups protect each other from prosecution. In the United States, for example, Joseph and Hyrum Smith were murdered by a mob, and an attempt to prosecute the perpetrators failed.[116] For decades, mobs lynched people of African descent without perpetrators being punished. Sometimes government agents, who should have been protecting people, have been part of the conspiracy. White supremacy groups have worked in secret to discriminate against others, often with violence or the threat of violence. But in our day, not all secret, discriminatory acts are violent. Housing segregation by ethnicity or limiting people’s opportunities because of ethnicity (e.g., “redlining”) are examples of non-violent discriminatory conspiracies.

The Book of Mormon mentions conspiracies 37 times (Table 24) and labels them “secret combinations.” It includes examples of single perpetrators acting with the support of a group and examples of large groups of people causing havoc. The secret combinations in the Book of Mormon seemed primarily concerned with gaining wealth or power and not necessarily discrimination of others. Nevertheless, because conspiratorial groups have been important agents of discrimination in our day, the Book of Mormon’s warnings against these groups are relevant to any discussion of inter-group relations.

The book condemns secret combinations in the strongest possible terms. Moroni wrote, “They formed a secret combination, even as they of old; which combination is most abominable and wicked above all, in the sight of God; for the Lord worketh not in secret combinations” (Ether 8:18–19; see 2 Nephi 26:23). Moroni added, “They have caused the destruction of [the Jaredites] and also the destruction of the people of Nephi” (Ether 8:21; see Helaman 2:13–14). Jesus said the wickedness of King Jacob’s people “was above all the wickedness of the whole earth, because of their secret murders and combinations; for it was they that did destroy the peace of my people and the government of the land” (3 Nephi 9:9). During a time of righteousness, the people “did put an end to all those wicked, and secret, and abominable combinations, in the which there was so much wickedness, and so many murders committed” (3 Nephi 5:6). The devil “stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness” (2 Nephi 9:9). The Lord will destroy these works (2 Nephi 10:15).

The Book of Mormon says secret combinations will destroy a nation and prophesied that they would exist among us today (2 Nephi 26:22; Alma 37:22, 25–26, 31; 3 Nephi 30:2; Mormon 8:27, 40). Moroni says to us,

And whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed; for the Lord will not suffer that the blood of his saints, which shall be shed by them, shall always cry unto him from the ground for vengeance upon them and yet he avenge them not. Wherefore, O ye Gentiles, it is wisdom in God that these things should be shown unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you, which are built up to get power and gain — and the work, yea, even the work of destruction come upon you, yea, even the sword of the justice of the Eternal God shall fall upon you, to your overthrow and destruction if ye shall suffer these things to be. (Ether 8:22–23[117])

Could these warnings be not only a reference to gangs peddling drugs, stealing, and murdering but also to lynchings and other discriminatory acts which have been done and are done “in secret,” and where people make pacts to protect perpetrators of bad deeds, including with false testimony?

Redemption from Discriminatory Attitudes — Three Miraculous Conversions

They have an eternal hatred towards the children of Nephi. (Mosiah 10:17)

Let us take up arms against them, that we destroy them and their iniquity. (Alma 26:25)

They took their swords, and all the weapons which were used for the shedding of man’s blood, and they did bury them up deep in the earth. (Alma 24:17)

We will set our armies … that we may protect our brethren. … There was a tremendous slaughter among the people of Nephi. (Alma 27:23, 28:3)

Another key message of the Book of Mormon is redemption. Throughout the book, Nephites, Lamanites, and Jaredites were invited to repent and come to the Lord. Often, they did. To our modern world, the ancient authors also invite Israelites, Lehites, and Gentiles to repent and accept the gospel of Christ. The authors included powerful examples of repentance from their days. One of the most powerful examples of redemption begins with five rebellious sons of two Nephite leaders and discriminatory attitudes among both Nephites and Lamanites. The example ends with thousands of Lamanites and Nephites giving up their lives, at least in part, for others. This story is full of inter-group kindnesses (Table 13), but it is also a story of three miraculous redemptions from sin, including the sin of discriminatory attitudes.[118]

Ammon, Aaron, Omner, Himhi, and Alma lived sinful lives and went about seeking to destroy the church and disrupting the good their fathers were doing. After a miraculous experience, these five had a complete change of heart and went about doing good and tried to repair the damage of their previous actions. The four sons of Mosiah (Ammon, Aaron, Omner, and Himni) and some colleagues decided to go to the Lamanites to try to help them feel the joy of redemption that the four sons and colleagues had received. They also hoped to bring peace to the land. They plead “many days” for permission, which Mosiah eventually granted after he asked the Lord. Although Mosiah agreed, other Nephites let them know their idea was silly.[119] They “laughed [the missionary group] to scorn.” The other Nephites expressed their prejudice by saying the Lamanites were not worth the effort because they were “stiffnecked,” delighted “in the shedding of blood,” and lived lives of “the grossest iniquity.” Their ways were “the ways of a transgressor from the beginning.” The other Nephites proposed exterminating the Lamanites and their iniquity. This proposition manifests the attitude of superiority of these Nephites. But it also suggests the Nephites were afraid of the Lamanites. This mission was not a vacation. The lives of the missionaries were in jeopardy.

The four sons and colleagues went anyway, and they had phenomenal success despite significant hardships. Thousands of Lamanites accepted the gospel the Nephite missionaries taught. These Lamanites, who formerly had their own prejudices and hatred toward the Nephites,[120] were now “friendly with the Nephites.” The miraculous mass conversion was impressive, but next came mass-casualty sacrifices in which both Nephites and converted Lamanites gave their lives. Among all the examples of inter-group kindness in the Book of Mormon (Table 13), these are perhaps the most inspiring.

Converted Lamanites made the first sacrifice.[121] They refused to take up arms against fellow citizens (unconverted Lamanites and former Nephites) when that group came against the converted people and sought to destroy them and overthrow the converted king. Instead of preparing to defend themselves, they buried “their swords, and all the weapons which were used for the shedding of man’s blood, … deep in the earth.” “They went out to meet” and “prostrated themselves” in front of the advancing force. One thousand and five converted Lamanites were killed, but, moved by the sacrifice, more than that number from the attacking force were converted. A second time, converted Lamanites again give up their lives rather than defend themselves and kill others. Yes, their sacrifice was motivated by their fear of returning to old hatreds and sins, but it was also a great act of kindness. As their king, Anti-Nephi-Lehi, explained, they did not want their swords “stained with the blood of our brethren.” They did not want to harm anyone. Through their example, many unconverted Lamanites became converted. Redemption did not end there.

Next, the Nephites sacrificed.[122] After the second massacre, the converted Lamanites faced total annihilation because they refused to defend themselves. Without first asking the Nephite nation, the Nephite missionaries proposed immigration to Nephite territory, and they returned home with thousands of refugees. When the idea of immigration was proposed, the converted Lamanites offered to become slaves to the Nephites to “repair … the many murders and sins which we have committed against them.” Instead, the Nephites offered the converted Lamanites land, military protection, and citizenship. The converts agreed to give material support in return. The Nephite pledge was shortly put to the test as an army of the remaining (unconverted) Lamanites had followed the refugees and attacked the Nephites. “A tremendous battle” ensued, “such an one as never had been known among [the Lehites].” Three years later, the Nephites again protected the converted Lamanites, now known as the people of Ammon. “The Nephites would not suffer that they should be destroyed.” Several years later, during the six-year Lamanite-Nephite war, the Nephites protected the people of Ammon a third time. The Book of Mormon does not record any Nephite complaints, suggesting the whole Nephite nation willingly sacrificed for their converted brethren.

The record does not specify the number of Nephite deaths in the three wars. After the first one, the casualty report was “a tremendous slaughter among the people of Nephi … there was a great mourning and lamentation heard throughout all the land, among all the people of Nephi.” For the second war the record notes that “the number of their dead was exceedingly great.” Casualties in the long six-year war were also high. The Nephites paid a high price to love their new Lamanite fellow citizens. Again, the Nephite record contains no complaints about their sacrifice, only that during the six-year war, converted Lamanites were willing to break their oath to help defend their new home.

The record is silent about how many Nephites scorned the original mission and wanted instead to exterminate the Lamanites. We do not know if this was a majority or minority view. But, given King Mosiah’s reluctance to send his sons and their friends, previous unsuccessful efforts, and numerous Nephite-Lamanite wars, likely few Nephites thought their mission was a good idea.[123] At least some of those who later gave their lives for Lamanites — or who put their lives at risk — must have been those who earlier did not endorse the mission or suggested exterminating the Lamanites. These Nephites also had been redeemed in an extraordinary way.

Thousands of Lamanites were redeemed from their hatred of the Nephites, and many Nephites were redeemed from their hatred of the Lamanites. The turning point came when the small group of Nephites risked their lives not to exploit Lamanite hatred of the Nephites nor “to destroy our brethren,” but to “save some few of their souls” and “perhaps … cure them of their hatred toward the Nephites” (Mosiah 28:1–2; Alma 26:26). The group achieved their goal and more, as Richard Bushman noted, “by simple acts of love and generosity.” [124] These acts, which were “so contrary to the Lamanite stereotypes of the Nephites,” touched the Lamanites’ hearts. Bushman adds that the group’s work “set the pattern for later conversions,” which “strengthens the implication that conversion to the gospel and repudiation of false traditions was the only workable basis for permanent peace.”

This offers a clear lesson for us today. Seemingly unredeemable people (Alma 26:17, 23–25) can indeed be redeemed. If Nephites and Lamanites can be redeemed from bigotry by following the Lord through acts of service, love, and generosity, so can we.

Conclusion

The culture of Joseph Smith’s time was not conducive to producing a book in which more than half its verses directly or indirectly preach international and intranational amicability. This fact is additional evidence of the book’s divinity. Inclusive messages were not common in Joseph Smith’s day.[125] He lived in a culture where Native Americans were exterminated or sent on forced marches,[126] African Americans were held in slavery, Chinese Americans were denied citizenship,[127] and Latter-day Saint Americans were driven out of the country. Attempts by early Latter-day Saints to be inclusive of Native and African Americans — to implement messages of the Book of Mormon — stimulated persecution of Latter-day Saints in the 1800s.[128]

Understandably, that atmosphere led people, including Latter-day Saints, to interpret Book of Mormon references to skin color in racial terms. Furthermore, as articulated by Paul Reeve, Latter-day Saints in the 1800s and early 1900s were seen as non-white by other people of European ancestry in the United States, in large part because of the Latter-day Saint outreach efforts and inclusive doctrines taught in the Book of Mormon.[129] This, Reeve noted, contributed to racial attitudes among the predominantly European-American Latter-day Saints as they tried to be seen as “white.” Peter Coviello blames 1800s racism within the church, including efforts of American Latter-day Saints to “become white” in the eyes of their countrymen, as contributing to racist perceptions of the Book of Mormon; this is “one obstacle to seeing clearly the counterracialist possibilities of The Book of Mormon,” he said.[130] With such previous, entrenched[131] teachings now officially disavowed,[132] perhaps we can see more clearly the non-discriminatory message of the book and live like the Christlike Nephites and Lamanites in the book.

Instead of highlighting how a few verses were interpreted as reflecting 1800s attitudes, a better focus is on the inclusive messages that are in more than half of the book’s verses:

- God loves all people and his message is for all people on earth (Table 4).

- God will treat all people fairly (Table 4).

- God favors personal righteousness, not lineage (Table 4).

- Every group (Nephites, Lamanites, Jaredites, Jews, and Gentiles) has had times of righteousness and times of wickedness.[133]

- All groups need to repent (tables 5–6, 20–22).

- The aim is spiritual beauty and cleanliness, not physical attractiveness (Table 3).

- The Gentiles have persecuted Lehite descendants and Jews. The Gentiles’ need to repent is particularly emphasized (tables 21–22).

- All people (Lehites, Jews, and Gentiles) are promised blessings and happiness if they follow the Lord (tables 4, 17–19).

- Anti-Semitism is evil (Table 21).

- Slavery is evil (Mosiah 2:13; Alma 27:9).

- Righteous Nephites viewed the Lamanites as brothers, and vice versa (tables 11, 13).

- Righteous Nephites reached out to the Lamanites, and vice versa (Table 12).

- Righteous people were kind to others. Sometimes these acts cost unselfish people their lives or put their lives at risk (Table 13).

- Unkind actions against others are condemned (Table 14).

- Persecution or oppression of others is wickedness (Table 15).

- Attitudes of superiority are condemned (Table 15).

- Class distinctions are evil (Table 15).

- Exploitation of vulnerable people is evil (Table 16).

- Although defensive war may be necessary, war is started by wickedness (Table 23).

- Conspiracies, which in our day are involved in some discriminatory actions or crimes, are extremely evil (Table 24).

- The wicked punish the wicked (Mormon 4:5).

- On no occasion do righteous Nephites seek to destroy Lamanites or vice versa (Table 23).

- People can learn from despised people. Multiple times Lamanites, who were scorned periodically by the Nephites, are examples of righteousness (Table 8), even when “unconverted” (Table 9).

- Christ taught us to focus on fixing ourselves and not others (3 Nephi 14:3–5; Matthew 7:3–5). The Nephite record does that by focusing on Nephite faults and de-emphasizing Lamanite ones (tables 5–7, 9–10).

Righteous people in the Book of Mormon cared about others. Whatever the differences truly were between the Nephites and Lamanites, those people gave us much to learn from in our day of unrelenting discrimination.

As leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have taught, the Book of Mormon has messages for our time, was written for us today, and should be an important focus of gospel study.

[The Book of Mormon’s] narrative is a chronicle of nations long since gone. But in its descriptions of the problems of today’s society, it is as current as the morning newspaper and much more definitive, inspired, and inspiring concerning the solutions of those problems.[134]

It was written for our day. The Nephites never had the book; neither did the Lamanites of ancient times. It was meant for us. … Each of the major writers of the Book of Mormon testified that he wrote for future generations. … If they saw our day and chose those things which would be of greatest worth to us, is not that how we should study the Book of Mormon? We should constantly ask ourselves, “Why did the Lord inspire Mormon (or Moroni or Alma) to include that in his record? What lesson can I learn from that to help me live in this day and age?”[135]

I speak about the power of the Book of Mormon and the critical need we have as members of this Church to study, ponder, and apply its teachings in our lives.[136]

Immersing ourselves regularly in the truths of the Book of Mormon can be a life-changing experience. … It contains the answers to life’s most compelling questions. It teaches the doctrine of Christ. … We learn about the gathering of scattered Israel. … These and other truths are more powerfully and persuasively taught in the Book of Mormon than in any other book. … I promise that as you daily immerse yourself in the Book of Mormon, you can be immunized against the evils of the day. … This is the book that will help to prepare the world for the Second Coming of the Lord.[137]

How appropriate then, that so many of the book’s verses directly or indirectly impart an anti-discriminatory, inclusive message — a message sorely needed in today’s diverse, interconnected, and contentious world. This message is not just important for getting along. As prophesied in the Book of Mormon, the gospel is going to all people on earth. The inclusive message is therefore critically important for those who preach and hear the gospel. Joseph Smith wrote, “A man filled with the love of God, is not content with blessing his family alone, but ranges through the whole world, anxious to bless the whole human race.”[138]

Despite obvious reasons to hate their Lamanite enemies, righteous Nephites in the Book of Mormon chose to put differences aside in their dealings with the Lamanites. Despite deep traditions of resentment and bitterness, righteous Lamanites were also exemplary in their dealings with the Nephites. Righteous Lamanites and Nephites also acted honorably toward others within their own nations. Today, whatever the apparent justifications for racial, ethnic, international, or class strife may be, whatever the reasons for divisions or for others’ circumstances and regardless of a person’s ethnicity, economic class, gender, or other characteristic, you and I can and should choose to love and reach out to others. Furthermore, let us not condemn or misread a book that overwhelmingly teaches us to love and serve others — however different from us they may be — because we live in a different time and culture, have different expectations, and are confused by a very small number of its passages.[139]

David Michael Belnap received a BS degree in biochemistry from Brigham Young University in 1989 and a PhD in biology from Purdue University in 1995. Since his days at Purdue University, he has studied the structure of viruses primarily by three-dimensional electron microscopy. He has also studied other biological macromolecules and helped develop 3DEM methods. Following graduate studies, he worked at the National Institutes of Health (Bethesda, Maryland; 1995 to 2004) and Brigham Young University (2004 to 2012). He currently is a research faculty member in the Department of Biochemistry and School of Biological Sciences at the University of Utah, where he also directs the Electron Microscopy Core Laboratory. David enjoys serving in the church and especially enjoys being outdoors with his wife Julie and family.

1 . For example, Title Page; 1 Nephi 13–14; 3 Nephi 29–30; Mormon 8:26–41. Elizabeth Fenton and Jared Hickman wrote, “the text is self-consciously and committedly anachronistic and asks to be entertained as such” (Elizabeth Fenton and Jared Hickman, “Introduction: Learning to Read with The Book of Mormon” in Americanist Approaches to The Book of Mormon, eds. Elizabeth Fenton and Jared Hickman [New York: Oxford University Press, 2019], 8–9).

2 . The most striking example is given in 4 Nephi 1:1–18.

3 . For example, James Fenton, “‘The Book of Mormon’: No Offense,” The New York Review, 11 June 2011, http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2011/06/11/james-fenton-book-of-mormon-review/; Thomas W. Murphy, “Laban’s Ghost: On Writing and Transgression” Dialogue 30, no. 2 (1997): 105–26; Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults, ed. Ravi Zacharias (Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2003) 207–208; Richard Abanes, Becoming Gods (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2004) 73, 365n121, 367n138; Simon G. Southerton, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2004) 8–9, 12, 40, 184.

4 . 1 Nephi 11:13; 1 Nephi 13:15; Jacob 3:5, 8–9; Alma 3:6; and 3 Nephi 2:15.

5 . For example, Eugene England, “‘No Respecter of Persons’: A Mormon Ethics of Diversity,” Dialogue 27, no. 4 (Winter 1994): 88, 93.

6 . For example, “The Book of Mormon with its story of the Lamanites and their sacred drama remains confusing, troubling, and demanding.” David Knowlton, “Lamanites, Apologetics, and Tensions in Mormon Anthropology” in Perspectives on Mormon Theology: Apologetics, eds. Blair G. Van Dyke and Loyd Isao Ericson (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2017), 208. “The struggle to define Book of Mormon racial identity reveals fractures in Mormonism’s relationship with itself.” Russell W. Stevenson “Reckoning with Race in the Book of Mormon: A Review of Literature” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 27 (2018): 225.

7 . 3,591 verses in the Book of Mormon directly or indirectly address issues of interracial, interethnic, international, intranational, or interclass relations (Table 1). That is 54% of the verses in the book.

I used the 1981 and 2013 editions of The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). In these editions, 6,604 verses are numbered as part of chapters. In my count, I include four additional verses for the two paragraphs on the title page and the one-paragraph testimonies of the Three and Eight Witnesses. This gives a total of 6,608 verses.

I include, of course, the Nephites and Lamanites as international. I also include different groups within the two nations who differed economically, ethnically, religiously, or in any other way. For example, Nephites who dissented and went to live with the Lamanites technically became Lamanites. However, just as immigrants today still have differences with the people among whom they now live, I consider these dissenters ethnic Nephites. Similarly, I distinguish converted Lamanites who become Nephites as ethnic Lamanites. I include gender.

8 . “Race and the Priesthood,” Gospel Topics Essays, December 2013, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood.

9 . According to Nephi’s record, his brothers Laman and Lemuel threaten or commit violence multiple times: they beat Sam and Nephi (1 Nephi 3:28–29), tie Nephi up twice (1 Nephi 7:16; 18:10–12), try to kill Lehi (1 Nephi 17:44), try to kill Nephi twice (1 Nephi 7:19; 17:48), and threaten to kill both Lehi and Nephi (1 Nephi 16:37). Shortly before his death, Lehi notes Laman and Lemuel sought to kill Nephi (2 Nephi 1:24), and Jacob’s brothers (assumed to be Laman and Lemuel) were rude (2 Nephi 2:1).

10 . For example, Joseph Fielding McConkie and Robert L. Millet, Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon, Volume 1: First and Second Nephi (1987, repr. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2007) 223–24; Kathryn B. Jenkins, The Essential Book of Mormon Companion: Key Insights to Your Gospel Study (American Fork, UT: Covenant Communications, 2011) 54, 196–97, 340; Kathryn Jenkins Gordon, Scripture Study Made Simple: The Book of Mormon (American Fork, UT: Covenant Communications, 2015) 74, 252–53, 477; Rodney Turner, “The Lamanite Mark” in The Book of Mormon: Second Nephi, The Doctrinal Structure, eds. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate, Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1989) 133–57; Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith The Mormon Prophet, 2nd ed. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), 43–44; John L. Sorenson, Mormon’s Codex: An Ancient American Book (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2013), 38–39, 550–51; Patrick Q. Mason, “Mormonism and Race” in The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Race in American History, eds. Kathryn Gin Lum and Paul Harvey (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), 156–71; Richard Lyman Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005), 97–99; Hokulani K. Aikau, A Chosen People, A Promised Land: Mormonism and Race in Hawai’i (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012), 36–37; Fenton and Hickman, “Introduction,” 4; David Whitmer, “An Address to All Believers in Christ” (Richmond, MO, 1887), 12; D. Michael Quinn, “The First Months of Mormonism: A Contemporary View by Rev. Diedrich Willers,” New York History 54 (1973): 329; Royal Skousen, Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2004–2009, 2014), 4:895–99.

11 . Respectively, Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, 98 and Mason, “Mormonism and Race,” 161. See also, Elizabeth Fenton, “Open Canons: Sacred History and American History in The Book of Mormon,” J19: The Journal of Nineteenth-Century Americanists 1 (2013): 354–55.

12 . Armand L. Mauss noted, “Although Joseph Smith presented the Book of Mormon to the world as his translation of an ancient document, it is generally regarded by non-Mormons as a nineteenth-century product, whether or not it was divinely inspired. Accordingly, passages like those excerpted above [1 Nephi 12:23; 2 Nephi 5:21, 30:6; Jacob 3:5, 8; Alma 3:6, 13–19; 3 Nephi 2:15–16; Mormon 5:15] are taken as simply reflections of nineteenth-century American racist understandings about the origins of various peoples of color. Such conventional wisdom seems justified both by the mysterious provenance of the Book of Mormon itself and by the meanings that Mormons themselves have traditionally attributed to such passages.” All Abraham’s Children: Changing Mormon Conceptions of Race and Lineage (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2003), 117–18. Elizabeth Fenton and Jared Hickman note, “[T]here’s no denying that The Book of Mormon can indeed seem like something cooked up after hours at a conference of nineteenth-century Americanists,” Fenton and Hickman, “Introduction,” 4. See also, John A. Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon” FARMS Review 15, no. 2 (2003): 183–97.

13 . Two other verses are often suggested to have racial connotations. However, skin is not mentioned, and if not for the racial interpretation of the other eight, “dark” in these verses would, without serious question, be considered metaphorical: In a vision, Nephi saw future people “dwindle in unbelief” which caused them to become “a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people” (1 Nephi 12:22–23). Mormon made a nearly identical prophecy (Mormon 5:15).

14 . McConkie and Millet, Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 1:224; Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957, 1966), 3:122–23; Jenkins, The Essential Book of Mormon Companion, 54, 196–97, 340; Gordon, Scripture Study Made Simple, 74, 252–53, 477; Turner, “The Lamanite Mark,” 133–57; Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 186–88; Monte S. Nyman, I, Nephi, Wrote this Record: A Teaching Commentary on The First Book of Nephi and The Second Book of Nephi (Orem, UT: Granite Publishing, 2003), 1:439–41.

15 . “The danger was not a mixture of races or skin colors but a mixture of false traditions with true ones. … Presumably a dark skin on a person who embraced the true tradition would have no significance. Skin color was only skin deep; what mattered was the history one believed — and the hatred or love that went with each version” [Richard Lyman Bushman, “The Lamanite View of Book of Mormon History” in Believing History: Latter-day Saint Essays, eds. Reid L. Neilson and Jed Woodworth (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004), 79–92]. John Tvedtnes argued the Nephites wanted to avoid marriage with unbelievers, as was advocated in the Bible (Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 184–88).

16 . Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 3:123; Nyman, I, Nephi, Wrote This Record, 1:439–41. Elder Quentin L. Cook noted he was taught this as a missionary by Marion D. Hanks, his mission president, Quentin L. Cook, “‘Be Not Weary in Well-Doing’” address, Brigham Young University, 24 August 2020, https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/quentin-l-cook/be-not-weary-in-well-doing.

17 . Eugene England “‘Lamanites’ and the Spirit of the Lord” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 18, no. 4 (1985), 25–32; England, “‘No Respecter of Persons,’“ 93.

18 . Fatimah Salleh and Margaret Olsen Hemming, The Book of Mormon: For the Least of These (Salt Lake City: By Common Consent Press, 2020), 1:27–29, 66–69, 113–17; England, “‘No Respecter of Persons,’” 93.

19 . Ahmad Corbitt “He Denieth None That Come unto Him: A Personal Essay on Race and the Priesthood, Part 3” Perspectives on Church History, 13 October 2014, https://history.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/personal-essay-on-race-and-the-priesthood-he-denieth-none.

20 . Jared Hickman, “The Book of Mormon as Amerindian Apocalypse,” American Literature 86 (2014): 429–61. Richard Bushman adds, “But the fact that these wild people are Israel, the chosen of God, adds a level of complexity to the Book of Mormon that simple racism does not explain. Incongruously, the book champions the Indians’ place in world history, assigning them a more glorious future than modern American whites. All the derogatory descriptions of Lamanites notwithstanding, the Indians emerge as God’s chosen people. They are not viewed as a pathetic civilization moving inevitably toward their doom, as sympathetic observers of Joseph’s time depicted them” (Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, 98–99). See also, Mason, “Mormonism and Race,” 162–63.

21 . Fenton, “Open Canons: Sacred History and American History in The Book of Mormon” 354–55; Craig R. Prentiss, “Loathsome unto Thy People: The Latter-day Saints and Racial Categorization” in Religion and the Creation of Race and Ethnicity: An Introduction, ed. C. R. Prentiss (New York: New York University Press, 2003): 124–39. Fenton adds, “Like the Nephites and Lamanites before them, the Gentiles of Europe are ‘white, and exceedingly fair.’ Within the context of Smith’s work, such an appearance more often hints at a pending fall from grace than indicates immunity against one. The white Christians who arrive to destroy the Lamanites fall into a recursive historical cycle that predates them and might even outlast them” (355). Nancy Bentley stated, “The [demise] of the Nephites taught that a free ‘white’ people could lapse from civilization into the backward tribalism of populations like the Lamanites” (Nancy Bentley, “Kinship, The Book of Mormon, and Modern Revelation” in Americanist Approaches to The Book of Mormon, eds. Elizabeth Fenton and Jared Hickman [New York: Oxford University Press, 2019], 235). See also, Mason, “Mormonism and Race,” 162.

22 . Corbitt, “He Denieth None That Come unto Him”; Peter Coviello, “How the Mormons Became White: Scripture, Sex, Sovereignty” in Americanist Approaches to The Book of Mormon, eds. Elizabeth Fenton and Jared Hickman [New York: Oxford University Press, 2019], 259–76.

23 . Hickman, “The Book of Mormon as Amerindian Apocalypse,” 456–57. He adds, “[L]ogically speaking, the evidence that racial ‘distinctions were irrelevant’ within the body of Christ would not be that the Lamanites turned white to look like Nephites but that the Lamanites retained their black skins. … Although the narrative does hold out for the black Lamanites a pathway to rightness, which may seem to relativize the initial racial distinction, the fact that that pathway also seems to run to or through whiteness shows how the narrative actually reinforces racial distinction with a vengeance” (456–57).

24 . Coviello, “How the Mormons Became White,” 259–64.

25 . Corbitt, “He Denieth None That Come unto Him.”

26 . Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 197.

27 . “Race and the Priesthood,” Gospel Topics Essay, emphasis added. For an indication that this essay represents an official church position (i.e., “these essays, which have been approved by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles”), see “Gospel Topics Essays,” https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/essays.

28 . Marvin Perkins, “Skin Color and Curses,” in Blacks in the Scriptures (Santa Clarita, CA: Blacks in the Scriptures, 1999, 2007), DVD. See also Blacks in the Scriptures (website), https://www.blacksinthescriptures.com.

29 . Making a similar argument in his Book of Mormon commentaries, Brant Gardner lists some of the same Old Testament verses mentioned by Perkins. Brant A. Gardner, Traditions of the Fathers: The Book of Mormon as History (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2015), 163; Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon: Volume 2 Second Nephi–Jacob (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), 120.

30 . Marvin Perkins states that even “black and white” in the passage “[the Lord] denieth none that come unto him, black and white” (2 Nephi 26:33) reflects the spiritual state of people, not race or actual skin color. Hence, he said, God denieth (respectively) no sinner or righteous person access, and all ethnicities are covered by “Jew and Gentile” at the end of that verse. Brant Gardner suggests black and white does refer to ethnicity in 2 Nephi 26:33; see Gardner, Second Witness, 2:373–75. Regardless, the principle is true that God does not discriminate by skin color, and both sinners and righteous people have access to God.

31 . Humans all have the same skin color, he says. We are all just different shades of brown.

32 . Hugh Nibley, “Lehi in the Desert, Part V, Contacts in the Desert” Improvement Era 53 (May 1950): 382–84, 448–49n227. This article was reorganized and republished in 1952 and 1988: Hugh Nibley, Lehi in the Desert and The World of the Jaredites (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1952), 83–85 and Hugh Nibley, Lehi in the Desert, The World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites; The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley: Volume 5, eds. John W. Welch, Darrell L. Matthews, and Stephen R. Callister (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1988), 73–74.

33 . Hugh Nibley, Lehi in the Desert (1952), 84–85 and Lehi in the Desert (1988), 73–74.

34 . Hugh Nibley, Since Cumorah: The Book of Mormon in the Modern World (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967), 246–51; also in Hugh Nibley, Since Cumorah, in The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, ed. John W. Welch (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1988), 215–20.

35 . Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 193–96. Tvedtnes suggested both figurative and literal meanings, and I have referenced his essay for both.

36 . Christian Lange notes instances of both literal and figurative interpretation of 3:106 in Islamic thought, see Christian Lange, “‘On That Day When Faces Will Be White or Black’ (Q3:106): Toward a Semiology of the Face in the Arabo-Islamic Tradition,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 127 (2007): 429–45. Tvedtnes also gives an example from a fourth-century Christian writer, Ephraim of Syria; see “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 195–96.

37 . Webster’s definitions for the adjective white are “1. Being of the color of pure snow; snowy; not dark; as white paper; a white skin. 2. Pale; destitute of color in the cheeks, or of the tinge of blood color; as white with fear. 3. Having the color of purity; pure; clean; free from spot; as white robed innocence. 4. Gray; as white hair; a venerable man, white with age. 5. Pure; unblemished. No whiter page than Addison’s remains. Pope. 6. In a scriptural sense, purified from sin; sanctified. Ps. li” [Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (New York: S. Converse, 1828)], s.v. “white.”

38 . “1. Of the color of night; destitute of light; dark. 2. Darkened by clouds; as the heavens black with clouds. 3. Sullen; having a cloudy look or countenance. 4. Atrociously wicked; horrible; as a black deed or crime. 5. Dismal; mournful; calamitous” (Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language, s.v. “black”).

39 . Mauss, All Abraham’s Children, 127–28. Mauss also stated, “It is not entirely certain that Joseph Smith himself or even most others of his immediate family and contemporaries would have understood these [skin color] passages in quite the same literal sense that modern readers have” (p. 118).

40 . Ethan Sproat, “Skins as Garments in the Book of Mormon: A Textual Exegesis,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 24 (2015): 138–65.

41 . Bentley, “Kinship, The Book of Mormon, and Modern Revelation,” 247, 256n26.

42 . Gardner, Traditions of the Fathers, 159–64; Gardner, Second Witness, 2:108–24, 504. Gardner gives an excellent review and analysis of the metaphorical interpretation of skin, including many authors I also quote.

43 . Gardner, Second Witness, 2:115.

44 . Ibid., 119.

45 . Douglas Campbell, “‘White’ or ‘Pure’: Five Vignettes” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 29, no. 4 (Winter 1996): 131–35.

46 . Sproat, “Skins as Garments in the Book of Mormon,” 138–65.

47 . Sproat also added, “The dilemma is that a long-held and widely circulated inference is still only an inference — not a definitive observation. … A striking aspect of racial interpretations of the various-colored skins in the Book of Mormon is the absence of any definitive internal textual support. I am not suggesting that the immediate context for every ambiguous passage contradicts traditional racial interpretations. But without more exploration into the contextual evidence, traditional racial interpretations seem to proceed from the subtle but significant assumption that the various-colored skins refer to human flesh. … [A]lthough a wealth of secondary literature and scholarship spanning from 1830 to 2015 assumes a racial interpretation of the Book of Mormon’s talk of skins, I see nothing in the text itself that privileges a racial interpretation” (ibid., 144).

48 . Adam Oliver Stokes, “‘Skin’ or ‘Scales’ of Blackness? Semitic Context as Interpretive Aid for 2 Nephi 4:35 (LDS 5:21),” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 27 (2018): 278–89.

49 . Steven L. Olsen, “The Covenant of the Chosen People: The Spiritual Foundations of Ethnic Identity in the Book of Mormon,” Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 21 (2012): 14–29.

50 . Olsen gives the following as examples: 1 Nephi 2:11; 7:8; 13:27; 17:30, 45; 2 Nephi 9:31–32; 25:28; 27:29; 28:14; 32:7; Jacob 2:13; 4:14; 6:4; Enos 1:22; Jarom 1:3–4; Omni 1:28.

51 . Campbell, “‘White’ or ‘Pure’: Five Vignettes”; Mauss, All Abraham’s Children, 117; Olsen, The Covenant of the Chosen People,” 20; Hickman, “The Book of Mormon as Amerindian Apocalypse,” 455; Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 193–96; Sproat, “Skins as Garments in the Book of Mormon,” 145.

52 . Jared Hickman notes that Joseph Smith “never referred to the Nephite-Lamanite division in explicitly racial terms” though others of his time did (Hickman, “The Book of Mormon as Amerindian Apocalypse,” 455–56).

53 . See also, Campbell, “‘White’ or ‘Pure’: Five Vignettes,” 131–33.

54 . Gardner, Second Witness, 2:119.

55 . Sproat, “Skins as Garments in the Book of Mormon,” 145–47.

56 . Campbell, “‘White’ or ‘Pure’: Five Vignettes,” 131–35.

57 . Commenting on 2 Nephi 13:9, Brant Gardner stated, “The face mirrors the soul. The face witnesses to the contents of the heart. The ancient concept of personality saw the physical as the reflection of the spiritual inner being” (Gardner, Second Witness, 2:221).

58 . Amy Easton-Flake, “Lehi’s Dream as a Template for Understanding Each Act of Nephi’s Vision” in The Things Which My Father Saw: Approaches to Lehi’s Dream and Nephi’s Vision, eds. Daniel L. Belnap, Gaye Strathern, and Stanley A. Johnson (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011): 187–93.

59 . Matthew L. Bowen, “Laman and Nephi as Key-Words: An Etymological, Narratological, and Rhetorical Approach to Understanding Lamanites and Nephites as Religious, Political, and Cultural Descriptors,” (presentation, FairMormon Conference, August 2019, Provo, Utah), https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2019/laman-and-nephi-as-key-words. See also Matthew L. Bowen, “‘O Ye Fair Ones’ — Revisited,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 20:315–44, https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/o-ye-fair-ones-revisited/. Bowen notes the correlation of the name Nephi with good and fair. Bowen states that the Book of Mormon emphasizes goodness of one’s actions, how the Nephites did not choose goodness in the end, and people can become good and fair by choosing to come to Christ.

60 . Gardner, Second Witness, 2:116–17; Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon: Volume 4 Alma (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), 696–97; Gardner, Traditions of the Fathers, 161. See also, Gardner, “If Lamanites Were Black, Why Didn’t Anyone Notice?” Fair Mormon Blog (21 May 2012), https://www.fairmormon.org/blog/2012/05/21/if-lamanites-were-black-why-didnt-anyone-notice.

61 . Sproat, “Skins as Garments in the Book of Mormon,” 165.

62 . Kevin Christensen, “Table Rules: A Response to Americanist Approaches to the Book of Mormon” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 37 (2020): 82.

63 . For example, Aikau, A Chosen People, A Promised Land: Mormonism and Race in Hawai’i, ix–xiii, 2

64 . Coviello, “How the Mormons Became White,” 260.

65 . “To the Nephites, who followed the law of Moses (Jarom 1:5), the Lamanite practices of ‘drink[ing] the blood of beasts’ (Jarom 1:6) and ‘feeding upon beasts of prey’ (Enos 1:20) would have been abhorrent, being forbidden in the Mosaic code (Leviticus 7:26–27; 11:13–20)” (Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 187).

66 . Perhaps this meant only close family was exempt from plundering, because we see a “practice of plunder” even among the Lamanites (Alma 17:25–39, 18:1–7).

67 . Gardner, Traditions of the Fathers, 156–58. See also Gardner, Second Witness, 2:114–16.

68 . Mauss, All Abraham’s Children, 116.

69 . J. Christopher Conkling, “Alma’s Enemies: The Case of the Lamanites, Amlicites, and Mysterious Amalekites” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14 (2005): 115, see also 108–17, 130–32.

70 . John Tvedtnes stated, “We should not be surprised to find attitudes of superiority and the attribution of negative characteristics to foreign people and cultures among the Nephites, and the existence of such in the Book of Mormon cannot be considered evidence that the text was necessarily a reflection of nineteenth-century American racist views. Parallels are known in other ancient cultures” (“The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 189–90).

71 . John Sorenson noted, “The Nephite picture of their relatives, in Jarom 1:[6] and Enos 1:20, sounds so similar to the Near Eastern epithets that this language probably should be considered a literary formula rather than an objective description, labeling applied to any feared, despised, ‘backward’ people” [An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1985), 90].

72 . Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 197.

73 . Dan Belnap, “‘And it Came to Pass … ’: The Sociopolitical Events in the Book of Mormon Leading to the Eighteenth Year of the Reign of the Judges,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 23 (2014): 132 (132–38).

74 . Enos 1:14; Mosiah 1:14; Mosiah 10:11–17; Alma 20:10, 13.

75 . Bowen, “Laman and Nephi as Key-Words.”

76 . In his study of the Book of Mormon onomasticon, Matthew Bowen noted a positive connotation of Nephite and a negative connotation of Lamanite, at least to the Nephites. Hence, perhaps this was motivation for the converted people to change their name and for the Nephites to give them a new name. We have seen that in our day. A name or symbol becomes so associated with a despised or evil act that the name or symbol cannot be used for anything good. Bowen said, “The Nephites apparently avoided using ‘Lamanites’ to refer to Ammon’s converts. These Lamanites, formerly ‘unfaithful’ became the ‘people of Ammon’ — the people of exceeding faith and faithfulness (Anti-Nephi-Lehi[es] = ‘Lehi/Lehites who is/are good’[?])” (Bowen, “Laman and Nephi as Key-Words”).

77 . “In the Book of Mormon, both the Nephites as well as the Lamanites created their own ‘truths’ about each other. The Nephites’ ‘truth’ about the Lamanites was that they ‘were a wild, and ferocious, and a blood-thirsty people’ (Mosiah 10:12), never able to accept the gospel. The Lamanites’ ‘truth’ about the Nephites was that Nephi had stolen his brother’s birthright and that Nephi’s descendants were liars who continued to rob the Lamanites of what was rightfully theirs (see Mosiah 10:12; Alma 20:13)” [Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “What Is Truth?,” Church Educational System (CES) Devotional Address, 13 January 2013, https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/dieter-f-uchtdorf/what-is-truth/].

78 . Conkling “Alma’s Enemies,” 115. He adds, “If anything, their record shows that it was the Nephite apostate groups — Amlicites, Amulonites, and Zoramites — who were responsible for most of Alma’s problems with the Lamanites” (ibid.).

79 . “While the savage stereotypes of the Lamanites persist among the Nephites, Mormon’s account of the mission of the sons of Mosiah shows that a key segment of Lamanite society is quite similar to traditional Nephite society: ordered, settled, relatively stable, and subject to spiritual conversion” (Olsen, “The Covenant of the Chosen People,” 26). See also Gardner, Second Witness, 2:114–16.

80 . Sorenson, Mormon’s Codex, 39. The higher population of Lamanites is mentioned, for example, in Jarom 1:6, Mosiah 25:3, and Helaman 4:19, 25.

81 . As noted by Christopher Conkling, “Alma’s Enemies,” 131n21.

82 . Dan Belnap notes, “Significantly, the context for these Lamanite behaviors [eating raw meat, drinking animal blood, and so forth] is missing from such descriptions, and its lack allows the emphasis to fall on negative characterizations. … [T]he context for these acts is missing, allowing such descriptions to maintain and even enhance negative stereotypes” (Dan Belnap, “‘And it came to pass … ,’” 133).

83 . Brant Gardner wrote, “The problem of social context is exacerbated when a reader from one culture reads a text written in and for a different culture, and when the text includes none of the necessary explanations” (Gardner, Second Witness, 2:113).

84 . 1 Nephi 1:16; 1 Nephi 6; 1 Nephi 9:1–2; 1 Nephi 10:15; 1 Nephi 14:28.30; 1 Nephi 19:1–6; 2 Nephi 4:14; 2 Nephi 5:33; 2 Nephi 31:1; 2 Nephi 33:1, 11; Jacob 1:2–3; Jacob 3:13; Jacob 4:1–2; Jacob 7:27; Jarom 1:1–2, 14; Omni 1:11,18; Words of Mormon 1:5; Mosiah 8:1; Alma 8:1; Helaman 3:13–15; Helaman 5:33; Helaman 8:3; Helaman 14:1; 3 Nephi 5:8, 18; 3 Nephi 7:17; 3 Nephi 17:15, 17; 3 Nephi 19:32, 34; 3 Nephi 26:6, 8; Mormon 7:1; Mormon 8:5; Ether 3:17; Ether 12:23, 25, 40; Ether 15:33.

85 . Although not a direct accusation, the king’s words imply his people had done those things.

86 . One hundred and sixteen additional negative characteristic phrases or words are used for both societies when they are joined or are equally wicked (Table 7). One label (disturbed) was only used in this scenario.

87 . The ratios shown in parentheses in this sentence are given as Nephite:Lamanite, respectively.

88 . The descendants of Book of Mormon peoples are often just called “Lamanites,” but the record makes clear that descendants of both Nephites and Lamanites would survive after the book closes (1 Nephi 13:30–31; 1 Nephi 15;13–14; 1 Nephi 22:7–8; 2 Nephi 3:3,23–24; 2 Nephi 9:53; 2 Nephi 10:18–19; 2 Nephi 26:15; 2 Nephi 28:2; 2 Nephi 30:4–5; Alma 45:13–14; Helaman 3:16).

89 . Fifteen of the 66 characteristics also are used to describe the Nephites and Lamanites when they are either joined as one society or are equally wicked (Table 7).

90 . Conkling “Alma’s Enemies,” 116. He adds, “Indeed, after the original Laman and Lemuel, who understood the gospel well enough to be accountable for their own choices regarding it, there were only one or two other pure Lamanite individual villains named in the entire book. When we look at the truly vicious villains in the Book of Mormon, the record shows that after Laman and Lemuel they came almost exclusively from the Nephite groups … [T]he record emphasizes that the majority of the time, it was the Nephite dissenters who were the true ‘hard hearts’ who continually stirred up, recruited, and inspired the reluctant Lamanites to go into battle.” (ibid.)

91 . Coviello, “How the Mormons Became White,” 260.

92 . Bowen, “Laman and Nephi as Key-Words.”

93 . See Olsen, “The Covenant of the Chosen People,” 25–26, for an idea similar to the one expressed in this paragraph.

94 . Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 185–86.

95 . For example, President Gordon B. Hinckley said, “Racial strife still lifts its ugly head. I am advised that even right here among us there is some of this. I cannot understand how it can be. … Now I am told that racial slurs and denigrating remarks are sometimes heard among us. I remind you that no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. Nor can he consider himself to be in harmony with the teachings of the Church of Christ. How can any man holding the Melchizedek Priesthood arrogantly assume that he is eligible for the priesthood whereas another who lives a righteous life but whose skin is of a different color is ineligible?” [Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Need for Greater Kindness,” Ensign (May 2006): 58–61]. See also, Spencer W. Kimball, “The Evil of Intolerance,” Improvement Era 57 (June 1954): 423–26 and Darius Gray, “Healing the Wounds of Racism,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (blog), 5 April 2018, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/inspiration/healing-the-wounds-of-racism.

96 . Tvedtnes, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon,” 185.

97 . “Nation refers to a traditional homeland, kindred refers to a lineage or descent group, tongue refers to a language group, and people refers to a group bound by moral law” (Olsen, “The Covenant of the Chosen People,” 16–17). I used “faiths” for Olsen’s “group bound by moral law.” By “faiths” I mean any moral code that people follow, including godless ones such as materialism and atheism.

98 . Not every unkind act is clearly labeled as wickedness, but all are in a context where a reader can understand with reasonable clarity that the act is unrighteous. The acts are never welcomed or praised.

99 . Alma 43:13, Mosiah 23:30–35, and Mosiah 24:1 connect Amalekites and Amulonites to their Nephite roots.

100 . Multiple people have asserted that during Christ’s visit, he reprimanded the Nephites for not including the teachings of Samuel the Lamanite in their records, and hence this is evidence of Nephite discriminatory attitudes because the Nephites did not include teachings from a Lamanite. This assertion is not accurate. Jesus asked the Nephites why they had not included the fulfillment of one of Samuel’s prophecies, not that they had excluded his teachings (3 Nephi 23:7–13).

101 . Helaman 6:17; 3 Nephi 6:10–15; 4 Nephi 1:23–26; for the connection to wealth, see also Alma 5:53–54.

102 . See also verses 1–2.

103 . Among the conflicts between European and native peoples in the Americas, perhaps none are as tragic as those instigated by some Europeans whose sole purpose was to get gain. For example, in the summer of 1859, a group of natives arrived in Brigham City, Utah Territory, with goods obviously taken from an emigrant wagon train. One Latter-day Saint merchant recognized a photograph among the belongings as coming from a wagon train headed to California that had passed through the town a few days earlier. The subsequent investigation revealed a brutal attack upon the emigrants, known as the Shepard Party, and the United States Army became involved. Several people were killed as a result of the initial attack and the Army’s response. In reporting the attack, members of the Shepard Party reported seeing at least three “white Indians” among the attackers. These men of European descent dressed like Indians, and one of them seemed to be leading the natives. One Army officer reported that he believed some enterprising non-native men pretended to set themselves up as suppliers of goods along the trail, but their real purpose was to incite “the Indians to plunder the trains, and [assist] them in these outrages. They are then enabled to purchase for a trifle the Indians share of the spoil.” Another officer reported, “[T]he renegades, deserters, and thieves, who have had to fly from justice … have taken refuge in the mountains, and have associated with the Indians, are more savage than the Indians themselves. By their cruelty to the whites, they have stimulated the Indians to acts of barbarity, which they never [were] know[n] to be guilty before.” D.R. Moorman and G.A. Sessions, Camp Floyd and the Mormons: The Utah War (Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press, 1992, 2005), 204–11.

The Latter-day Saint instigators of the 1857 Mountain Meadows Massacre provide a second example. They first persuaded Paiute Indians to attack California-bound emigrants. One leader stated, “It was to be all done by the Indians, so that it could be laid to them, if any questions were ever asked about it.” When that did not eliminate the emigrants, the Latter-day Saint militiamen persuaded the Paiutes to participate in the militiamen’s massacre. After the massacre, the participants of European ancestry “persisted in blaming the tragedy primarily on the Paiutes.” “The story of an attack solely by Indians would be told as a coverup again and again, long after it had any kind of credibility.” R.W. Walker, R.E. Turley, Jr., and G.M. Leonard, Massacre at Mountain Meadows (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 137–217. See also, R.E. Turley, Jr., “The Mountain Meadows Massacre” Ensign (September 2007): 14–21; and “Peace and Violence Among 19th-Century Latter-Day Saints,” Gospel Topics Essays, May 2014, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/peace-and-violence-among-19th-century-latter-day-saints.

Today, vulnerable people are induced to deliver bombs in vehicles or on foot, killing others and themselves. In some cases, these couriers of death are induced with promises of a glorious afterlife. The leaders of this type of terrorism are not willing to kill themselves but instead use people they consciously or subconsciously deem expendable to do “the dirty work.”

104 . Bushman, “The Lamanite View of Book of Mormon History,” 87–88. The following passages are references for hatred and reasons for the hatred: 2 Nephi 5:24; Jacob 7:24–26; Mosiah 1:14; Mosiah 10:12–17; Alma 54:17, 24; Alma 60:32.

105 . In the New Testament, Jesus noted that some would persecute his followers thinking they had God’s blessing: “Yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service” (John 16:2).

106 . The Jaredites were another group that preceded the Nephites and Lamanites but were destroyed. The Mulekites were contemporary with the Nephites and Lamanites but were absorbed by the Nephites.

107 . Joseph M. Spencer, The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi’s Record (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 153. Spencer added, “There’s a single message in Isaiah for Nephi: the story of Israel’s redemption and the extension of its covenant to the whole world at that point” (p. 285).

108 . See for example, Aikau, A Chosen People, A Promised Land: Mormonism and Race in Hawai’i. The assumption today is that native Americans are not pure descendants of Book of Mormon people.

109 . Fenton and Hickman, “Introduction,” 12.

110 . See Bradley J. Kramer, Gathered in One: How the Book of Mormon Counters Anti-Semitism in the New Testament (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2019).

111 . Kramer, Gathered in One, 39–41. Matthew L. Bowen, “‘What Thank They the Jews’? (2 Nephi 29:4): A Note on the Name ‘Judah’ and Antisemitism,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 12 (2014):111–25.

112 . Bentley, “Kinship, The Book of Mormon, and Modern Revelation,” 250–51.

113 . Reports of all Nephite-Lamanite battles mention casualties except one (Alma 16:12), so we can probably assume no loss of life occurred in this conflict. The record of the non-violent capture of Alma and his people also did not include casualties (Mosiah 23).

114 . Fourteen mentions of Nephite civil war are made in the Book of Mormon (Table 23). One of these accounts states that “many wars and serious contentions” occurred among the people of Zarahemla before they and the Nephites became one nation (Omni 1:17), so more than 14 obviously occurred.

115 . Elder Dallin Oaks called peace “the opposite of war.” Dallin H. Oaks, “World Peace,” Ensign (May 1990), https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1990/05/world-peace.

116 . Dallin H. Oaks and Marvin S. Hill, Carthage Conspiracy: The Trial of the Accused Assassins of Joseph Smith (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1979).

117 . See also verses 24–25.

118 . References for this story are Mosiah 27:8–37; 28:1–9; Alma 17–28; 43:11–14; 44:21; 53:10–12.

119 . Alma 26:23–25.

120 . Jacob 3:7; 7:26; Mosiah 1:14; 10:17; Alma 20:10, 13.

121 . Specific references for the Lamanite sacrifices: Alma 24:1–27; 27:2–3.

122 . Specific references for the Nephite sacrifices: Alma 28:1–6; 43:11–14; 44:21; 53:10–12.

123 . Previous outreach attempts are mentioned in Jacob 7:24 and Enos 1:14, 20. See Table 23 for references to wars.

124 . Bushman, “The Lamanite View of Book of Mormon History,” 88–91.

125 . Despite our society’s ongoing struggles with discrimination, inclusive messages like those in the Book of Mormon are more likely to have been written at a time such as now, when racism and other forms of discrimination are loudly condemned.

126 . For example, the Indian Removal Act was passed by the United States government in May 1830, two months after the Book of Mormon was published. This act forcibly removed native people from the southeastern United States to lands in the west.

127 . The United States government passed the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882. This act prohibited immigration of Chinese people to the United States and denied citizenship to Chinese people already in the U.S. Although this legislation came many years after Joseph Smith’s death, it shows that exclusionary attitudes were entrenched in the United States for many decades.

128 . See for example, W. Paul Reeve, Religion of a Different Color: Race and the Mormon Struggle for Whiteness (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015) and Max Perry Mueller, Race and the Making of the Mormon People (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2017).

129 . Reeve, Religion of a Different Color.

130 . Coviello, “How the Mormons Became White: Scripture, Sex, Sovereignty,” 259–76.

131 . For example; Reeve, Religion of a Different Color, 55–56; Mueller, Race and the Making of the Mormon People; McConkie and Millet, Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 1: 223–24; Jenkins, The Essential Book of Mormon Companion: Key Insights to Your Gospel Study, 54, 196–97, 340; Gordon, Scripture Study Made Simple: The Book of Mormon, 74, 252–53, 477; Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, 97–98; Mason, “Mormonism and Race,” 160–63; Noel B. Reynolds, “The Political Dimension in Nephi’s Small Plates,” BYU Studies 27 (Fall 1987): 15–37.

132 . “Race and the Priesthood” Gospel Topics Essay.

133 . Tables 5–8, 17–22. Righteous examples of Jews are found in the Bible. Examples of Nephite righteousness are found throughout the Book of Mormon. For righteousness and wickedness of Jaredites, see the Book of Ether.

134 . Gordon B. Hinckley, “An Angel from on High, the Long, Long Silence Broke,” Ensign (November 1979): 7–9.

135 . Ezra Taft Benson, “The Book of Mormon — Keystone of Our Religion” Ensign (November 1986): 4–7.

136 . Thomas S. Monson, “The Power of the Book of Mormon” Ensign (May 2017): 86–87.

137 . Russell M. Nelson, “The Book of Mormon: What Would Your Life Be Like Without It?” Ensign (November 2017): 60–63, emphasis in original.

138 . History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1978), 4:227.

139 . I thank my three anonymous peer reviewers, my editors, and family and friends for ideas and for helping me make this article better. I thank staff at the Church History Library (Salt Lake City) for retrieving documents for me during the COVID-19 shutdown of the library.

Tables

The following pages provide the detailed tables referenced in this article, Table 1 through Table 24. The caption before each table provides a limited amount of explanatory information. At the end of each table there may be footnotes to some of the content within the table.

Any column with the heading “CV” stands for “count of verses.” Table-specific legends appear before each table, with notes, if any, after each table.

I acknowledge the help of Brant A. Gardner’s Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), Volumes 1, 2, and 5 in interpreting some verses, particularly verses from Isaiah.

Table

Page

Table

Page

Table 1

269

Table 13

337

Table 2

297

Table 14

341

Table 3

299

Table 15

344

Table 4

301

Table 16

346

Table 5

307

Table 17

347

Table 6

310

Table 18

350

Table 7

319

Table 19

354

Table 8

330

Table 20

356

Table 9

331

Table 21

359

Table 10

332

Table 22

360

Table 11

333

Table 23

361

Table 12

335

Table 24

368

Table 1. Book of Mormon verses directly or indirectly dealing with interracial, interethnic, international, or interclass relations, organized in the order they appear in the book. The column headers are abbreviated as follows, and Tables 2–24 list verses by topic and define topics.

Topic

Abbreviation in Table 1

Listing of Verses by Topic

Topic

Abbreviation in Table 1

Listing of Verses by Topic

Lamanite Cursing

L Curs.

Table 2

Unkindness by Nephites

Unkind.

Table 14

Appearance

Appear.

Table 3

Do Not Persecute

Persec.

Table 15

All Invited, God Is Fair

All

Table 4

Exploitation

Exploit.

Table 16

Lamanite Wickedness

L Wick.

Tables 5 and 7

Promises to Gentiles

P Gent.

Table 17

Nephite Wickedness

N Wick.

Tables 6 and 7

Promises to Jews or Israel

P Israel

Table 18

Lamanites Righteous

L Right.

Table 8

Promises to Lamanites/Lehites

P Lehi.

Table 19

Nephites-Lamanites Compared

NL Com.

Table 9

Wickedness of Jews or Israel

W Israel

Table 20

Lamanites “Excused”

L Excus.

Table 10

Anti-Semitism Condemned

A-Semit.

Table 21

Lamanites, Our Brethren

L Bro.

Table 11

Gentiles Wicked, Repent!

G Wick.

Table 22

Outreach

Outre.

Table 12

Armed Conflict

Armed

Table 23

Inter-Group Kindness

Kind.

Table 13

Secret Combinations

S Comb.

Table 24

Reference

CV

L Curs.

Appear.

All

L Wick.

N Wick.

L Right.

NL Com.

L Excus.

L Bro.

Outre.

Kind.

Unkind.

Persec.

Exploit.

P Gent.

P Israel

P Lehi.

W Israel

A-Semit.

G Wick.

Armed

S Comb.

Summary

Title Page

2*

x

x

x

x

Book of Mormon written to all. Lamanites are part of Israel. Book would come forth “by way of the Gentile.” Purposes of book are to help Israel and to convince all “that Jesus is the Christ.” Christ manifest to all.

Testimony of Three Witnesses

1*

x

x

Testimony written to “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.” Nephites and Lamanites were “brethren.”

Testimony of Eight Witnesses

1*

x

Testimony written to “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.”

1 Nephi 1:4, 13–14, 18–20

6

x

x

Lehi and others warned Jews of impending destruction unless they repent. God’s power, goodness, and mercy are over all. Jews sought to kill Lehi.

1 Nephi 2:1,13,21,23–24

5

x

x

x

Jews at Jerusalem were wicked. If Laman and Lemuel rebel, they are “cut off from … the Lord.” If Nephi’s seed rebels, they lose Lord’s protection.

1 Nephi 3:17–18

2

x

Wickedness of people at Jerusalem would lead to their destruction.

1 Nephi 5:17–18

2

x

Plates of brass would go to Lehites over all the earth.

1 Nephi 7:13–14

2

x

Jerusalem would be destroyed because of wickedness.

1 Nephi 8:11

1

x

Fruit of tree is white, whiter than anything Lehi had ever seen.

1 Nephi 10:2–4, 11–14, 17–19

10

x

x

x

x

After destruction and Babylonian captivity, Jews will return. A Messiah would come to Jews and be slain. Israel would be scattered, then gathered after Gentiles receive gospel. Holy Ghost and repentance available to all.

1 Nephi 11:8,13–15,18,27–28,32–36

12

x

x

x

Tree and Jesus’ mother are white and beautiful. Israel would reject Jesus and his apostles. Destruction prophesied for all that fight against them.

1 Nephi 12:2–3, 10–11, 15–16, 19–23

11

x

x

x

x

Wars among Lehites prophesied and linked to “fountain of filthy water.” Garments “made white.” Nephites would become wicked and be conquered by Lamanites. All would become dark, loathsome, and filthy.

1 Nephi 13:4–40,42

38

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

“Great and abominable church” formed among Gentiles. Gentiles were white, fair, and beautiful. God will not let Gentiles destroy Lehites, despite “the wrath of God.” Gentiles will help bring message of Christ to all.

1 Nephi 14:1–6, 12, 14, 26

9

x

x

x

x

Gentiles who accept gospel are part of Israel but wo to those with hard hearts. God’s justice is upon all wicked. God’s covenant people found over all the earth. Sealed words will come to Israel.

1 Nephi 15:4–5,7,12–20,33–34

14

x

x

x

x

x

x

Nephite destruction to come from wickedness. Lehites are a branch of Israel. Gentiles will receive gospel and take to Lehite descendants. Israel will reject God and be restored in latter days. Filthiness is wicked works.

1 Nephi 17:30–44

15

x

x

Lord favors the righteous, not wicked. Israel and Jews have been wicked.

1 Nephi 19:7–11,13–17,19,23–24

13

x

x

x

x

Because they trampled God, Jews would be scourged and hated. God will remember his covenant to Israel. “Every nation, kindred, tongue, and people shall be blessed.” Nephi and Isaiah wrote to Lehites and all Israel.

1 Nephi 20:1–2,4–5,8–12,14,17–18

12

x

x

House of Jacob has not followed the Lord. Nevertheless, Israel is chosen and the Lord will not give his glory to another and will fulfill his word.

1 Nephi 21

26

x

x

x

x

Despite wickedness, God will redeem the House of Israel. Messiah will be a light to all. Lord will help Gentiles, and they will help gather Israel.

1 Nephi 22:3–20, 22–23, 25, 28

22

x

x

x

x

x

x

Because they rejected “Holy One of Israel,” House of Israel will be scattered and hated. Gentiles would scatter Lehite descendants and then bring gospel to them. Gentiles will help gather Israel. “All that fight against Zion shall be destroyed.” Lord gathers from all over the earth.

2 Nephi 1:5–7, 9–14, 16–29

23

x

x

x

x

America consecrated to Lehites and others Lord leads there; they are cursed if wicked, at liberty if righteous. Lehi pleads with Laman, Lemuel, and others to be righteous. Lehi fears a curse will come upon them.

2 Nephi 2:7–10

4

x

Redemption for all who accept Christ. All need to know. God judges all.

2 Nephi 3:2–3,5–21,23,24

21

x

x

Seed of Nephi’s brother Joseph would survive, and one would greatly help Israel and Lehites. Joseph of Egypt spoke of his seed, a seer, and Moses.

2 Nephi 4:2–9,11

9

x

x

Joseph of Egypt prophesied of Lehites. Disobedience will result in being cut off from the Lord’s presence. “In the end” Lamanites will be blessed.

2 Nephi 5:1–9,14,19–25,34

18

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanites and Nephites form. Lamanites “cut off from … Lord.” They “were white,” fair, and delightsome, now have “skin of blackness,” and are loathsome, idle, mischievous, cunning, and a scourge to Nephites. Repentance removes loathsomeness. War “with our brethren” begins.

2 Nephi 6:5–18

14

x

x

x

x

x

x

Isaiah words apply to Lehites. Gentiles will help Israel. Lord’s judgments will come to Jews for rejecting God. Gentiles blessed if they forsake evil. “God shall deliver his covenant people.” Their enemies will be destroyed.

2 Nephi 7:1–3,10–11

5

x

x

Israel sold itself for its iniquities; the Lord still will redeem Israel.

2 Nephi 8

25

x

x

x

Israel should follow the Lord and not forget him. “The Lord shall comfort Zion.” Those who afflicted the Lord’s people will be afflicted.

2 Nephi 9:1–3, 5, 9, 14–16, 18, 21–27, 30, 42, 44–45, 47–48, 53

23

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Israel will be restored and “gathered home,” Lehite seed included. Secret combinations are of devil. All judged by God. Purity is righteousness. Filthy is wickedness. Christ’s sacrifice is for all. He saves those who do not know the law. Wo to those “puffed up” from riches or learning. Nephites are sinful. Nephite seed will not be completely destroyed.

2 Nephi 10:1–22

22

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Nephites will perish because of wickedness, but many will be restored. Wicked Jews would kill Jesus and face calamities. Israel will be gathered; Gentiles “shall be great” in helping. America is a land for Lehites. Gentiles also blessed there. “Secret works of darkness” will be destroyed. Anyone who fights against Zion “shall perish.” Gentiles will afflict Lehites, but later will help them. Lord remembers all he “has led away.”

2 Nephi 11:2,8

2

x

x

Isaiah’s words applicable unto Nephi’s people and “unto all men.”

2 Nephi 12:2–17

16

x

x

x

War shall cease. Israel has “gone astray.” Haughtiness will be put down.

2 Nephi 13

26

x

x

x

x

Jerusalem would suffer because of wickedness. Sin seen in “their countenance.” Righteous will be well. Haughtiness will be put down.

2 Nephi 14

6

x

x

x

Women suffer after war. Israel will be redeemed, cleansed from filthiness.

2 Nephi 15

30

x

x

x

Because Israel rejected the Lord, afflictions result. Warning given to those who think they are wise and prudent. The Lord will gather Israel.

2 Nephi 16:5,9–13

6

x

x

The Lord is rejected, calamity will result. “[A remnant] shall return.”

2 Nephi 17

25

x

x

Ephraim and Syria attacked Judah unsuccessfully. Shearjashub means “the remnant shall return.” Devastation will come to Ephraim and Judah.

2 Nephi 18:1,3–15, 17, 19–22

19

x

Shortly, Ephraim will be destroyed. Judah “refuseth the waters of Shiloah” and calamity will result.

2 Nephi 19

21

x

x

Prophecy of Messiah coming to Israel. Joy increased. Messiah will reign. Israel would be devoured. Wickedness abounds.

2 Nephi 20

34

x

x

x

Lord will send Assyria “against a hypocritical nation,” but then the Assyrians would be punished. “The remnant shall return … unto the mighty God.” “The haughty shall be humbled.”

2 Nephi 21:3–4,9–16

10

x

x

x

x

Lord will not judge on appearance. Peace will be found. Gentiles will seek “root of Jesse.” Lord will “recover … his people,” “the second time.”

2 Nephi 23:11,15,22

3

x

x

Arrogance and haughtiness will be put down. “Every one that is proud shall be thrust through.”

2 Nephi 24:1–3,32

4

x

Israel “shall return” and will rest from sorrow, fear, and bondage.

2 Nephi 25:2–4,6,9–18,21,28

16

x

x

x

x

x

Nephi saw wickedness among Jews. God’s judgments come to all. Nephites are of Israel. Jews would return from Babylon. Jews would reject Messiah and be scattered and scourged. Lord’s people will be gathered. Joseph’s seed will not perish. Nephites are stiffnecked.

2 Nephi 26:2–10, 12–16, 19–28, 32–33

26

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Wars prophesied. Nephites destroyed because of wickedness, and Lehite descendants “dwindle in unbelief.” Jews and Gentiles need gospel. Lehite descendants will receive writings of ancestors. Wickedness among Gentiles, including secret combinations. Everyone invited to partake of salvation. “All are alike unto God.”

2 Nephi 27:1–6, 28, 31, 33–34

10

x

x

x

x

x

x

Great wickedness will exist among Jews and Gentiles in latter days; all wicked and all nations fighting Zion will suffer. “Words of a book” will come forth. Lebanon will be fruitful. “Jacob shall not now be ashamed.”

2 Nephi 28:2,9–15,32

9

x

x

x

x

Written words of great worth to Lehites. “Puffed up” people condemned. “Wo be unto the Gentiles,” but God will bless them “if they will repent.”

2 Nephi 29

14

x

x

x

x

x

x

God’s promises to Israel and to Nephi will be honored. Anti-Semitism condemned. Gentiles have persecuted Jews. God “will return all these things upon your own heads.” Gentiles warned to not dismiss the record of the Nephites. The Lord “speak[s] unto all nations of the earth.”

2 Nephi 30:1–10, 15

11

x

x

x

x

x

x

Righteousness is key, not lineage. Lehite descendents will joyfully receive words from Gentiles. Converted Lehites will be pure and delightsome. Jews will become delightsome. Restoration will commence among all.

2 Nephi 31:20

1

x

God asks us to love him and all people.

2 Nephi 33:7–10,12–14

7

x

x

Nephi has charity for people and urges all to believe in Christ. “Respect the words of the Jews.”

Jacob 1:8,10,13–16

6

x

x

x

x

x

x

Jacob wishes all people could be persuaded to believe in Christ. Nephi fought. Lamanites are people “that seek to destroy the people of Nephi,” no mention of skin color. Nephites start to become wicked.

Jacob 2:5–6,9–10,13–14,16–26,31–35

22

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Jacob chastises the Nephites for their wickedness. “One being is as precious in [God’s] sight as the other.” Riches should be used to bless others. Lord responds to “cries of the fair daughters” who were exploited. “Ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren.”

Jacob 3:3–11

9

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Jacob continues: Nephites hate their Lamanite brethren because of their filthiness, but cursed Lamanites more righteous. Lamanite “skins will be whiter than yours.” Lamanites “shall become a blessed people.” Lamanite hatred (of Nephites) and filthiness is “because of their fathers.”

Jacob 4:2–3,14–18

7

x

x

x

Lamanites were “beloved brethren.” “Jews were a stiffnecked people.” Jacob will explain how Jews can be redeemed after rejecting the Lord.

Jacob 5

77

x

x

Allegory of olive tree, symbolic of Israel, given; Gentiles are included.

Jacob 6:1–4

4

x

x

x

The Lord will fulfill his covenant with the house of Israel. Those who work in Lord’s vineyard are blessed. Israel is stiffnecked and gainsaying.

Jacob 7:3–4, 9, 15, 18–19, 23–26

10

x

x

x

x

x

x

Nephites nourished Sherem, a wicked man who fell after preaching against Christ. Nephites were hated by Lamanites, “our brethren.” Nephites reach out to Lamanites, without success. Wars and contentions occurred.

Enos 1:10–18, 20, 22–24

13

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Land (for “them”) cursed only for iniquity. Enos prays “for my brethren, the Lamanites.” Nephite outreach efforts were unsuccessful. Lamanites were wild, ferocious, and so forth. Nephites “stiffnecked.” Wars occur.

Jarom 1:2–3,6,7–9,13

7

x

x

x

x

x

“These plates” for “our brethren the Lamanites.” Nephites have hard hearts and deaf ears. Lamanites “loved murder” and drank “blood of beasts.” “Many times” the Lamanites came to battle against Nephites.

Omni 1:2–3, 5, 10, 17, 24, 28

7

x

x

“Much war and contention” reported, both civil wars and Nephite-Lamanite wars. Wicked Nephites destroyed.

Words of Mormon 1:8, 12, 13–17

7

x

x

x

Mormon prays his brethren may accept Lord so they are delightsome again. War reported. Nephite wickedness took great effort to combat.

Mosiah 1:5,13–14

3

x

x

x

x

x

God’s words unknown to “our brethren, the Lamanites,” whose unbelief is from their fathers’ traditions and who are weak and hate Nephites.

Mosiah 2:4,11–14, 26

6

x

x

x

Righteous Nephites “filled with love towards God and all men.” By word and example, King Benjamin taught that a righteous ruler is not above the people he or she serves. King Benjamin taught that slavery was wrong.

Mosiah 3:9, 11, 13–15, 20

6

x

x

Christ crucified by “his own” stiffnecked people. Christ atoned for ignorant sinners. Gospel declared “to every kindred, nation, and tongue.”

Mosiah 4:7,16–26

12

x

x

Atonement is for all mankind. People should help those in need.

Mosiah 6:7

1

x

King Mosiah helped grow food to not be a burden to his people.

Mosiah 7:15, 20–22, 24–32

13

x

x

x

x

Separate Nephite group was wicked and were in bondage to Lamanites. If Lord’s people “sow filthiness … the effect thereof is poison.”

Mosiah 9:1–3, 10–19

13

x

x

x

x

x

Zeniff stops Nephites from destroying Lamanites. Nephite settlers slow to remember God. War with Lamanites, who are “lazy” and “idolatrous.”

Mosiah 10:1–2, 6–20

17

x

x

Lamanites attack Nephite settlers and believe earlier Nephites had wronged them. Lamanites are “wild,” “ferocious,” and “blood-thirsty”; their children taught to hate Nephites.

Mosiah 11

29

x

x

x

x

King Noah and his people become wicked. Lamanites attack Nephite settlers again. Nephites delight in shedding blood “of their brethren.” Abinadi’s life threatened because he preached against wickedness.

Mosiah 12:1–19, 22–24, 26,29–31,37

27

x

x

x

x

Abinadi warns Nephite settlers to repent; he is imprisoned and questioned. Zion will be redeemed. Whole earth will “see the salvation of our God.”

Mosiah 13:1–2,4,6–8,11,25–26,29,32

11

x

x

x

King Noah orders Abinadi killed. Abinadi accuses his captors of teaching iniquity. Children of Israel were stiffnecked.

Mosiah 14:2

1

x

The Messiah’s appearance would not be distinctive or desirable.

Mosiah 15:5, 10–12, 24, 26–31

11

x

x

x

Christ would suffer at hands of “his people.” All who hearken are the Lord’s seed. Ignorant sinners redeemed, but people who willfully rebel are not. Salvation “shall be declared” to all. “Lord shall bring again Zion.”

Mosiah 16:1

1

x

“All shall see the salvation of the Lord.”

Mosiah 17

20

x

x

x

Alma defends Abinadi and is cast out. Abinadi executed by King Noah.

Mosiah 18:27–29, 32–34

6

x

x

People who have should help needy. Group of believers flee Noah’s army.

Mosiah 19:2–3, 6–15, 17–26, 28

23

x

x

x

x

Lamanites conquer Nephite settlers. Iniquitous King Noah killed after commanding men to leave families. “Fair daughters” protect Nephites.

Mosiah 20

26

x

x

x

Lamanite women kidnapped by Noah’s priests (in hiding). Lamanites retaliate against other settlers. Gideon notes settler’s iniquity.

Mosiah 21:2–13,15,17,30

15

x

x

x

x

x

Thrice Nephite settlers attack oppressive Lamanites. Lord “slow to hear [settler’s cries] because of their iniquities.” Widows and children helped.

Mosiah 22:3

1

x

x

Gideon calls oppressive Lamanites “our brethren.”

Mosiah 23:7, 9, 12, 15, 25–39

19

x

x

x

x

No person is above another. King Noah and priests led people to iniquity. Love neighbor. Nephites captured by Lamanites and former Nephites.

Mosiah 24:1,4–11

9

x

x

x

x

Lamanites taught the Nephite language and to write (apparently some or all Lamanites were illiterate). Lamanites prosper; they are “a very cunning people.” Amulon oppresses Alma and his people.

Mosiah 25:4–11

8

x

x

Nephites concerned for souls of “the Lamanites, who were their brethren.”

Mosiah 26:4–6, 9, 11, 38

6

x

x

Some Nephites have become sinful. Leaders in the church persecuted by people not in the church.

Mosiah 27:1–4, 8–11, 16, 25, 30–32

13

x

x

x

x

Nephite “believers” persecuted by “unbelievers.” Persecutions forbidden. All people “must be born again.” The Redeemer “manifest unto all.”

Mosiah 28:1–9

9

x

x

x

x

Once evil, Mosiah’s sons pled to go to serve Lamanite brothers.

Mosiah 29:1–11, 16–18, 21–24, 32, 35–36

21

x

x

x

To avoid bloodshed and iniquity, Mosiah proposes government of judges instead of kings. King Noah and his people were wicked. Liberty desired.

Alma 1:2–17, 19–22, 24–28, 30, 32

27

x

x

x

x

Nehor kills an opponent of his ideas. Nephites have freedom of belief. Church members persecuted, but forbidden to persecute. Many still fight with others. Priests and people are equal. Needy helped. Some Nephites were idle, idolatrous, and wicked in other ways.

Alma 2:1–5,8–38

36

x

x

Nephite civil war and war with Lamanites and Nephite dissenters occurs.

Alma 3:4–23,27

21

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanites marked as part of curse. Curse removed if Lamanites turn to Lord. People who joined Lamanites (like wicked Amlicites) also marked. Lamanites attack Nephites again. Everyone receives a just reward.

Alma 4:3, 6–13, 15, 19

11

x

x

x

x

Nephites think they have been wicked. Evils of pride, persecution, and inequality found among Nephites. Righteous people helped those in need.

Alma 5:5,7, 14, 18–24, 27, 30–33, 36–37, 48, 50, 53–57

24

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanites put Nephites in bondage. Nephites were wicked. God’s image in your countenance? Filthiness can be made white. Persecuting others and attitudes of superiority are evil. All invited to repent and help needy.

Alma 6:3,5–7

4

x

x

x

Sin within church noted. God’s word accessible to all. People in church concerned for non-believers.

Alma 7:3,6,21

3

x

x

Some Nephites were unrighteous. Filthiness is unrighteousness.

Alma 8:9, 11, 13–14, 16–17, 24–25, 28–29

10

x

x

Wicked people of Ammonihah reviled, spit upon, and cast out Alma. “Except they repent the Lord God will destroy them.”

Alma 9:1, 4–5, 8, 12–25, 28, 30–32

22

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Alma warns Ammonihah Nephites to repent. If not, more tolerable for transgressing Lamanites, who are in ignorance because of their fathers. Disobedient cut off from God. Lord will be merciful to Lamanites. Lord merciful to all who call on him. All rewarded for their works.

Alma 10:7, 13–14, 16–27

15

x

Amulek tells people of Ammonihah they are wicked.

Alma 11:20–21, 23, 40–41, 44

6

x

x

Cunning, wicked judges stir up wickedness for gain. Those who believe in Christ are saved. All will be judged.

Alma 12:1, 3–5, 8, 15–16, 33–35

10

x

x

Zeezrom wicked. All resurrected and judged by God. All who believe and repent saved through Christ. Whosoever sins is not saved.

Alma 13:11–12,22

3

x

x

Garments washed white. Gospel declared to all nations, even to Nephites.

Alma 14:2–11, 14–25

22

x

x

Nephites in Ammonihah cast out, stone, imprison, or execute “believers.” Execution will justify Lord’s judgements against the wicked of that city.

Alma 15:1,3,5,15

4

x

x

Cast out people found in Sidon; those in Ammonihah remain wicked.

Alma 16:1–9,11–12,14,16

13

x

x

x

x

Lamanites destroy Ammonihah and attack Nephites again three years later. No “respect of persons” and “no inequality” reported among Nephites.

Alma 17

39

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Sons of Mosiah and colleagues go to Lamanites, “their brethren,” to help them. Lamanites were wild, hardened, ferocious, and indolent; they are cursed “because of the traditions of their fathers,” but “promises of the Lord were extended” if they repent. To king Lamoni, Ammon says he wants to be a servant. He protects Lamoni’s flocks.

Alma 18

43

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Intra-Lamanite plundering and servant killing mentioned. Ammon is a faithful servant to king Lamoni. Ammon preaches to Lamoni. He believes, prays, and collapses.

Alma 19

36

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Lamoni, his wife, and many other Lamanites are converted. The queen’s faith was more than had been shown by Nephites. Abish also was faithful. Ammon distinguished as a Nephite. Many saw angels. The Lord reaches out “to all people who will repent.”

Alma 20

30

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Lamoni and Ammon (“this Nephite”) confront Lamoni’s father. Lamoni’s father hates Nephites. Lamoni disobeys order to kill Ammon, and Ammon defends Lamoni. Lamoni’s father impressed with Ammon. Ammon’s imprisoned colleagues released.

Alma 21

23

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Aaron and others have trouble, and some are jailed. Former Nephites were harder than Lamanites and swayed them. Eventually, many Lamanites are converted. Lamoni’s people are zealous.

Alma 22:1–28,33–34

30

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Aaron and brethren offer to be servants of head Lamanite king. He and his household are converted. “More idle” Lamanites lived in wilderness. Nephites considered Lamanites enemies.

Alma 23

18

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Freedom to preach decreed. Thousands of Lamanites converted from wickedness and “never did fall away.” Curse removed (skin not mentioned). They were friendly with Nephites. Ex-Nephites hardened their, and unconverted Lamanite neighbors’, hearts.

Alma 24

30

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Former Nephites (“more hardened”) stir up unconverted people against converted Lamanites, who buried their swords and refused to fight. They had given up wickedness. Many die. Most attackers were former Nephites.

Alma 25:1–8,13–17

13

x

x

x

x

x

Ammonihah attack continued. Vengeful Lamanites defeated, and many are converted. Some are killed by former Nephites. Lamanite mission continued: More converted Lamanites “bury their weapons.”

Alma 26

37

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Joy expressed for successful mission to “our dearly beloved brethren.” Before mission, some Nephites mocked it and proposed exterminating the wicked Lamanites, who followed the incorrect “traditions of their fathers.” Ammon and brethren, who once were sinful, suffered much. Converted Lamanites will give up their lives rather than “take the life of their enemy.” Greatest love ever showed by Lehite people. Lehites are part of Israel. “God is mindful of every people.”

Alma 27

30

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: After losing to Nephites, Lamanites (stirred up by angry ex-Nephites) again kill converted Lamanites who again refused to use weapons. Converts flee to Nephites and offer to be slaves to pay for previous wickedness (slavery was against Nephite law). Converts were “a highly favored people of the Lord.” Nephites give converted Lamanites (“their brethren”) land, protection, and citizenship.

Alma 28:1–6,8–14

13

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanite mission continued: Nephites protected the converted Lamanites (brethren) at a tremendous cost. Sin causes great inequality.

Alma 29:8,14–17

5

x

x

Lord gives his word to all nations. Lamanite mission concludes with joy.

Alma 30:7–12, 18, 22, 29, 42, 46–47, 52–56, 58–60

20

x

x

x

x

Nephites not punished for beliefs. Korihor leads many to wickedness; he is cursed and later trampled.

Alma 31:1–2, 5, 8–28, 30–31, 33–35

29

x

x

x

Preaching is more effective than force. One person is not above others. Zoramites were wicked. Alma prays for them, “their souls are precious.”

Alma 32:2–5,22–23

6

x

x

x

x

Despising poor and coarsely dressed people is evil. God is merciful to all believers and speaks to men, women, and children.

Alma 33:22

1

x

All will be judged by the Son of God.

Alma 34:2, 15, 28–29, 36, 40

6

x

x

x

x

All who believe are saved. Prayers are vain if a person does not help the needy. Garments made white through Christ. Do not revile against others.

Alma 35:3–11,13,15

11

x

x

x

x

x

Wicked Zoramites cast out converted, poor Zoramites, who are welcomed by people of Ammon. They ignore Zoramite threats. Zoramites incite Lamanites to war. Alma sorrows over Nephite wickedness.

Alma 36:6, 9, 12–14, 30

6

x

x

Alma sought to destroy church. He suffered over his sins. Not keeping God’s commandments means “cut off from his presence.”

Alma 37:4, 9–10, 19, 21–22, 25–26, 28–31

12

x

x

x

x

x

Sacred records would go to whole earth. They helped convert Lamanites and will help future generations. Many Nephites are wicked. Curse and destruction come from works of darkness, such as secret combinations.

Alma 38:1, 3–4, 7, 14

5

x

x

x

x

x

We are cut off from God’s presence through disobedience. Shiblon bound and stoned by Zoramites. Do not say “we are better” than other people.

Alma 39:11, 17–19

4

x

x

Poor example brought iniquity. Souls of all ages are “precious unto God.”

Alma 42:27

1

x

“Whosoever will come may come and partake.” No one is compelled.

Alma 43:3–54

52

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

War beginning in Alma 35 continues: Zerahemnah appointed wicked ex-Nephites over Lamanites, who had no armor. People of Ammon protected. Nephites protect liberty and families. The two groups are “brethren.”

Alma 44:1–23

23

x

x

War concludes. Many Nephites died protecting people of Ammon.

Alma 45:9–14, 16, 21, 23–24

10

x

x

Nephites prophesied to become very wicked. Land is cursed to wicked. Dissension grows within the church.

Alma 46:1–13, 17–21, 23, 27–35

28

x

x

x

x

Wickedness leads to civil war. Moroni inspires Nephites to defend liberty and tries to arrest Amalickiah (dissenter leader). Lehites are Joseph’s seed.

Alma 47

36

x

x

x

x

Amalickiah stirs up Lamanites to fight Nephites and becomes Lamanite king by scheming. Nephite dissenters were more wicked than Lamanites.

Alma 48:1–16, 21–25

21

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanites coming to attack Nephites. Nephites reluctantly fighting their brethren and were taught to not give offense and only kill in self-defense.

Alma 49:1–28

28

x

x

x

x

Lamanites attack Nephites and are defeated. Nephites viewed the two nations as “brethren.” Angry Amalickiah “did care not for … his people.”

Alma 50:1–7, 9–12, 20–22, 25–36

26

x

x

x

x

Nephites prepared for next war and have an internal conflict. Wickedness gave war and distance from God. Morianton abused a female servant.

Alma 51:2–4,7–37

34

x

x

x

Nephite contention and civil war occur. A six-year Nephite-Lamanite war begins as Amalickiah again stirs up Lamanites against the Nephites.

Alma 52

40

x

Six-year war continued. Ammoron leads Lamanites in two-front war.

Alma 53

23

x

x

x

Six-year war continued. Nephites harmed by intrigue. Nephites protect converted Lamanites, who want to help. Their sons join Nephite army.

Alma 54

24

x

x

Six-year war continued. Ammoron justifies the war to avenge wrongs.

Alma 55

35

x

x

x

x

Six-year war cont. Ammoron’s justification was fraudulent. A descendant of Laman helps free Nephites. Moroni would not kill drunk Lamanites.

Alma 56

57

x

x

x

x

Six-year war continued. Converted Lamanites were willing to break their oath so they could help Nephites. Sons of these Lamanites fight valiantly.

Alma 57

36

x

x

Six-year war continued. Converted Lamanite’s sons again valiant.

Alma 58

41

x

x

Six-year war continued. Lamanite army driven. Lamanite sons faithful.

Alma 59

13

x

x

x

Six-year war continued. Even in loss, Nephites see Lamanites as brethren.

Alma 60

36

x

x

x

x

Six-year war continued. Moroni writes angry letter to Pahoran. Lamanite tradition of their fathers was exploited by dissenting Nephites.

Alma 61

21

x

x

x

Six-year war continued. Pahoran replied. Wicked Nephites took over capital. Righteous Nephites would not kill if they were not attacked.

Alma 62:1–42, 44–45

44

x

x

x

Six-year war ends. Nephite rebels and Lamanite army defeated. Captured Lamanites join people of Ammon. Wickedness was among Nephites.

Alma 63:14–15

2

x

x

x

Nephite dissenters again incite Lamanites to war against Nephites.

Helaman 1:7–12, 14–33

26

x

x

x

x

x

Son of former Nephite leader indicted. Chief judge murdered in a conspiracy. Lamanites attack Nephites and are led by ex-Nephites.

Helaman 2:3–11,13–14

11

x

Conspirators try to murder chief judge. Such evil helped destroy Nephites.

Helaman 3:1, 3, 14, 16–17, 19, 22–23, 27–30, 33–34,36

15

x

x

x

x

x

Nephites became “wicked, and wild, and ferocious.” Wars and conspiracies were among Nephites. “The Lord is merciful unto all” who call on him. Persecution of others “was a great evil.”

Helaman 4:1–14, 16, 18–19, 21–26

23

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanites, induced by Nephite dissenters, attack Nephites three years after a Nephite civil war. Nephites were wicked like “their brethren, the Lamanites.” Persecuting others and oppressing the poor are evil acts.

Helaman 5:2–4,16–52

40

x

x

x

Most Nephites are wicked. Nephi and Lehi go to Lamanites to preach. “More part” are converted and return captured land, even dissenters accept.

Helaman 6:1–9, 14–40

36

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanites mostly righteous. Lamanites preach to Nephites. Peace is “in all the land.” Nephites rejoiced with Lamanites. Putting oneself above another is wrong. Nephites mostly wicked and uphold robber band.

Helaman 7:1–6, 9, 11–29

26

x

x

x

x

x

Nephites need to repent of great wickedness, including “that secret band.” God does not favor the wicked unless they repent. Lamanites are more righteous than the Nephites, and the Lord will bless the Lamanites.

Helaman 8:1, 3–4, 7–8, 12–13, 24–28

12

x

x

Wickedness, including “secret band,” is bringing destruction to Nephites.

Helaman 9:21–24

4

x

Great destruction awaits Nephites if they do not repent.

Helaman 10:3,11–18

9

x

x

x

“Secret works of darkness” among wicked deeds of Nephites. Nephi warned all Nephites to repent. Armed contention begins.

Helaman 11:1–2, 10, 21–34, 36–37

19

x

x

x

x

x

x

Secret band fuels Nephite civil wars. Church and peace found throughout Nephites and Lamanites. Ex-Nephites induce some Lamanites against their “brethren.” Band of robbers formed. Nephites become wicked.

Helaman 12:1–8,25

9

x

x

Men’s hearts are unstable. “I would that all men might be saved.”

Helaman 13

39

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lamanites are righteous. Samuel, the Lamanite prophet, is rejected but preaches from a city wall. Nephites will be cursed and destroyed unless they repent. Persecution listed with other iniquities.

Helaman 14

31

x

x

x

x

Samuel prophesies of Christ. All who believe in Christ are saved. Nephites need to repent. Samuel’s ethnicity partly why Nephites are angry.

Helaman 15

17

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Samuel, the Lamanite, again calls on Nephites (his “beloved brethren”) to repent. Lamanites had been wicked because of the tradition of their fathers but now are mostly righteous in contrast to Nephites. Lord will bless “our brethren, the Lamanites,” “even if they should dwindle in unbelief.”

Helaman 16:1–8,10–12,15,22–23

14

x

x

x

x

x

Samuel, the Lamanite prophet, is driven away by Nephites. Some Nephites repent, but Nephites and Lamanites “harden their hearts.”

3 Nephi 1:6–7, 9–10, 18, 27–30

9

x

x

x

x

“Unbelievers” plan to kill “believers.” Wickedness found among Nephites and Lamanites, including Gadianton robbers.

3 Nephi 2:3,10–19

11

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Wickedness abounds. Lamanites and Nephites unite and fight robber band. Converted Lamanites join “their brethren, the Nephites.” For converted Lamanites, curse is removed, and “skin became white.”

3 Nephi 3

26

x

x

x

x

x

Robbers demand surrender of united Nephites and Lamanites. They refuse and prepare physically and spiritually to face robbers.

3 Nephi 4:1–29

29

x

x

Robber band defeated by united, and prayerful, Nephites and Lamanites.

3 Nephi 5:3–6, 21–26

10

x

x

x

x

x

Nephites repent. Robber band eliminated; robbers released if they commit to live better. The Lord has blessed faithful Lehites and will gather Israel.

3 Nephi 6:3–4, 10, 12–18, 20–30

21

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Former robbers are given land, and just laws are present. Inequality, persecution, and class distinctions occur. Some do not revile back. Some do. “All manner of iniquity” is found. A few Lamanites remain steadfast. Gospel preachers “put to death secretly” and a conspiracy is formed.

3 Nephi 7:1–2, 5–11, 14–16, 18–20

15

x

x

x

Conspiracy murders chief judge and destroys Nephite government. Very few, among the Nephites, are righteous. Prophets are stoned.

3 Nephi 8:24–25

2

x

x

x

If people had not killed prophets, their “fair daughters” would have lived.

3 Nephi 9:1–14, 16–17, 20–22

19

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Christ speaks of great wickedness. “Fair” people were slain. Secret combinations were “above all.” He will save all who come to him and give Holy Ghost as he did to Lamanites. He was rejected by his own.

3 Nephi 10:4–7, 15, 17

6

x

x

Lehites are part of Israel and a remnant of Joseph’s seed. The Lord will gather Lehites if they repent. People slain who testified of destruction.

3 Nephi 11:28–30, 32–34, 41

7

x

x

Devil incites contention; Christ does opposite. All people commanded to repent. Preach the gospel “unto the ends of the earth.”

3 Nephi 12:9–12, 38–41, 43–45

11

x

x

Peacemakers are blessed. Christ says to rejoice when persecuted, “turn the other cheek, and “love your enemies.”

3 Nephi 15:5,8,12–13, 18–19, 22–23

8

x

x

x

x

Christ covenanted with Israel. Lehites are a remnant of Joseph and were separated because of iniquity. Gentiles receive Christ via the Holy Ghost.

3 Nephi 16:4–20

17

x

x

x

x

x

x

Because of unbelief, Israel will receive the gospel from Gentiles and will be gathered. If Gentiles do not repent, they will be smitten. If they repent, “they shall be numbered among [Israel].” America is a dwelling place for Lehites. “All the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of God.”

3 Nephi 17:14

1

x

Wickedness within the house of Israel troubled Jesus.

3 Nephi 18:22–25,28–33

10

x

x

Do not exclude anyone from worship services, even if that person needs to repent and will not. Continue to minister to him or her. Christ invited all.

3 Nephi 19:25,28–30

4

x

Disciples were purified and were “white, even as Jesus.”

3 Nephi 20:10–23, 25–46

36

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lehites are a remnant of house of Israel. Israel sold itself but will “be redeemed without money.” God gave land of America for inheritance of Lehites. After receiving gospel, if Gentiles do not repent, “I will return their iniquities upon their own heads.” All the earth will see salvation.

3 Nephi 21

29

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

When gospel comes from Gentiles to Lehite descendants, who have dwindled in unbelief, the Lord has begun fulfilling his covenant with Israel. Those not believing to be “cut off from among my people.” If they repent, Gentiles will be part of Israel. People gathered from “all nations.”

3 Nephi 22

17

x

x

x

x

“Enlarge the place of thy tent.” Gentiles will be inherited. “With great mercies will I gather thee.” “Weapon[s]” formed against Israel will fail.

3 Nephi 23:1–5

5

x

x

x

Isaiah spoke on all things about Israel. Hence, he also must speak to the Gentiles. They will get Christ’s words. Whoever hearkens is saved.

3 Nephi 24

18

x

x

x

x

x

Sons of Levi to be purged. Judgment against oppressors. Tithe neglectors cursed. God will return if Israel repents. Righteousness is criterion.

3 Nephi 25:1–3,5–6

5

x

x

All wicked “shall be stubble;” righteous will be blessed. Elijah promised.

3 Nephi 26:4–5,8,19

4

x

x

x

x

All will be judged. Account of Christ to go to Lehite descendants through Gentiles. People had “all things common” and dealt justly with each other.

3 Nephi 27:6, 14–20, 32

9

x

x

x

All who accept Christ will be saved. Christ will judge all. He invites all to repent. People will choose wickedness in four generations.

3 Nephi 28:18–23, 27–29, 31–32,34

12

x

x

x

x

Ministry of Three Nephites is to all people, then and afterwards, including Jews and Gentiles. The three were persecuted. All will be judged by God.

3 Nephi 29:1–3,8–9

5

x

x

x

x

God will fulfill his covenant to Israel; this has begun when Gentiles get “these sayings.” Do not persecute the Jews or any other part of Israel.

3 Nephi 30

2

x

x

x

Gentiles, turn from wickedness that you may join the Lord’s people.

4 Nephi 1:2–4,6–7,10–11,13–18, 20,24–40,42–43,45–47,49

37

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

All Nephites and Lamanites are converted and live in harmony. People are “fair and delightsome.” Later, wickedness reappears, including class distinctions and robbers. Lamanites re-form, no skin change noted. “Believers” smitten but do not smite back. Nephites are wicked like “their brethren, the Lamanites.” Records to come to remnant of Israel.

Mormon 1:8–14,16–19

11

x

x

x

x

Final war between Nephites and Lamanites begins. Wickedness prevails. Gadianton robbers infest the land. Mormon forbidden from preaching.

Mormon 2:1–16,18–29

28

x

x

x

x

x

War and wickedness continue. Robbers and Lamanites fought Nephites, who became “weak like unto our brethren.”

Mormon 3

22

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Mormon preaches repentance to Nephites without success and refuses to lead them after they beat Lamanites and want revenge. “Vengeance is mine.” Mormon invites all people to “believe the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

Mormon 4

23

x

x

x

x

x

Nephites attack Lamanites and vice versa. Wicked punished by the wicked. Wickedness is extreme, and human sacrifice occurs.

Mormon 5

24

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Awful carnage as Nephites succumb to Lamanites. Mormon writes about the wickedness and calamities to motivate Gentiles, Jews, and Lehite descendants to righteousness. Lehites, once delightsome, will become more dark and filthy. Lehite blessings will go to Gentiles, who will count Lehite descendants “as naught.” The Lord will remember his covenant with Abraham and house of Israel. The Gentiles need to repent.

Mormon 6

22

x

x

x

Nephites destroyed. Mormon laments wickedness of “ye fair ones.”

Mormon 7:1–2, 4, 8–10

6

x

x

x

x

x

Mormon writes to Lehite survivors. They are part of Israel and will receive record of Jews through the Gentiles. Fight only if God commands.

Mormon 8:2–3,7–9, 15, 19–25, 27–33, 35–41

27

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

More Nephites are destroyed, Lamanites are fighting themselves. Lord will remember covenants. Lehite saints prayed for him who would “bring these things forth.” He would have eye single to [God’s] glory” or welfare of his covenant people. Smiters will be smitten. A warning given to those who persecute Israel. Much wickedness would exist in latter days. including secret combinations.

Mormon 9:4, 6, 13–14, 21–23, 25, 35–37

11

x

x

x

x

Spiritual filthiness and an invitation to turn to God to be “spotless, pure, fair, and white.” Judgment and gospel are for all. Gospel is desired for brethren, and a prayer made for Israel.

Ether 2:11,15

2

x

x

Gentiles warned to repent. Sin brings a divine curse.

Ether 3:14

1

x

Christ came for all people. Those who believe will have eternal life.

Ether 4:3,6,13–19

9

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Lehites “have all dwindled in unbelief.” Invitation to Gentiles, Israel, and all people to “come unto me.” Unbelief caused wickedness in Israel.

Ether 6:21–28

8

x

Despite the brother of Jared’s assertion that “surely this thing leadeth into captivity,” the Jaredites choose to be led by a king.

Ether 7:4–5,7–9,15–21

12

x

x

Corihor and his “exceedingly fair” children attracted many people to Corihor’s rebellion. War begins among the Jaredites. Four wars occur.

Ether 8:2–25

24

x

x

x

x

x

Two Jaredite wars occur. An “exceedingly fair” daughter starts a conspiracy to kill the king. These secret combinations are “most abominable,” caused the destruction of the Nephites and Jaredites, and will destroy nations. Gentiles need to remove secret combinations.

Ether 9:1–12, 26–27

14

x

x

A secret combination causes a split into two kingdoms. War within one kingdom leaves only 30 survivors. King killed in another conspiracy.

Ether 10:5–9,14–15,30–34

12

x

x

Four more Jaredite civil wars and two rebellions mentioned. Robber conspiracy forms. King fights robbers but does not prevail.

Ether 11:4,7,15–18,22

7

x

x

Jaredites have five more armed conflicts. Secret combinations are a cause of tremendous wickedness.

Ether 12:15, 22, 28, 35–36, 38

6

x

x

x

x

x

x

Former mission to Lamanites was a miracle. Lehite descendants to receive gospel via Gentiles. Lord will show Gentiles their weakness and a path to righteousness. Moroni prays for the Gentiles and loves “my brethren.”

Ether 13:3–12, 15–19, 22–31

25

x

x

x

x

Prophesy of gathering of Israel: New and Old Jerusalem “cometh” and garments are white. A great war occurs among the Jaredites. “Fair sons and daughters” did not repent. Secret combinations cause much fighting.

Ether 14

31

x

x

Two civil wars occur. Secret combinations contribute to carnage.

Ether 15:1–32

32

x

Jaredites are destroyed by civil war.

Moroni 1:1–4

4

x

x

x

Avoiding Lamanites to protect his life, Moroni calls them “my brethren.”

Moroni 7:28–32,34

6

x

Lord claims “all those who have faith in him” and calls all to repentance.

Moroni 8:17, 19, 22, 24, 27–29

7

x

x

All children and those without law are saved. Pride destroying Nephites.

Moroni 9:2–24

23

x

x

x

x

x

During final war, Nephite “wickedness doth exceed that of the Lamanites.” Nephites had been delightsome people.

Moroni 10:1–2, 8, 17–19, 24, 31, 34

9

x

x

x

x

Moroni again writes to beloved Lamanite brethren. Spiritual gifts come to each person. A plea is given to all. Israel “put on thy beautiful garments.”

*Each paragraph in title page and witness testimonies is considered one verse.

Table 2. Book of Mormon verses discussing Lamanite cursing (12 instances) or relevant to Lamanite cursing or cursing in general (17 instances marked with asterisk). Each entry is a separate instance.

Reference

CV

Summary

1 Nephi 2:21, 23–24

3

If Laman and Lemuel rebel, they will be cursed, “cut off from the presence of the Lord.”

2 Nephi 1:7*

1

“If iniquity shall abound cursed shall be the land for their sakes.”

2 Nephi 1:10–12*

3

For people who dwindle in unbelief who had received great, divine blessings, the consequences are terrible.

2 Nephi 1:13–14,16–29

16

“Inasmuch as ye will not keep my commandments ye shall be cut off from my presence.” Dying Lehi pleads with his sons and Ishmael’s sons to be righteous. Lehi fears that a curse will come upon them. They will receive “first blessing” if they are righteous, Nephi will receive it if they are wicked.

2 Nephi 4:4

1

“Inasmuch as ye will not keep my commandments ye shall be cut off from my presence.”

2 Nephi 4:5–9

5

Lehi asks that possible cursing on Laman’s and Lemuel’s children “be answered upon the heads of your parents.” Lord “will be merciful unto you and unto your seed forever.” “In the end thy seed shall be blessed.”

2 Nephi 5:20–24

5

Lamanites are “cut off from presence of the Lord.” Lamanites “were white,” now have “skin of blackness.” They shall be “loathsome” to Nephites and are “idle” and “full of mischief and subtlety.” Nephite seed will also be cursed if they mix with Lamanite seed. Repentance will remove the loathsomeness.

Jacob 1:13–14*

2

Lamanites are people “that seek to destroy the people of Nephi.” No skin color difference is mentioned.

Jacob 3:3,5

2

Lamanites are cursed, but Nephites will also be cursed if they do not repent.

Jacob 3:9–10*

2

As occurred with Lamanites, children can be affected negatively by their parent’s “filthiness.”

Enos 1:10*

1

“I curse it not save it be for the cause of iniquity.”

Mosiah 1:5

1

Lamanites know nothing of the commandments of God.

Alma 3:6–10,13–18

11

Marking was part of the curse against the Lamanites. Lord marked Lamanites to prevent intermixing to prevent belief in “incorrect traditions.” Cursing removed if Lamanites turn to Lord. People who joined Lamanites would also be marked. Amlicites, who dissented and joined Lamanites, had marked themselves. This fulfilled God’s words. The curse also fell on the Amlicites, but no skin change mentioned.

Alma 3:19*

1

Amlicites brought curse upon themselves. “Every man that is cursed” brings condemnation upon himself.

Alma 9:13*

1

“Inasmuch as ye will not keep my commandments ye shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord.”

Alma 9:14

1

“Inasmuch as the Lamanites have not kept the commandments of God, they have been cut off from the presence of the Lord.”

Alma 17:15

1

Lamanites were cursed because of fathers’ traditions, but Lord’s promises extended if they repent.

Alma 23:18

1

For converted Lamanites, “the curse of God did no more follow them.” They become “very industrious.” They correspond with Nephites.

Alma 30:52–56*

5

Korihor “taught [the devil’s] words … I withstood the truth … I have brought this great curse upon me.”

Alma 36:30*

1

“Inasmuch as ye will not keep the commandments of God ye shall be cut off from his presence.”

Alma 37:28,31*

2

“A curse upon this land … destruction shall come upon all … workers of darkness … except they repent.”

Alma 38:1*

1

“Inasmuch as ye will not keep the commandments of God ye shall be cut off from his presence.”

Alma 45:16*

1

“Cursed shall be the land … unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people … which do wickedly.”

Alma 50:20*

1

“Inasmuch as they will not keep my commandments they shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord.”

Helaman 13:17–39*

23

“A curse shall come upon the land … because of the people’s sake … because of their wickedness.”

3 Nephi 2:14–16

3

For Lamanites who were converted to the Lord, the curse was removed, and they are numbered as Nephites.

3 Nephi 24:8–9*

2

“This whole nation” is cursed for robbing God by not giving tithes and offerings.

4 Nephi 1:20, 35–39*

6

Lamanites form again. This time, Lamanites reject God and “willfully rebel,” but nothing mentioned about skin changes or a specific curse, even though conditions were similar to when the first Lamanites formed.

Ether 2:15*

1

“If ye will sin until ye are fully ripe ye shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord.”

Total Count

104

Table 3. Book of Mormon verses discussing appearance; verses relevant to appearance; or verses that commonly are thought to refer to people’s appearance (e.g., light, dark, fair, delightsome), including references to skin. Each entry is a separate instance (46 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

1 Nephi 8:11

1

Lehi said, “the fruit thereof was white, to exceed all the whiteness that I had ever seen.”

1 Nephi 11:8

1

Nephi sees a beautiful (“exceeding of all beauty”) and white (whiter than snow) tree.

1 Nephi 11:13–15,18

4

Mother of Jesus was “exceedingly fair and white” and “most beautiful and fair.”

1 Nephi 12:10–11

2

Garments and people “made white” by the blood of the Lamb of God.

1 Nephi 12:15–16

2

A vision of final Nephite-Lamanite war connects it to “the fountain of filthy water” and “depths of hell.”

1 Nephi 12:20–23

4

Lamanites and Nephite survivors would “dwindle in unbelief” and become dark, loathsome, and filthy.

1 Nephi 13:15–16

2

Gentiles were white, fair, and beautiful, like Nephites “before they were slain.” Gentiles are humble and have God’s power.

1 Nephi 15:33–34

2

Filthiness is wicked works or acts.

2 Nephi 5:21–22

2

Lamanites “were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome,” now have “a skin of blackness.” They shall be “loathsome” to Nephites. Repentance will remove the loathsomeness.

2 Nephi 9:14–16

3

Righteousness is “clothed with purity.” Guilt, uncleanness, nakedness, and filthiness refers to wickedness.

2 Nephi 13:9

1

“The show of their countenance doth witness against them, and doth declare their sin to be even as Sodom.”

2 Nephi 14:3–4

2

To be cleansed from filth is to become holy.

2 Nephi 21:3–4

2

The Lord will judge righteously, not on appearance.

2 Nephi 30:6–7

2

Conversion to gospel makes Lamanite descendants “pure and delightsome people.” Jews also become delightsome.

Jacob 1:13–14

2

Lamanites are people “that seek to destroy the people of Nephi.” A skin color difference is not mentioned.

Jacob 2:32

1

The Lord responds to “the cries of the fair daughters of this people … against the men of my people.”

Jacob 3:3,5,8–10

5

Speaking to Nephites, Jacob said, some Nephites “are filthy this day before God.” “The Lamanites …, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you.” “Unless ye … repent … their skins will be whiter than yours.’ “Revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins” or “their filthiness.” “Remember your own filthiness.”

Words of Mormon 1:8

1

Mormon’s prayer that his brethren may accept gospel “that they may once again be a delightsome people.”

Mosiah 7:30–31

2

If Lord’s people “sow filthiness they shall reap the chaff thereof in the whirlwind; and the effect … is poison.”

Mosiah 14:2

1

Messiah “hath no form nor comeliness … there is no beauty that we should desire him.”

Mosiah 19:13–14

2

“Fair daughters” (here beautiful women) used to protect Nephite settlers from attack by a Lamanite army.

Alma 3:4–16, 18

14

Amilicites marked themselves like the Lamanites “with red in their foreheads.” Lamanites had shaved heads and wore only a skin covering their loins. Lamanite skins “were dark,” a mark the Lord set upon them to prevent intermarriage with Nephites. Distinguishing features of Nephites are those people who “would not believe in the tradition of the Lamanites,” who “believed those records … brought out of … Jerusalem,” who “believed in the commandments of God,” who “kept” God’s commandments, and who kept “true” records of themselves and the Lamanites. Skin not mentioned as a distinguishing feature. Marking removed after repentance. Nephites who rebelled and joined Lamanites would also be marked and Amlicites fulfilled this by marking their foreheads. No mention is made of Amlicite skins becoming dark.

Alma 5:14,19

2

“Have ye received his image in your countenances?”

Alma 5:21–24,27

5

“Garments stained with blood and all manner of filthiness” must be “made white through the blood of Christ.”

Alma 7:21

1

Filthiness is unholiness and spiritual uncleanliness.

Alma 13:11–12

2

“Their garments were washed white through the blood of the Lamb.”

Alma 19:18

1

Ammon was easily distinguished as a Nephite.

Alma 20:10

1

Ammon was easily distinguished as a Nephite.

Alma 23:18

1

“The curse of God did no more follow [converted Lamanites].” No skin change mentioned.

Alma 32:2–3

2

“Poor class of people” were cast out because of coarse apparel and were “esteemed as filthiness.”

Alma 34:36

1

“Their garments should be made white through the blood of the Lamb.”

Alma 55:4–15

12

As part of a plot to recapture Nephite prisoners of war, a search was made among Nephite army for someone who was a descendant of Laman.

3 Nephi 2:14–16

3

Converted Lamanites “were numbered among the Nephites.” Lamanite curse was removed, and “their skin became white like unto the Nephites.” Youth “became exceedingly fair.”

3 Nephi 8:25

1

If people had repented, their “fair daughters” and others would “have been spared.”

3 Nephi 9:2

1

“Fair sons and daughters” were slain and devil laughed.

3 Nephi 19:25,28–30

4

Disciples “were as white as the countenance and also the garments of Jesus.” Jesus thanks the Father “that thou has purified those whom I have chosen.”

4 Nephi 1:10

1

People (all converted) are “exceedingly fair and delightsome.”

4 Nephi 1:20, 35–39

6

Lamanites form again as dissenters become Lamanites, but at this separation nothing mentioned about skin changes, even though conditions were similar to when the first Lamanites formed.

Mormon 5:15, 17

2

Descendants of Book of Mormon people will become more dark and filthy than was known throughout the Book of Mormon, “because of their unbelief and idolatry.” “They were once a delightsome people.”

Mormon 6:17, 19

2

After the destruction of the Nephites, Mormon laments, “O ye fair ones, how could ye have departed from the ways of the Lord!”

Mormon 9:4,6,14

3

“Filthiness” is spiritual filthiness, and turn to God “that … ye may be found spotless, pure, fair, and white.”

Ether 7:4

1

Corihor and his “exceedingly fair” children attracted many people to Corihor’s rebellion.

Ether 8:8–10

3

In a conspiracy to kill the king, an “exceedingly fair” daughter proposes to dance to win the support of a potential co-conspirator.

Ether 13:10

1

Garments of people who dwell in the New Jerusalem “are white through the blood of the Lamb.”

Ether 13:17

1

“Fair sons and daughters” did not repent.

Moroni 9:12

1

Before they became wicked, Nephites “were a civil and delightsome people.”

Total Count

116

Table 4. Book of Mormon verses stating God’s message and blessings are available to any person and verses stating God treats each person fairly. No distinctions are made based on ancestry, class, nationality, and so forth. The test is righteousness only. Except as noted, each entry is a separate instance or thought on this subject (116 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Title Page

2

The Book of Mormon is for all people (Lamanites, Jews, and Gentiles). One of its purposes is to convince “Jew and Gentile [all people] that Jesus is the Christ.” Jesus Christ is manifest to all nations.

Testimony of Three Witnesses

1

Testimony written to “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.”

Testimony of Eight Witnesses

1

Testimony written to “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.”

1 Nephi 1:14

1

God’s “power, and goodness, and mercy are over all the inhabitants of the earth.”

1 Nephi 10:17–19

3

Holy Ghost is available to all who diligently seek the Lord. Repentance available to all.

1 Nephi 11:36

1

Destruction prophesied for “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, that shall fight against the twelve apostles.”

1 Nephi 13:39–40

2

Other records that will come forth shall establish the truth of the Bible to all people and “make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people” that Jesus is the Savior and that all people must believe in him.

1 Nephi 13:42

1

Prophecy that Lord will manifest himself to all nations, both Jews and Gentiles.

1 Nephi 14:3–5

3

God’s justice “upon all those who will work wickedness and abomination before him.”

1 Nephi 14:12,14

2

“Covenant people … were scattered upon all the face of the earth.”

1 Nephi 17:30–43

14

“The Lord esteemeth all flesh in one.” Righteous are favored. Wicked are not.

1 Nephi 19:17

1

“Salvation of the Lord” will come to “all the earth,” “every nation, kindred, tongue, and people shall be blessed.”

1 Nephi 21:6

1

Messiah will be a light to Israel and Gentiles and bring salvation to “ends of the earth.”

1 Nephi 22:9–11

3

“All the kindreds of the earth” will be blessed through Abrahamic covenant.

1 Nephi 22:14–20, 22–23

9

“Every nation” warring against Israel and “all that fight against Zion” will fail. Righteous people will be preserved. Wicked people will not. The Lord’s test is righteousness versus wickedness.

1 Nephi 22:25,28

2

Lord gathers “his children from the four quarters of the earth.” If they repent, “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people shall dwell safely in the Holy One of Israel.”

2 Nephi 2:7

1

Christ’s sacrifice for “all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit.”

2 Nephi 2:8

1

“How great the importance” to let “the inhabitants of the earth” know about Christ.

2 Nephi 2:9–10

2

“They that believe in [Christ] shall be saved.” “All men come unto God” to be judged.

2 Nephi 9:5

1

“The great Creator … [will] die for all men, that all men might become subject unto him.”

2 Nephi 9:15–16,18

3

God will judge all. The test will be righteousness or filthiness.

2 Nephi 9:21–24

4

Christ’s sacrifice and redemption is for all people. All are commanded to repent; if not, they are damned.

2 Nephi 9:25–27

3

God is fair. Those without Lords’ law not held to same standard as those who have the law.

2 Nephi 10:13–17

5

Anyone who fights against Zion, king, Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female, “shall perish.”

2 Nephi 11:8

1

“Ye may liken [some of Isaiah’s words] unto you and unto all men.” Also, “rejoice for all men.”

2 Nephi 23:11,15,22

3

The proud and wicked will be punished. “I will be merciful unto my people, but the wicked shall perish.”

2 Nephi 25:3

1

Judgments of God “come upon all nations.”

2 Nephi 26:3–9

7

At Christ’s death and resurrection, the test would be righteousness, nothing said about lineage.

2 Nephi 26:12–13

2

Jews and Gentiles need gospel. Lord manifests “himself unto all who believe in him … yea, unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people.”

2 Nephi 26:24–28,33

6

Everyone is invited to partake of salvation. None are turned away. “All men are privileged the one like the other, and none are forbidden.” “All are alike unto God.”

2 Nephi 27:2–5, 31

5

All nations fighting Zion and people choosing wickedness will suffer.

2 Nephi 29:7–8, 11–12

4

The Lord “remember[s] one nation like unto another” and “speak[s] unto all nations of the earth.”

2 Nephi 30:1–2

2

Lineage is not the test, righteousness is. “As many of the Gentiles as will repent are the covenant people of the Lord; and as many of the Jews as will not repent shall be cast off.”

2 Nephi 30:8–10

3

God’s work will commence “among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.” Righteous spared, and wicked destroyed.

2 Nephi 31:20

1

God asks us to love him and all people.

2 Nephi 33:7–10

4

Nephi has charity for his people, Jews, and Gentiles. He wants all to believe in Christ, the key to his hope.

2 Nephi 33:12–13

2

Nephi prays “many of us, if not all, may be saved.” He bids farewell to brethren, Israel, and all on earth.

Jacob 1:8

1

Jacob wishes all people could be persuaded to believe in Christ.

Jacob 2:21

1

“One being is as precious in [God’s] sight as the other.”

Mosiah 2:4

1

King Benjamin’s people were “filled with love towards God and all men.”

Mosiah 3:11

1

God is fair; Christ atoned for all that die “not knowing the will of God … or who have ignorantly sinned.

Mosiah 3:13

1

Redemptive message is for “every kindred, nation, and tongue.”

Mosiah 3:20

1

“Knowledge of a Savior shall spread throughout every nation, kindred, tongue, and people.”

Mosiah 4:7

1

Atonement “was prepared from the foundation of the world for all mankind.”

Mosiah 7:29–32

4

No favoritism, Lord “will not succor my people” if they commit transgression. A Nephite group saw this.

Mosiah 12:24

1

“All the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.”

Mosiah 15:10–12

3

“All those who have hearkened” are the seed of the Lord or “heirs of the kingdom of God.”

Mosiah 15:24

1

Those who died “not having salvation declared unto them” are “redeemed by the Lord.”

Mosiah 15:26–27

2

Salvation will not come to “all those … that have willfully rebelled against God.”

Mosiah 15:28,31

2

“Salvation of the Lord shall be declared to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people.”

Mosiah 16:1

1

“All shall see the salvation of the Lord;” “every nation, kindred, tongue, and people shall see eye to eye.”

Mosiah 23:7

1

Lord said, “ye shall not esteem one flesh above another, or one man shall not think himself above another.”

Mosiah 27:25

1

“Men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, must be born again.”

Mosiah 27:30–31

2

The Redeemer “will make himself manifest unto all.” He will judge all.

Alma 3:27

1

“Every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey.”

Alma 5:33

1

God invites all and will receive all who repent.

Alma 5:36

1

“Whosoever bringeth forth not good fruit … the same have cause to wail and mourn.”

Alma 5:48

1

Christ takes away “the sins of every man who steadfastly believeth on his name.”

Alma 5:50

1

Everyone invited to repent and “the King of heaven shall … shine forth among all the children of men.”

Alma 6:5

1

“The word of God was liberal unto all, … none were deprived.”

Alma 9:17

1

“The Lord will be merciful unto all who call on his name.”

Alma 9:28

1

“All men shall reap a reward of their works.”

Alma 11:40

1

“[Christ] shall take upon him the transgressions of those who believe on his name.”

Alma 11:41,44

2

“All shall rise from the dead and stand before God, and be judged according to their works.”

Alma 12:8

1

All will be resurrected and stand before God to be judged.

Alma 12:15,33–34

3

God has all power to save everyone that believes. Whosoever repents has claim on mercy through Christ.

Alma 12:16,35

2

Whosoever hardens his heart and does iniquity dies a spiritual death.

Alma 13:22

1

Gospel declared unto all nations, even to Nephites.

Alma 16:14

1

Word of God imparted “without any respect of persons.”

Alma 19:36

1

“We see that [the Lord’s] arm is extended to all people who will repent and believe on his name.”

Alma 26:37

1

“We see that God is mindful of every people.”

Alma 29:8

1

Lord grants to all nations all “he seeth fit that they should have.”

Alma 32:22

1

“God is merciful unto all who believe on his name.”

Alma 32:23

1

God imparts his word not only to men, but also to women and to children.

Alma 33:22

1

“All men shall stand before [the Son of God], to be judged at the last and judgment day.”

Alma 34:15

1

Christ “shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on his name.”

Alma 37:4

1

Sacred records prophesied to “go forth unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people.”

Alma 39:17–19

3

“Is not a soul at this time as precious unto God as a soul will be at the time of his coming?”

Alma 42:27

1

Gospel is available freely to “whosoever will come” and partake. No one is compelled.

Helaman 3:27–30

4

“Gate of heaven is open unto all” who will believe in Christ.

Helaman 7:23

1

God does not favor any of the wicked “one more than the other, save it be unto those who repent.”

Helaman 12:25

1

“I would that all men might be saved.”

Helaman 14:8

1

“Whosoever shall believe on the Son of God, the same shall have eternal life.”

Helaman 14:17–18

2

“The resurrection of Christ redeemeth … all mankind;” whosoever repents “is not hewn down.”

3 Nephi 9:14, 17, 20–22

5

Direct statement and invitation from Christ: “come unto me ye ends of the earth, and be saved.”

3 Nephi 11:32–34

3

God asks “all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in [Christ].” “Whoso believeth … shall be saved.”

3 Nephi 11:41

1

Preach the gospel “unto the ends of the earth.”

3 Nephi 16:20

1

“All the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of God.”

3 Nephi 18:22–25

4

Do not forbid any person from worshipping or meeting with you or cast any person out. Pray for people. Follow Christ’s example, he invited all to come to him. “Whosoever breaketh this commandment suffereth himself to be led into temptation.”

3 Nephi 18:28–33

6

Do not cast out a person even if he or she is not currently worthy to partake of the sacrament or is unrepentant. Continue to minister to that person. Pray for that person.

3 Nephi 20:25

1

In his covenant with Abraham, God said, “in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.”

3 Nephi 20:35

1

“All the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of the Father.”

3 Nephi 21:11,20

2

Whosoever does not believe “shall be cut off from among my people.”

3 Nephi 21:28–29

2

Lord will gather his people from “all nations.”

3 Nephi 22:2–3

2

“Enlarge the place of thy tent … stretch forth the curtains … lengthen the cords and strengthen thy stakes.”

3 Nephi 23:5

1

“Whosoever will hearken … shall be saved.”

3 Nephi 24:18

1

The Lord’s criterion is “him that serveth God and him that serveth him not.”

3 Nephi 25:1–2*

2

“All the proud, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble.” Those who fear the Lord will be blessed.

3 Nephi 26:4–5

2

All will be “judged of their works.” Criterion is righteousness.

3 Nephi 27:6

1

“Whoso taketh upon him my name, and endureth to the end, the same shall be saved at the last day.”

3 Nephi 27:14–20

7

Christ suffered on cross to “draw all men unto me, that they may be judged according to their works.” Criterion is righteousness. “Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me.”

3 Nephi 28:18,23

2

Three Nephites “did minister unto all the people.”

3 Nephi 28:27–29

3

Three Nephites will minister to Gentiles, Jews, Israel, and “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.”

3 Nephi 28:31,34

2

“All people must surely stand before the judgment-seat of Christ.”

Mormon 3:17–22

6

Mormon invites Gentiles, Jews, Lehite descendants, and “all the ends of the earth” to “believe the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

Mormon 5:8–24

17

Invitation to Gentiles, Jews, and Book of Mormon descendants to come to Christ, and a warning about what happened to Book of Mormon people who forgot the Lord.

Mormon 9:13–14

2

All will be “loosed from this eternal band of death” and will be judged by “the Holy One.”

Mormon 9:21

1

Whoso believes in Christ without doubting and asks shall receive. “This promise is unto all.”

Mormon 9:22–23,25

3

Christ sent his disciples to “preach the gospel to every creature” throughout the world. Whosoever believes will be saved and “unto him will I confirm all my words, even unto the ends of the earth.”

Ether 3:14

1

“In me shall all mankind have life, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name.”

Ether 4:13–19

7

Invitation from Lord to Gentiles, House of Israel, and all people to “come unto me.”

Moroni 7:28

1

Lord claims “all those who have faith in him.”

Moroni 7:29–32

4

So “the residue … may have faith in Christ,” angels minister to Lord’s “chosen vessels.”

Moroni 7:34

1

“Repent all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me.”

Moroni 8:17, 19, 22, 24

4

God is fair; all little children and all that are without law are saved.

Moroni 10:17

1

Spiritual gifts “come unto every man severally.”

Moroni 10:24,31,34

3

Moroni ends his record with a plea “unto all the ends of the earth.”

Total Count

273

*Continuation of previous entry, one line above.

Table 5. Book of Mormon verses where Lamanites are said or implied to be wicked or where negative characteristics are given. Negative labels or descriptions were counted (N) if the term could have been used by an outsider to view the Lamanites in a negative or prejudicial way (e.g., Alma 26:23–35), but this does not necessarily mean the label was used that way in the verse. Labels are given in summary column, but a label is only listed once even if used multiple times. A synonym may also be used. Except as noted, each row entry is a separate instance (54 total).

Reference

CV

N

Summary

1 Nephi 12:20–23†

4

*

Prophecy that, after Nephites are overpowered by Lamanites, the people “dwindle in unbelief” and become “dark,” “loathsome,” and “filthy,” “full of idleness and all manner of abominations.”

1 Nephi 13:11–12,14, 30–31,35†

6

*

God angry with Lehite descendants, who have “dwindle[d] in unbelief.” They are smitten by Gentiles, but not destroyed.

2 Nephi 5:1–9,14,19

11

1

Lehi’s and Sariah’s family splits as threats to Nephi’s life increase; Lamanites hate Nephites.

2 Nephi 5:21–22,24

3

9

Lamanites are sinful, cursed, hardhearted, loathsome, idle, mischievous, subtle, and sought beasts of prey.

2 Nephi 26:15

1

*

Lehite descendants will “dwindle in unbelief” and will be smitten by the Gentiles.

Jacob 1:13–14

2

1

Lamanites are people “that seek to destroy the people of Nephi.”

Jacob 2:35

1

1

Implication that Lamanites have done iniquities.

Jacob 3:5, 7, 9

3

6

Lamanites are cursed, filthy, and hate the Nephites, “because of the iniquity of their fathers.”

Jacob 7:24,26

2

5

Lamanites delighted in bloodshed, hated Nephites, and continually sought to destroy Nephites.

Enos 1:14,20

2

17

Lamanites were evil, wild, ferocious, blood-thirsty, idolatrous, filthy, nearly naked, primitive, and ate beasts of prey and raw meat. They hate and want to destroy Nephites (“in their wrath”).

Jarom 1:6

1

2

Lamanites “loved murder” and drank “blood of beasts.”

Mosiah 1:13–14

2

2

Lamanites are hateful and “weak.”

Mosiah 7:15,21–22

3

7

Lamanites hold a Nephite group in bondage. “Cunning” of Lamanite king led to this.

Mosiah 9:10–13

4

6

Lamanites wanted to bring Nephite settlers into bondage. Lamanites were cunning and crafty, “lazy,” “idolatrous,” and wanted to steal from Nephites.

Mosiah 10:12, 17–18

3

14

“Wild,” “ferocious,” “blood-thirsty,” “cunning,” and deceptive Lamanites attack Nephite settlers again. Lamanite children taught to hate, murder, rob, plunder, and destroy Nephites.

Mosiah 21:2–5

4

5

Lamanites “stirred up in anger against the Nephites” and increase subjugation of Nephites.

Mosiah 24:7

1

4

After some education, Lamanites became wealthier and became “a very cunning people.” They delighted “in all manner of wickedness and plunder, except it were among their own brethren.”

Alma 5:5

1

1

Alma’s group “brought into bondage by the hands of the Lamanites.”

Alma 9:14

1

1

Lamanites were cut off from the Lord “from the beginning of their transgressions in the land.”

Alma 17:14–15

2

14

Lamanites were “a wild and a hardened and a ferocious people” who loved riches. They were idolatrous and “very indolent” and delighted in murdering, robbing, and plundering Nephites.

Alma 17:26–39

14

One example given of Lamanites plundering against each other. A group of Lamanites try to kill Ammon.

Alma 18:1–7¶

7

2

Murders had occurred, and King Lamoni had killed servants who lost animals to plunderers.

Alma 19:14,27

2

2

Lamanite iniquities had been cause of much mourning among Nephites.

Alma 20:30

1

8

Ammon’s brethren ended up with hardened, stiffnecked Lamanites who rejected them.

Alma 21:3,11–13

4

8

“Lamanites … were sufficiently hardened, but were influenced to “strong” wickedness by ex-Nephites. “Few believed,” and missionaries contend “with many” and are “cast into prison.”

Alma 22:28

1

2

“The more idle part of the Lamanites lived in the wilderness, and dwelt in tents.”

Alma 23:3,‡ 7,13

3

8

Lamanites rebelled against God, and wickedness, murder, plunder, stealing, and adultery implied.

Alma 23:14

1

1

Lamanites’ hearts were hardened by former Nephites.

Alma 24:7,9–12,15,18

7

14‡

Converted Lamanites viewed earlier beliefs as “traditions of our wicked fathers,” were redeemed from “many murders” and sins, and covenanted to no longer kill others, steal, or be idle.

Alma 25:1

1

2

Lamanites, who had killed other Lamanites, are angry and vengeful.

Alma 26:3,9,24–25

4

9

Lamanites were in darkness, hateful, strangers to God, stiffnecked, blood-thirsty, iniquitous.

Alma 27:6,8

2

4‡

Converted Lamanites said they had committed “many murders and sins” against Nephites.

Alma 27:23

1

2

Previously, converted Lamanites had committed “many murders” and “awful wickedness”

Alma 43:6–7

2

3

Lamanites had a wicked and murderous disposition and hated the Nephites.

Alma 47:35

1

1

Servants of Amalickiah (presumably Lamanites) assisted his fraudulent takeover of Lamanites.

Alma 47:36

1

5

Implication that Lamanites are “hardened and impenitent” and “wild, wicked and ferocious.”

Helaman 4:22,24

2

2

Nephites had become wicked and weak, like the Lamanites.

Helaman 6:18,20

2

2*

Wicked Lamanites part of secret band that murdered and plundered.

Helaman 15:4,7,10

3

5

Lamanite “deeds have been evil continually.” The Lord hated them for that.

Helaman 16:15,22–23

3

*

Hearts harden: foolish, vain ideas; much disturbed; Satan’s influence—sins, rumors, contentions.

3 Nephi 1:29–30

2

1

Many Lamanite youth choose wickedness. Lamanites “began to decrease as to their faith.”

3 Nephi 2:11

1

*

“Contentions throughout all the land” noted.

3 Nephi 3:15,25

2

*

Lachoneus urges united Lamanites and Nephites to “repent of all your iniquities.” They do.

3 Nephi 6:14–18,20

6

*

“A few” Lamanites are righteous, but “great inequality “ and “awful wickedness” is found. Pride, power-seeking, riches-seeking, vanity were found. Satan was leading the people.

3 Nephi 9:1–13

13

*

The Lord mentions great wickedness that was found throughout the land.

3 Nephi 21:5

1

*

Lehite descendants will “dwindle in unbelief because of iniquity.”

3 Nephi 27:32

1

*

People in fourth generation from Christ “will sell [Christ] for silver and gold.”

4 Nephi 1:20, 24–40, 42–43, 45–47γ

23

9*

People who “rejected the gospel” become Lamanites. Others are Nephites. Pride, costly apparel, class distinctions, denying church, seeking gain, persecutions, unbelief, hard hearts, wickedness, and vanity found. They willfully rebelled and taught hatred of “children of God.”

Mormon 1:13–14, 18–19

4

*

Wickedness and unbelief prevails, including sorceries. Strong influence of “evil one” was found.

Mormon 2:8,11,26

3

1

Blood and carnage over “all the face of the land.” Lamentations occur. Lamanites are weak.

Mormon 4:11–12, 14, 21

4

2*

“Every heart was hardened.” “They delighted in the shedding of blood continually.” Greatest evil ever known among Israel. Lamanites offer Nephite women and children as human sacrifices.

Mormon 5:8–11, 15–18

8

*

Blood and carnage abounds; people have lost Spirit. Descendants will become more dark, filthy, and loathsome than was known in the Book of Mormon, because of unbelief and idolatry.

Mormon 8:8

1

*

After Nephite destruction, survivors fight among themselves—continual murder and bloodshed.

Ether 4:3

1

*

Lehites “have all dwindled in unbelief,” and they “have rejected the gospel of Christ.”

Moroni 9:7–9,20

4

3

Lamanites forced Nephites to eat human flesh, a “great abomination.” Lamanites wicked.

Subtotal, before Christ§

130

177

Subtotal, after Christ§

63

15

Total Count

193

192

†The descendants of Book of Mormon people are often just called “Lamanites” but the record makes clear that descendants of both Nephites and Lamanites would survive after the book ends (1 Nephi 13:30–31; 1 Nephi 15;13–14; 1 Nephi 22:7–8; 2 Nephi 3:3,23–24; 2 Nephi 9:53; 2 Nephi 10:18–19; 2 Nephi 26:15; 2 Nephi 28:2; 2 Nephi 30:4–5; Alma 45:14; Helaman 3:16). In addition, the formation of Lamanites after Christ appears is based on those who chose to leave the church, not on lineage (4 Nephi). Until the two nations completely reform, lineage seems to have little to do with whether a person was a Lamanite or Nephite. Presumably intermarriage between descendants former Nephites and Lamanites was common during the peaceful era after Christ’s visit. Mormon notes that he was “a pure descendant of Lehi” (3 Nephi 5:20), and Moroni notes that Mormon “was a descendant of Nephi” (Mormon 8:13). Moroni did not use “pure” in his statement. Perhaps Mormon and Moroni had Lamanite ancestry as well.

¶Continuation of a previous entry one line above.

‡Lamanites labeled themselves.

*All or additional descriptions were given to both Nephites and Lamanites (as or essentially as one people) and are not counted here.

γI include the wickedness described between 4 Nephi 1:20 and 4 Nephi 1:35 with both Nephites and Lamanites. The record is not clear if the break-off “Lamanites” (verse 20) or the other people are the perpetrators.

§Before Christ (appears to Lehites), 1 Nephi through 3 Nephi 7; after Christ, 3 Nephi 8 through Moroni.

Table 6. Book of Mormon accounts where Nephites were labeled or implied to be wicked or where consequences of Nephite wickedness were prophesied. Negative Nephite characteristics or labels given in these verses are counted (N) if the term was descriptive and could have been used by an outsider to view the Nephites in a negative or prejudicial way, but this does not necessarily mean the label was used that way in the verse. Labels counted are given in summary column, but is only listed once if used multiple times. A synonym may also be used. Except as noted, each entry is a separate instance (146 total). (N = number of negative labels.)

Reference

CV

N

Summary

1 Nephi 2:23–24

2

Prophecy that Nephites would not be protected if they rebel against the Lord.

1 Nephi 12:19–23†

5

1*

Nephites will become prideful and are overpowered by Lamanites. The survivors then “dwindle in unbelief” and become “dark,” “loathsome,” “filthy,” idle, and have “all manner of abominations”

1 Nephi 13:11–12,14, 30–31,35†

6

*

God angry with Lehite descendants who have “dwindle[d] in unbelief.” They are smitten by Gentiles, but not destroyed.

1 Nephi 15:4–5

2

2

Nephi is overcome because he beheld (in vision) the fall of his people through wickedness.

2 Nephi 5:25

1

Lamanites would scourge Nephites “even unto destruction” if Nephites do not remember the Lord.

2 Nephi 9:44–45, 47–48

4

7

Jacob says Nephites are sinful, need to shake off Satan’s chains, and have impure minds.

2 Nephi 10:2

1

1

Many Nephite descendants would perish “because of unbelief.”

2 Nephi 10:20

1

1

“Let us remember him, and lay aside our sins.”

2 Nephi 25:28

1

1

Nephites “are a stiffnecked people.”

2 Nephi 26:10

1

5

Nephite destroyed from pride, foolishness, selling for naught, and choosing the devil and darkness.

2 Nephi 26:15

1

*

Lehite descendants will “dwindle in unbelief” and will be smitten by the Gentiles.

Jacob 1:15–16

2

4

Under second king, Nephites are hard hearted, wicked, prideful, and desire wives and concubines.

Jacob 2:5–6, 9–10, 13–14, 16, 20–26, 31–35

19

31

Jacob admonishes the Nephites for wickedness including pride, sexual sins, persecutions, attitude of superiority, loss of trust in their families, and their poor example.

Jacob 3:3–11¶

9

13

Jacob chastises Nephites for their sexual sins and tells them to follow Lamanite example. Worry about “your own filthiness” do not revile Lamanites, “whom ye hate because of the darkness of their skins” or their filthiness. Grief caused to children by bad example. Get loose from Satan.

Jacob 7:3–4,9,18–19,23

6

8

A wicked man denied Christ, “lead away many hearts,” used flattery, and admitted being deceived.

Enos 1:22–23

2

3

Nephites were stiffnecked and “hard to understand.” “Exceeding harshness” was needed.

Jarom 1:3,13

2

6

Nephites have hard hearts, deaf ears, blind minds, stiff necks, contentions, and dissensions.

Omni 1:2

1

2

Omni said he was “a wicked man.”

Omni 1:5

1

1

“The more wicked part of the Nephites were destroyed.”

Words of Mormon 1:12, 15–17

4

8

False Christs, prophets, and teachers; contention; dissension; and stiffneckedness among Nephites took “much sharpness” to combat.

Mosiah 7:20,24–28

6

11

Nephite group was wicked: contentious, “shed blood among themselves,” and killed a prophet.

Mosiah 9:2

1

4

Contention caused by blood-thirsty Nephite ruler results in “shedding of much blood.”

Mosiah 9:3

1

1

Nephite settlers “were slow to remember the Lord our God.”

Mosiah 11:1–15,19–29

26

47

King Noah and his people are wicked: lazy, idolatrous, boastful, flattering, vain, deceptive, whoredoms, blind eyes, hard hearts, delight in blood, love riches, “lifted up in pride,” live riotously, vain, wine-bibber, and angry. Prophet Abinadi is rejected.

Mosiah 12:1–9

9

10

Abinadi again warns hard-hearted Nephite settlers to repent of evil. They are angry and bind him.

Mosiah 12:26, 29–31, 37

5

9

Abinadi tells leaders they “have perverted the ways of the Lord,” set their hearts on riches, committed whoredoms, caused people “to commit sin.,” and set at naught God’s commandments.

Mosiah 13:4, 6–8, 11, 25–26¶

7

6

Abinadi continues: leaders are angry, rejecting a prophet, and wicked. He states, “I perceive that ye have studied and taught iniquity the most part of your lives.”

Mosiah 17:2–3

2

2

Alma knew of the iniquity Abinadi had said. King Noah was angry at Alma and cast him out.

Mosiah 19:2–3

2

1

A great contention occurs among the people of King Noah.

Mosiah 19:17

1

1

Limhi knew that his father, King Noah, had committed iniquities.

Mosiah 20:21

1

1

“All this because we would not hearken … and turn from our iniquities?”

Mosiah 21:11

1

1

Nephites stirred up to anger against the Lamanites.

Mosiah 21:15,30

2

3

Lord “slow to hear [Nephite settler’s cries] because of their iniquities.”

Mosiah 23:9,12

2

6

People oppressed by king Noah and his priests. They brought their people “into iniquity.”

Mosiah 24:8–10

3

7

Ex-Nephite Amulon oppresses Alma and his small group of Nephites.

Mosiah 26:4–6,9,11

5

9

Sinful Nephites induce dissensions through deceptive, flattering words. Many commit many sins.

Mosiah 27:8–11,16

5

13

Sons of leaders wicked, rebel, seek to destroy church, idolatrous, flattering, and leading astray.

Mosiah 28:4

1

2

Mosiah’s sons “were the very vilest of sinners.”

Mosiah 29:18

1

5

King Mosiah encourages the Nephites to remember the wickedness of king Noah and his people.

Alma 1:6,9,12

3

8

Nehor is proud, wears costly apparel, angry and kills Gideon, and introduces priestcraft.

Alma 1:16–17

2

6

People doing priestcraft, being vain, preaching false doctrine, seeking gain and honor, pretending.

Alma 1:19–20

2

3

Nephites not in church persecuted people in the church.

Alma 1:22,24

2

6

Nephites in church proud, contend warmly with adversaries, harden hearts, leave church.

Alma 1:32

1

15

Nephites (not in church) were involved in sorceries, idolatry, idleness, babblings, envyings, strife, “wearing costly apparel,” pride, persecuting, lying, thieving, robbing, murder, whoredoms, and “all manner of wickedness.”

Alma 2:1–5,8

6

10

Wicked Amlici (of Nehor): cunning, seeks power, induces conflict, anger, aims to destroy church.

Alma 2:20

1

1

The murder of Gideon is mentioned again.

Alma 3:18

1

1

Amlicites “had come out in open rebellion against God.”

Alma 4:3

1

2

Nephites believed God’s punishments were “sent upon them because of their wickedness.”

Alma 4:6–13,15,19

10

34

Pride, iniquity, inequality, costly apparel, materialism, vanity, scornfulness, persecution of others, contention, envy, malice, poor examples, neglect of needy, and craftiness found in church.

Alma 5:7

1

3

Alma and others were in “deep sleep,” darkness, and encircled by the “chains of hell.”

Alma 5:18, 20, 22–23, 32, 37, 53, 54–57

11

23

Church wicked, “subjects to the devil,” filthy, murderers, vain, prideful, wear costly apparel, set hearts upon riches, led astray, trampled God, have superiority attitude, persecute, neglect needy.

Alma 6:3

1

2

Wickedness and pride among people in the church is noted.

Alma 6:7

1

1

The murder of Gideon is noted again.

Alma 7:3,6

2

6

Some Nephites unbelieving, prideful, vain, hearts set upon riches, idolatrous, and in awful state.

Alma 8:9, 11, 13

3

7

Ammonihah Nephites are led by Satan, hard-hearted, and unbelieving. They reject Alma.

Alma 8:14, 16–17, 24–25, 28–29

7

6

Alma returns after being cast out. He and Amulek told to warn the wicked people of Ammonihah to repent or be destroyed. They seek to destroy liberty.

Alma 9:1, 4–5, 8, 12, 15, 18–25, 30–32

17

20

Nephites in Ammonihah are wicked, hard-hearted, stiffnecked, perverse, and “are a lost and a fallen people.” They quickly forgot God. They contend, are angry, and reject message.

Alma 10:7,13–14,16–27

15

17

Nephites in Ammonihah are wicked, cunning, perverse, and angry. “Ye lawyers and hypocrites.”

Alma 11:20–21,23

3

6

For gain, cunning, wicked judges stirred up people “to riotings,” “disturbances,” and “wickedness.”

Alma 12:1,3–5

4

7

Zeezrom lied. Satan led him in the subtle plan to set people against Lord’s messengers.

Alma 14:2–4,6

4

6

Some in Ammonihah angry and reject Alma and Amulek. People’s blind minds came from lying.

Alma 14:10–11,16,18

4

4

Awful scene: executions of believers by hard-hearted people who were “after the order of Nehor.”

Alma 15:3,5

2

2

Zeezrom suffered because of his past wickedness.

Alma 15:15

1

4

People left in Ammonihah remained hard-hearted, stiffnecked, of Nehor, and unbelieving.”

Alma 16:11

1

2

People killed in Ammonihah “were of the profession of Nehor.”

Alma 21:3–5,8,10

5

8

Former Nephites, “harder” than Lamanites, influenced Lamanites into strong wickedness. Ex-Nephites were “after the order of the Nehors.” They are angry and reject preaching.

Alma 23:14

1

1

Former Nephites hardened their hearts and those of Lamanites near them.

Alma 24:1

1

1

Former Nephites stirred up unconverted Lamanites and themselves to anger against converts.

Alma 24:28–30

3

5

Most who killed converts were ex-Nephites and of Nehor; ex-Nephites were hardened and sinful.

Alma 26:17–18

2

5

Mosiah’s sons were in an “awful, sinful, and polluted state.” Angry, they sought to destroy church.

Alma 27:2,12

2

4

Ex-Nephites are “exceedingly angry,” led by Satan, and stir up others against converted Lamanites.

Alma 30:12, 18, 22, 29, 42, 46–47, 53, 58, 60

10

19

Korihor’s teachings influenced many to do wicked things, including whoredoms. He was Anti-Christ, hard-hearted, perverted ways of the Lord, and led by devil. He lied and flattered.

Alma 30:59

1

1

Zoramites “had separated themselves from the Nephites.”

Alma 31:1–2, 8–11, 24–28, 30–31, 33

14

30

Zoramites separate, did not live commandments, “a wicked and a perverse people,” idolatry, hearts set on riches, boasting, prideful, vain, costly apparel, unbelief (infidelity), and superiority attitude.

Alma 34:2

1

1

Christ was taught to Zoramites before their dissension.

Alma 35:3,8

2

4

Popular Zoramites angry at and would not hearken to the word. Leader is wicked. People angry.

Alma 35:15

1

5

Alma sad over iniquity, wars, bloodshed, and contentions. People hard hearted and take offense.

Alma 36:6, 9, 12–14

5

9

Alma sought to destroy church. He was tormented for his sins. He led people astray.

Alma 37:10

1

2

Many stiffnecked Nephites “are now hardening their hearts in sin and iniquities.”

Alma 38:7

1

1

Alma told to stop “the work of destruction.”

Alma 39:11

1

2

“How great iniquity ye brought … for when they saw your conduct they would not believe.”

Alma 43:6,13

2

3

Amalekites (Nephite dissenters) had a wicked and murderous disposition.

Alma 45:9–14

6

8

Nephites will “dwindle in unbelief,” become very wicked, including lasciviousness and “works of darkness,” and will be destroyed.

Alma 45:21:23–24

3

9

Dissensions, disturbances, rejected preaching, pride, and materialism found among Nephites.

Alma 46:1–11,27–28

13

22

Amalickiah led away many people. Wickedness included anger, power-seeking, dissenting, cunning, flattering, seeking to destroy church and liberty, and quick to forget God and do iniquity.

Alma 47: 4,35–36

3

13

Ex-Nephite Amalickiah was subtle and fraudulent in his takeover of the Lamanite government. Dissenters hardened, impenitent, wild, wicked, ferocious, indolent, lascivious, and forgot God.

Alma 48:7

1

1

Former Nephite Amalickiah obtained power by fraud and deceit.

Alma 48:24

1

3

Nephites would defend themselves against cruel dissenters who wanted to destroy them.

Alma 49:3

1

1

Ammonihah previously destroyed “because of the iniquity of the people.”

Alma 49:25–27

3

6

Ex-Nephite Amalickiah angry, curses God, and swears to drink Moroni’s blood; power grab failed.

Alma 50:21–22

2

10

Contentions, murder, plundering, idolatry, whoredoms, and abominations brought wars.

Alma 50:25–26,35

3

6

A warm contention: stubborn people were inspired by Morianton, who was wicked and flattering.

Alma 51:2–4, 7–9, 12, 15–22

15

22

Power-seeking, angry, prideful, dissenting, and stubborn people “who professed nobility” induce contention. Amalickiah had sworn to drink Moroni’s blood.

Alma 53:8–9

2

5

“Some intrigue” among Nephites caused dissensions. This iniquity put Nephites in danger.

Alma 59:11–12

2

2

Nephite military leaders doubt “because of the wickedness of the people.”

Alma 60:15–17,32

4

8

Wicked “king-men” dissenters wanted power and caused contention, bloodshed, and suffering.

Alma 61:3–5,11,17–18

6

6

Wicked Nephite dissenters have usurped control of capital city. They used “great flattery.”

Alma 62:2,6¶

2

3

Moroni mourned because of iniquity and rebellion against God by Nephite dissenters.

Alma 62:40–41,45

3

6

Murder, contentions, dissensions, “and all manner of iniquity” occurred. Many hardened by war.

Alma 63:14

1

1

Nephite dissenters again go to the Lamanites.

Helaman 1:7–9

3

5

Those for another governor (he rebelled and sought to destroy liberty) irate and murder current one.

Helaman 1:15

1

1

Coriantumr “was a dissenter from among the Nephites.”

Helaman 1:18

1

2

Contention and difficulty in Nephite government left Nephites vulnerable to attack.

Helaman 3:1,3#

2

4

Contention, pride, and dissensions occurred among the Nephites.

Helaman 3:14,16‡

2

12

Nephites were “wicked, and wild, and ferocious” in Mormon’s day and were guilty of contentions, dissensions, murder, robbing, plundering, abominations, and whoredoms earlier.

Helaman 3:17,19,22#

3

5

Great contentions, disturbances, and dissensions occurred among the Nephites.

Helaman 3:33–34,36

3

8

Some Nephites prideful even to persecuting others, “a great evil.” Riches led to great pride.

Helaman 4:1–4,8

5

7

“Many dissensions in the church,” a contention caused “much bloodshed,” and dissenters start war.

Helaman 4:11–14

4

22

Wickedness includes pride, materialism, oppressing poor, persecuting, mocking, denying, murdering, plundering, lying, stealing, adultery, contentions, desertion, and boasting.

Helaman 4:21–26

6

13

Nephites set God at naught, disbelieve, and are wicked, weak, stiffnecked, and corrupt.

Helaman 5:2–4

3

5

Nephite majority is wicked. They are “ripening for destruction” and stiffnecked. Laws are corrupt.

Helaman 5:17,27,35

3

3

Nephi and Lehi preach to Nephite dissenters, who now receive the gospel message.

Helaman 6:1–2,15–19,21–24, 31–35, 38–40

19

51*

Nephites are wicked, rejected Lord, and led by Satan: dwindled in unbelief, hardened, impenitent, hearts set on riches, murder, robbing, plundering, stealing, whoredoms, idols, superiority attitudes, neglect of poor, and persecutions. Nephites are in awful state and are ripening for destruction.

Helaman 7:1–6, 9, 11–29

26

38

Nephites in “awful wickedness”: unjust government, adultery, stealing, murder, devil’s hold on their hearts, hard-hearted, forgot God, after gain, praise of men, after wealth, hearts set on riches, plundering, lying, vain, and pride. “Except ye repent ye shall perish.”

Helaman 8:1, 3–4, 7–8, 12–13, 24–27¶

11

21

Nephites have corrupt laws; stir up anger and contention; and deny, reject, and rebel. They are ripening for destruction because of murder, fornication, wickedness, and secret works of darkness.

Helaman 9:21–24¶

4

10

People are fools, uncircumcised of heart, blind, stiffnecked, wicked, angry; they want to kill Nephi.

Helaman 10:3, 11–18

9

15

Nephites do “secret works of darkness,” murder, plunder, and “all manner of iniquities.” They are hard-hearted, and “they would not hearken” to warnings to repent. Armed contention begins.

Helaman 11:1

1

1

“The contentions did increase.”

Helaman 11:22–23

2

3

Contentions and much strife over “points of doctrine.” Nephi, Lehi, and others settle the strife.

Helaman 11:24–25

2

3

Nephite dissenters again stir up trouble.

Helaman 11:34, 36–37

3

8

“Great evil,” pride, forgetting God occurring. “They were ripening again for destruction.”

Helaman 12:1–8

8

23

People are foolish, devilish, vain, evil, slow to do good, and forget God. They have false, hard, and unsteady hearts; have set at naught God’s counsel; and have trampled God underfoot.

Helaman 13:1

1

2

Nephites remain “in great wickedness.”

Helaman 13:2–39

38

62

Samuel, rejected, chastises hard-hearted Nephites for malice, persecutions, murders, hearts set on riches, pride, boasting, envying, strifes, murders, other iniquities, and choosing darkness. He calls them wicked, perverse, hardened, stiffnecked, “led by foolish and blind guides,” and worse than fathers who killed prophets. They are angry with prophets, reject them, and seek to destroy them, but they embrace false prophets. Cursing to come upon Nephites, unless they repent.

Helaman 14:9–11,13,19¶

5

5

Sinful Nephites angry with Samuel and have rejected him. “The judgments of God … await you because of your iniquities, and also that ye might know the conditions of repentance.”

Helaman 15:1–3,14,17¶

5

2

Unless the Nephites repent of their iniquities, the Lord will “utterly destroy them … because of their unbelief notwithstanding the mighty works which I have done among them.”

Helaman 16:2,6–7

3

8

People do not believe Samuel’s words, are angry with him, and try to kill him.

Helaman 16:10–12, 15, 22–23

6

4*

People “more hardened in iniquity” and still prideful, after Samuel preaches. They had foolish, vain ideas and “were much disturbed.” Rumors and contentions spread. Satan’s influence strong.

3 Nephi 1:9–10

2

1

“Unbelievers” plan to kill other Nephites. Nephi saddened by “this wickedness of his people”

3 Nephi 1:18

1

2

“They began to fear because of their iniquity and their unbelief.”

3 Nephi 1:27–29

3

5

Robbers commit “many murders.” Many Nephites join the band. Zoramites use lying and flattery.

3 Nephi 2:3,10–11, 18–19

5

10*

Great wickedness, contentions, and dissensions occur. People’s hearts led away by Satan. “The sword of destruction did hang over them.”

3 Nephi 3:10–11

2

2

Nephite dissenters join robber band.

3 Nephi 3:15, 25

2

*

Lachoneus urges united Lamanites and Nephites to “repent of all your iniquities.” They do.

3 Nephi 5:3

1

3

Nephites forsake sins, abominations, and whoredoms.

3 Nephi 6:10,12–18, 20

9

7*

Inequality, disputings, pride, boasting, persecution, class distinctions, power-seeking, riches-seeking, vanity, and “all manner of iniquity” is found. People, led by Satan, “did wilfully rebel.”

3 Nephi 6:21,23¶

2

4

Primarily judges, high priests, and lawyers are angry, prophets put to death secretly.

3 Nephi 6:29–30¶

2

6

People covenant to destroy the people of the Lord and the government.

3 Nephi 7:1–2, 5–11, 15–16, 18, 20

13

23

Government destroyed. People turned from righteousness, like a dog to its vomit. People yield to Satan. Great contentions occur, and people are hard hearted, have blind minds, and are angry.

3 Nephi 8:24–25

2

4

People lament that they had not repented and had rejected and killed the prophets.µ

3 Nephi 9:1–13

13

*

The Lord mentions great wickedness that was found throughout the land.

3 Nephi 21:5

1

*

Lehite descendants will “dwindle in unbelief because of iniquity.”

3 Nephi 27:32

1

*

People in fourth generation from Christ “will sell [Christ] for silver and gold.”

4 Nephi 1:20,24–40

18

*

Pride, class distinctions, seeking gain, denying church, wearing costly apparel, persecutions, unbelief, and hard hearts found. Dissenters become Lamanites.

4 Nephi 1:43,45–47

4

3*

Wealth-loving Nephites became prideful, vain and “exceedingly wicked” like the Lamanites.

Mormon 1:13–14, 16–19

6

4*

People willfully rebel against God, and wickedness, unbelief, hard hearts, and sorceries are found.

Mormon 2:8,10–15,18–19,26–27

11

21

Wickedness continues. People lament and mourn but “not unto repentance.” Nephites “become weak,” rebel against God, and curse God. Thieves, robbers, murderers, and witchcraft are present.

Mormon 3:2–3

2

1

Mormon preaches repentance, but Nephites “harden their hearts against the Lord their God.”

Mormon 3:7–15

9

8

Nephites repel two Lamanite attacks. Nephites then boast and want revenge against Lamanites. Mormon refuses to lead them “because of their wickedness and abomination.” Mormon is without faith because of their hard hearts. The Lord will destroy Nephites.

Mormon 4:4, 8, 10–12

5

3*

People persisted in wickedness. They boasted. “Every heart was hardened.” “They delighted in the shedding of blood continually.” Greatest wickedness ever known among Lehites or Israel.

Mormon 5:1–2, 8–11, 15–18

10

1*

“Blood and carnage” abound; people have lost Spirit and do not repent. Survivors will become more dark, filthy, and loathsome than previously known, because of unbelief and idolatry.

Mormon 6:16–22

7

2

Mormon laments the wickedness that destroyed the Nephites. They rejected Jesus.

Mormon 8:8

1

*

After Nephite destruction, survivors fight among themselves—continual murder and bloodshed.

Ether 4:3

1

*

Nephites and other Lehites have “all dwindled in unbelief” and “rejected the gospel of Christ.”

Moroni 8:27–29

3

5

Pride brought down the Nephites; they are rejecting, denying, and rebelling. Spirit ceased.

Moroni 9:3–6,9–15,18–24

18

34

Nephite wickedness was extreme and included rape, torture, murder, and cannibalism. They also were stirred up to anger, blood-thirsty, vengeful, hard-hearted, loveless, merciless, neglectful of needy, depraved, perverted, brutal, without order, past feeling, uncivilized, and without principle.

Subtotal, before Christ§

603

1074

Subtotal, after Christ§

112

86

Total

715

1160

¶Continuation of the previous entry (one line above)

†The descendants of Book of Mormon people are often just called “Lamanites” but the record makes clear that descendants of both Nephites and Lamanites would survive after the book ends (1 Nephi 13:30–31; 1 Nephi 15;13–14; 1 Nephi 22:7–8; 2 Nephi 3:3,23–24; 2 Nephi 9:53; 2 Nephi 10:18–19; 2 Nephi 26:15; 2 Nephi 28:2; 2 Nephi 30:4–5; Alma 45:14; Helaman 3:16). In addition, the formation of Lamanites after Christ appears is based on those who chose to leave the church, not on lineage (4 Nephi). Until the two nations completely reform, lineage seems to have little to do with whether a person was a Lamanite or Nephite. Presumably intermarriage between descendants former Nephites and Lamanites was common during the peaceful era after Christ’s visit. Mormon notes that he was “a pure descendant of Lehi” (3 Nephi 5:20), and Moroni notes that Mormon “was a descendant of Nephi” (Mormon 8:13). Moroni did not use “pure” in his statement. Perhaps Mormon and Moroni had Lamanite ancestry as well.

*All or additional descriptions were given to both Nephites and Lamanites (as or essentially as one people) and are not counted here.

‡I assume the list of wicked and righteous deeds in Helaman 3:14 refers to the Nephites because the first “their” follows “Nephites.” The list also mentions dissensions, and elsewhere dissensions are not mentioned as occurring among the Lamanites.

γI include the wickedness described between 4 Nephi 1:20 and 4 Nephi 1:35 with both Nephites and Lamanites. The record is not clear if the break-off “Lamanites” (verse 20) or the other people are the perpetrators.

µPresumably they are Nephites because Zarahemla is mentioned.

§Before Christ (appears to Lehites), 1 Nephi through 3 Nephi 7; after Christ, 3 Nephi 8 through Moroni.

#These two entries describe wickedness during the same time period.

Table 7. Negative words used in the Book of Mormon to describe Nephites and Lamanites or words used to describe their evil acts. Labels are included for societies and influential people within a society. Person-to-person interactions were generally excluded. If a verse contains more than one mention or multiple verses are listed, the number of terms is indicated in parentheses. War, cursing, and conspiracies (secret combinations) are generally not included here, however some evil surrounding war and conspiracies is included. (N = the number of times a term was used.)

Characteristic§

Lamanites¶

Nephites¶

Nephites and Lamanites‡

N

Reference

N

Reference

N

Reference

anger

3

Enos 1:14; Mosiah 21:2; Alma 25:1

45

Mosiah 11:26–27(2); Mosiah 12:9; Mosiah 13:4,8(2); Mosiah 17:3; Mosiah 21:11; Mosiah 24:9; Alma 1:9; Alma 2:8; Alma 9:31–32(2); Alma 10:24; Alma 14:2–3(2); Alma 21:10; Alma 24:1; Alma 26:18; Alma 27:2,12(3); Alma 35:3,8(2); Alma 46:2–4(3); Alma 49:26–27(2); Alma 51:4; Helaman 1:7,9(2); Helaman 8:1,4,7(3); Helaman 9:24; Helaman 13:26; Helaman 14:10; Helaman 16:2; 3 Nephi 6:21(3); 3 Nephi 7:18,20(2); Moroni 9:4–5(2)

awful state

4

Alma 7:3; Alma 14:10; Alma 26:17; Helaman 6:40

babblings

1

Alma 1:32

blind …

6

Jarom 1:3; Mosiah 11:29; Alma 14:6; Helaman 9:21; Helaman 13:29; 3 Nephi 7:16

bloodshed

7

Mosiah 7:25; Mosiah 9:2; Alma 35:15; Alma 60:16(2); Helaman 4:1; Helaman 10:18

1

Mormon 8:8

blood-thirsty

7

Jacob 7:24(2); Enos 1:20; Jarom 1:6; Mosiah 10:12; Alma 26:24; Alma 43:6

6

Mosiah 9:2; Mosiah 11:19(2); Alma 43:6; Moroni 9:5,23(2)

1

Mormon 4:11

boasting

8

Mosiah 11:19(2); Alma 31:25; Helaman 4:13; Helaman 13:22; 3 Nephi 6:10; Mormon 3:9; Mormon 4:8

brutal

2

Alma 48:24; Moroni 9:19

cannibalism

1

Moroni 9:8

3

Alma 49:27; Alma 51:9; Moroni 9:10

carnal

1

Mosiah 26:4

contention

1

Alma 21:11

57

Jarom 1:13; Words of Mormon 1:12,16(2); Mosiah 7:25; Mosiah 9:2; Mosiah 19:3; Alma 1:9,22,32(4); Alma 2:1,5(3); Alma 4:9,19(3); Alma 9:1; Alma 21:5; Alma 35:15; Alma 50:21,25–26(5); Alma 51:2,4,7,9,12,16,22(7); Alma 60:16(2); Alma 61:3,11(2); Alma 62:40; Helaman 1:8,18(3); Helaman 3:3,14,17,19,22(5); Helaman 4:1,12(2); Helaman 8:7; Helaman 10:18(2); Helaman 11:1,22–23(4); Helaman 13:22; 3 Nephi 2:18; 3 Nephi 6:10; 3 Nephi 7:7

1

3 Nephi 2:11

corruption

10

Helaman 4:22; Helaman 5:2; Helaman 6:39; Helaman 7:4–5(5); Helaman 8:3; 3 Nephi 6:29

costly apparel (wearing)

10

Jacob 2:13; Alma 1:6,32(2); Alma 4:6; Alma 5:53; Alma 31:28(5);

3

4 Nephi 1:24(3)

cunning

10

2 Nephi 5:24; Mosiah 7:21(2); Mosiah 9:10(2); Mosiah 10:18(2); Mosiah 24:7(2); Alma 47:35

13

Alma 2:1–2(2); Alma 4:19; Alma 10:13(5); Alma 11:21; Alma 12:3_4(2): Alma 46:10; Alma 47:35

curse God

2

Alma 49:27; Mormon 2:14

darkness (choose)

2

Alma 26:3(2)

6

2 Nephi 26:10; Alma 5:7; Alma 45:12; Helaman 8:4; Helaman 10:3; Helaman 13:29

2

1 Nephi 12:23; Mormon 5:15

deaf ears

1

Jarom 1:3

denying

7

Jacob 7:9,19(2); Helaman 4:12; Helaman 8:13(3); Moroni 8:28

1

4 Nephi 1:26

depravity

1

Moroni 9:18

destroyed government

3

3 Nephi 7:1,2,6(3)

destroy (seek to)

8

Jacob 1:14; Jacob 7:24; Enos 1:14,20(4); Mosiah 10:17–18(2)

24

Mosiah 27:9–10,16(4); Alma 2:4; Alma 8:17; Alma 26:18; Alma 36:6,9(2); Alma 48:24; Alma 38:7; Alma 46:10(2); Helaman 1:8; Helaman 13:26(4); 3 Nephi 6:29,30(5); 3 Nephi 7:11

dissension

54

Jarom 1:13; Words of Mormon 1:16; Mosiah 26:5; Mosiah 27:9; Alma 30:59; Alma 31:2,8(2); Alma 34:2; Alma 43:13; Alma 45:21,23(2); Alma 46:6–7,11,27–28(6); Alma 47:35–36(3); Alma 48:24; Alma 50:22; Alma 51:15–16,19–20(4); Alma 53:8–9(2); Alma 60:32; Alma 61:17; Alma 62:6,40(2); Alma 63:14; Helaman 1:15; Helaman 3:1,3,14,17(4); Helaman 4:1–4,8,12(6); Helaman 5:17,27,35(3); Helaman 11:24–25(3); 3 Nephi 1:28; 3 Nephi 2:18; 3 Nephi 3:10–11(2)

1

4 Nephi 1:20

disturbed

1

Helaman 16:22

envying

3

Alma 1:32; Alma 4:9; Helaman 13:22

example (poor)

5

Jacob 2:35; Jacob 3:10; Alma 4:10–11(2); Alma 39:11

fallen

3

1 Nephi 15:5; Alma 9:30,32(2)

false hearts

1

Helaman 12:1

false Christs, prophets, and preachers

12

Words of Mormon 1:15–16(3); Alma 1:16; Alma 30:12; Helaman 13:27–28(7)

1

4 Nephi 1:34

ferocious

4

Enos 1:20; Mosiah 10:12; Alma 17:14; Alma 47:36

2

Alma 47:36; Helaman 3:16

filthiness

4

Jacob 3:5,9 (3); Enos 1:20

6

Jacob 3:3,9,10(4); Alma 5:22(2)

2

1 Nephi 12:23; Mormon 5:15

flattery

19

Jacob 7:4(2); Mosiah 11:7(2); Mosiah 26:6; Mosiah 27:8; Alma 30:47; Alma 46:5,7,10(3); Alma 50:35; Alma 61:4; Helaman 13:27–28(6); 3 Nephi 1:29

foolish

4

2 Nephi 26:10; Helaman 9:21; Helaman 12:4; Helaman 13:29

1

Helaman 16:22

forget God

4

Alma 47:36; Helaman 7:20; Helaman 11:36; Helaman 12:2

get gain

4

Alma 1:16; Alma 11:20; Helaman 7:5,21(2)

1

4 Nephi 1:26

hardened, hard-hearted

9

2 Nephi 5:21(2); Alma 17:14; Alma 20:30; Alma 21:3,12(3); Alma 23:14; Alma 47:36

43

Jacob 1:15; Enos 1:22; Jarom 1:3; Mosiah 11:29(2); Mosiah 12:1; Alma 1:24; Alma 8:11; Alma 9:5,30–31(3); Alma 14:11; Alma 15:15; Alma 21:3; Alma 23:14; Alma 24:30; Alma 30:29,42,46(4); Alma 35:15; Alma 37:10; Alma 47:36; Alma 62:41; Helaman 6:2,35(2); Helaman 7:18; Helaman 9:21; Helaman 10:13,15(2); Helaman 12:2; Helaman 13:8,12,29(3); 3 Nephi 7:16; Mormon 1:17(2); Mormon 3:3; Mormon 3:12; Moroni 9:4,6,10,23(4)

4

Helaman 16:15; 4 Nephi 1:31,34(2); Mormon 4:11

harshness needed

2

Enos 1:23; Words of Mormon 1:17

hate

12

2 Nephi 5:14; Jacob 3:7; Jacob 7:24,26(2); Enos 1:20; Mosiah 1:14; Mosiah 10:17 (2); Alma 26:9; Alma 43:7; 4 Nephi 1:39(2)

1

Jacob 3:5

human sacrifice

2

Mormon 4:14,21(2)

hypocrites

1

Alma 10:17

idleness

3

2 Nephi 5:24; Alma 22:28; Alma 24:18*

1

Alma 1:32

1

1 Nephi 12:23

idolatry

3

Enos 1:20; Mosiah 9:12; Alma 17:15

8

Mosiah 11:6–7(2); Mosiah 27:8; Alma 1:32; Alma 7:6 Alma 31:1; Alma 50:21; Helaman 6:31

1

Mormon 5:15

impenitent

1

Alma 47:36

2

Alma 47:36; Helaman 6:2

impure minds

1

2 Nephi 9:47

inequality, attitudes of superiority

13

Jacob 2:13; Jacob 3:9(2); Alma 4:12,15(3); Alma 5:54; Alma 31:28; Alma 51:17–18,21(3); Helaman 6:17; 3 Nephi 6:12

3

3 Nephi 6:14; 4 Nephi 1:26,29(2)

intrigue

2

Alma 53:8–9(2)

lawyers

3

Alma 10:14,17,27(3)

lazy, indolent

3

Mosiah 9:12, Alma 17:14–15(2)

2

Mosiah 11:6, Alma 47:36

led about by Satan

24

2 Nephi 9:45; 2 Nephi 26:10; Jacob 3:11(2); Jacob 7:18; Mosiah 27:9; Alma 5:7,20(3); Alma 8:9; Alma 11:23; Alma 12:5; Alma 27:12; Alma 30:42,53(3); Helaman 6:21,31(2); Helaman 7:15–16(2); 3 Nephi 2:3(2); 3 Nephi 7:5; Moroni 9:3

16

Helaman 16:22–23(4); 3 Nephi 6:15–17(5); 3 Nephi 27:32; Mormon 5:16,18(5); Mormon 1:19

led or leading astray

7

Jacob 7:3(2); Mosiah 27:9–10(2); Alma 5:37; Alma 30:18; Alma 36:14

loathsome

1

2 Nephi 5:22

2

1 Nephi 12:23; Mormon 5:15

lost

2

Alma 9:30,32(2)

loveless

1

Moroni 9:5

lying, deception

2

Mosiah 10:18(2)

17

Mosiah 11:7,11(2); Mosiah 26:6; Alma 1:17,32(2); Alma 12:1,3–4(4); Alma 14:6; Alma 30:42,47(2); Alma 47:35; Alma 48:7; Helaman 4:12; Helaman 7:21; 3 Nephi 1:29

malice, evil nature

1

Enos 1:20

4

Alma 4:9; Helaman 12:4; Helaman 13:22; Moroni 9:19

materialism

3

Alma 17:14(3)

23

Mosiah 11:14; Mosiah 12:29; Alma 4:6,8(2); Alma 5:53; Alma 7:6; Alma 31:24,28(2); Alma 45:24; Helaman 3:36(2); Helaman 4:12; Helaman 6:17; Helaman 7:21,26(3); Helaman 12:2; Helaman 13:20–22(4); 3 Nephi 6:10; 4 Nephi 1:43

1

3 Nephi 6:15

merciless

1

Moroni 9:18

mischief (full of)

1

2 Nephi 5:24

mocking the sacred

1

Helaman 4:12

murder

13

Mosiah 10:17; Alma 17:14(2); Alma 18:2; Alma 23:3µ*; Alma 24:9–11,18 (5)*; Alma 27:6*,8*,23(3)

33

Mosiah 7:26,28(2); Mosiah 9:2; Alma 1:9,32(2); Alma 2:20; Alma 5:23; Alma 6:7; Alma 50:21; Alma 62:40; Helaman 1:9; Helaman 3:14; Helaman 4:12; Helaman 6:15,17,19,21,23,38(7); Helaman 7:5,21(2); Helaman 8:26–27(2); Helaman 10:3; Helaman 13:22; 3 Nephi 1:27(2); 3 Nephi 7:1,6(2); 3 Nephi 8:25; Mormon 2:10; Moroni 9:10

2

Helaman 6:18; Mormon 8:8

neglect of others

15

Alma 4:12(5); Alma 5:55(3); Helaman 4:12(3); Helaman 6:39(3); Moroni 9:19

Nehor (order of)

10

Alma 2:1; Alma 14:16,18(2); Alma 15:15; Alma 16:11(2); Alma 21:4(2); Alma 24:28–29(2)

offended

1

Alma 35:15

order (without)

1

Moroni 9:18

past feeling, lost Spirit

3

Moroni 8:28; Moroni 9:4,20(2)

2

Mormon 5:16(2)

persecution

21

Jacob 2:13,20(3); Mosiah 24:8(2); Alma 1:19–20,32(4); Alma 4:8,9,15(3); Alma 5:54; Helaman 3:34(2); Helaman 4:12; Helaman 6:39(3); Helaman 13:22; 3 Nephi 6:10

3

4 Nephi 1:29–30,34(3)

perversion

13

Mosiah 12:26(2); Alma 9:8; Alma 10:17–18,25(3); Alma 30:22,60(2); Alma 31:1,11,24(3); Helaman 13:29; Moroni 9:19

plundering, robbing

11

Mosiah 9:12(2); Mosiah 10:17(2); Mosiah 24:7; Alma 17:14 (3); Alma 18:7; Alma 23:3µ*; Helaman 6:20

12

Alma 1:32; Alma 50:21; Helaman 3:14(2); Helaman 4:12; Helaman 6:17,21,23(4); Helaman 7:21; Helaman 10:3; Mormon 2:10

1

Helaman 6:18

polluted

1

Alma 26:17

power-hungry

8

Alma 2:2; Alma 46:4(2); Alma 49:26(2); Alma 51:8(2); Alma 60:16

1

3 Nephi 6:15

praise of men

3

Alma 1:16; Helaman 7:5,21(2)

pride

44

1 Nephi 12:19; 2 Nephi 26:10; Jacob 1:16; Jacob 2:13,16,20(5); Mosiah 11:5,19(2); Alma 1:6,22,32(3); Alma 4:6,8,9,12,19(7); Alma 6:3; Alma 7:6; Alma 31:25,27(2); Alma 45:24(3); Alma 51:17–18,21(3); Helaman 3:1,33–34,36(4); Helaman 4:12; Helaman 7:26; Helaman 11:37; Helaman 13:22(2); Helaman 16:10; 3 Nephi 6:10,13(2); 4 Nephi 1:43; Moroni 8:27

1

4 Nephi 1:24

priestcraft

4

Alma 1:12,16(4)

principle (without)

1

Moroni 9:20

quick to do iniquity, slow to do good

6

Alma 46:8; Helaman 12:4–5(5)

quick to forget God, slow to remember God

9

Mosiah 9:3; Alma 9:8; Alma 46:8(2); Helaman 12:4–5(5)

rape

1

Moroni 9:9

rebelled against God

3

Alma 23:7,13(2); 4 Nephi 1:38

8

Mosiah 27:11; Alma 3:18; Alma 36:13; Alma 62:2; Helaman 8:25; Mormon 1:16; Mormon 2:15; Moroni 8:28

1

3 Nephi 6:18

rejected the gospel or prophets

8

Alma 20:30(6); Alma 21:12–13(2)

57

Mosiah 11:26–28(5); Mosiah 12:9; Mosiah 13:4; Alma 1: 24(2); Alma 8:13,24(6); Alma 9:4,32(2); Alma 14:3–4(2); Alma 21:10(2); Alma 30:29; Alma 35:3; Alma 45:23–24(2); Helaman 6:2(2); Helaman 7:3; Helaman 8:24–25(2); Helaman 9:24; Helaman 10:13,15,18(5); Helaman 13:2,7,24,26(8); Helaman 14:10(2); Helaman 16:2,6–7(7); 3 Nephi 6:23; 3 Nephi 8:25; Mormon 6:17; Moroni 8:29

5

4 Nephi 1:30–33(4); Ether 4:3

rioting, disturbances

4

Alma 11:20(2); Alma 45:21; Helaman 3:17

riotous living

2

Mosiah 11:14(2)

ripening for destruction

4

Helaman 5:2; Helaman 6:40; Helaman 8:26; Helaman 11:37

scornful

1

Alma 4:8

sell oneself for naught

1

2 Nephi 26:10

3

3 Nephi 27:32(3)

set at naught God’s commandments

10

Mosiah 12:37(2); Mosiah 13:25; Alma 31:9–10(2); Alma 36:13; Helaman 4:21; Helaman 12:6(3)

sorcery

3

Alma 1:32; Mormon 2:10(2)

3

Mormon 1:19(3)

stealing, thieving

2

Alma 23:3µ*; Alma 24:18*

7

Alma 1:32; Helaman 4:12; Helaman 6:21,23(2); Helaman 7:5,21(2); Mormon 2:10

stiffnecked

2

Alma 20:30; Alma 26:24

12

2 Nephi 25:28; Enos 1:22; Jarom 1:3; Words of Mormon 1:17; Alma 9:5,31(2); Alma 15:15; Alma 37:10; Helaman 4:21; Helaman 5:3; Helaman 9:21; Helaman 13:29

stubborn

2

Alma 50:35; Alma 51:21

subjugation, bondage

10

Mosiah 7:15,22(5); Mosiah 21:2–5(4); Alma 5:5

10

Mosiah 11:3–4,6,13(4); Mosiah 23:12(2); Mosiah 24:8–10(4)

torture

1

Moroni 9:10

trample God

3

Alma 5:18; Helaman 6:31; Helaman 12:2

trust broken

3

Jacob 2:35(2), Jacob 3:10

unbelief

3

Jacob 3:7; Alma 26:9; 4 Nephi 1:38

14

2 Nephi 10:2; Alma 7:6; Alma 8:11; Alma 15:15; Alma 21:8; Alma 31:30; Alma 45:10,12(2); Alma 50:22; Helaman 4:23,25(2); Helaman 6:34; Helaman 15:17; 3 Nephi 1:18

8

1 Nephi 12:22–23(2); 1 Nephi 13:35; 2 Nephi 26:15; 3 Nephi 21:5; Mormon 1:14; Mormon 5:15; Ether 4:3

uncivilized, primitive†

8

2 Nephi 5:24; Enos 1:20(5); Jarom 1:6; Alma 22:28

1

Moroni 9:11

unsteady

1

Helaman 12:1

vanity

1

4 Nephi 1:43

11

Mosiah 11:7,11(2); Alma 1:16; Alma 4:8; Alma 5:37,53(2); Alma 7:6; Alma 31:27; Helaman 7:21; Helaman 12:4; 4 Nephi 1:43

2

Helaman 16:22; 3 Nephi 6:15

vengeful

1

Alma 25:1

4

Mormon 3:9,14(2); Moroni 9:5,23(2)

weak

3

Mosiah 1:13; Helaman 4:24; Mormon 2:26

3

Helaman 4:24,26(2); Mormon 2:26

whoredoms

1

Alma 23:3µ*

22

Jacob 1:15; Jacob 2:23,33(2); Jacob 3:5; Mosiah 11:2,4,6,20(5); Mosiah 12:29(2); Alma 1:32; Alma 30:18; Alma 45:12; Alma 47:36; Alma 50:21; Helaman 3:14; Helaman 4:12; Helaman 6:23; Helaman 7:5; Helaman 8:26; 3 Nephi 5:3

wickedness

41

2 Nephi 5:21–22(2); Jacob 2:35; Jacob 3:7; Mosiah 24:7; Alma 9:14; Alma 19:14,27(2); Alma 21:3(2); Alma 23:3(2)µ*; Alma 24:7,9–12,15(7)*; Alma 26:24–25(3); Alma 27:6*,8*,23(3); Alma 43:6; Alma 47:36; Helaman 4:22; Helaman 6:18; Helaman 15:4,7,10(5); 3 Nephi 1:30; 4 Nephi 1:39–40,42(4); Moroni 9:9,20(2)

293

1 Nephi 15:4; 2 Nephi 9:44–45,47–48(5); 2 Nephi 10:20; Jacob 1:15; Jacob 2:5,6,9–10,16,22–23,31,34–35(16); Jacob 3:3; Jacob 7:23; Omni 1:2,5(3); Mosiah 7:20,24,25,26,28(7); Mosiah 11:2,6,19–20,22,29(9); Mosiah 12:1–2,7–8,29,31(9); Mosiah 13:7,11(2); Mosiah 17:2; Mosiah 19:17; Mosiah 20:21; Mosiah 21:15,30(3); Mosiah 23:9,12(4); Mosiah 26:4,6,9,11(5); Mosiah 27:8(2); Mosiah 28:4(2); Mosiah 29:18(5); Alma 1:32; Alma 2:4; Alma 4:3,7,10,11(5); Alma 5:18,23,32,37,56–57(8); Alma 6:3; Alma 8:14,25,28(3); Alma 9:8,15,18–19(4); Alma 10:7,17,20,25(4); Alma 11:20; Alma 15:3,5(2); Alma 24:30(2); Alma 26:17; Alma 30:18,58(3); Alma 31:1–2,9,24,26,30–31,33(9); Alma 35:8,15(2); Alma 36:12–14(4); Alma 39:11; Alma 43:6; Alma 45:12,14(4); Alma 46:9–10(2); Alma 47:36; Alma 49:3; Alma 50:21–22,35(3); Alma 53:9; Alma 59:11–12(2); Alma 60:15,17(2); Alma 61:4,18(2); Alma 62:2,40,45(3); Helaman 3:14,16;34(5); Helaman 4:11,13–14,22–23,25–26(12); Helaman 5:2,4(2); Helaman 6:2,16,22–24, 31–35,38(16); Helaman 7:4,6,9,11,13–14,21,25,27(12); Helaman 8:8,24,26(5); Helaman 9:21–23(4); Helaman 10:3(2); Helaman 11:34,36–37(5); Helaman 12:4; Helaman 13:1,14–17,22–23,26,29,30(17); Helaman 14:11,13(2); Helaman 15:3; Helaman 16:10,12(3); 3 Nephi 1:10,18(2); 3 Nephi 2:3,10,18–19(6); 3 Nephi 5:3(2); 3 Nephi 7:5,7–11,15(11); 3 Nephi 8:24,25(2); Mormon 1:16; Mormon 2:8,10,13,18–19,27(13); Mormon 3:11–13(4); Mormon 4:10(2); Mormon 5:2; Mormon 6:17; Moroni 9:9,13,15,20(7)

40

1 Nephi 12:23; 3 Nephi 3:15,25(2); 3 Nephi 6:15,17–18,20(5); 3 Nephi 9:2,5,7–13(19); 3 Nephi 21:5; 4 Nephi 1:27–28,34,45–47(7); Mormon 1:13–14(3); Mormon 4:12; Mormon 5:9

wild

4

Enos 1:20; Mosiah 10:12; Alma 17:14; Alma 47:36

2

Alma 47:36; Helaman 3:16

wine-bibber

1

Mosiah 11:15

worse than …

1

Helaman 13:26

Total Count

192

1160

116

Count of Labels Used

36

99

32

Unique Labelsβ

3

66

1

§Similar characteristics (synonyms or synonymic phrases) are grouped together.

¶Lamanites and Nephites described separately or a comparison was made where the emphasis was on Nephites becoming wicked and both Nephites and Lamanites are labeled with the same term.

‡Lamanites and Nephites had joined together (e.g., 3 Nephi 3) or the record describes a degraded state of both nations. This includes the period after the Nephites are destroyed and Nephite survivors became Lamanites.

*Lamanites labeled themselves.

†Six uncivilized, primitive characteristics are given for Lamanites: tent-dwellers, nearly naked, ate only raw meat, ate and sought “beasts of prey,” skills with primitive tools (bow, cimeter, and ax), and drank “the blood of beasts.” Nephites were “without civilization.”

µNot a direct accusation but words imply that the act was done.

βFor Lamanites and Nephites, these are labels only used for one group, but the label also could be used to describe both societies in the “Nephites and Lamanites” column (under the conditions specified). For “Nephites and Lamanites” this gives the labels only used for both groups and never for Nephites and Lamanites separately.

Table 8. Book of Mormon accounts where Lamanites were labeled righteous or showed righteous behavior. Each entry is a separate instance (19 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Jacob 3:3,5–9

6

Jacob speaks to Nephites. “Lamanites whom ye hate … are more righteous than you.” Because Lamanites are monogamous and chaste, Lord will be merciful to them. Lamanite couples love each other and their children.

Alma 18:40–43

4

King Lamoni believes Ammon’s words and prays to God. Lamoni collapses.

Alma 19

36

King Lamoni’s wife, the queen, shows great faith. King Lamoni has vision and sees Lord. Abish had “been converted unto the Lord for many years,” and she also exercises faith. The king and queen testify to their fellow Lamanites, and many are converted. Many see and converse with angels.

Alma 21:17

1

More Lamanites converted through preaching of Aaron and others.

Alma 21:19–23

5

Righteousness abounds among king Lamoni’s people. “They were zealous for keeping the commandments.”

Alma 22:15–23

9

Head Lamanite king and household are converted.

Alma 23:1–13,15–18

17

Thousands of Lamanites converted. They laid down their weapons. They were industrious and friendly with Nephites. Converted Lamanites “never did fall away”

Alma 24:1–29

29

Converted Lamanites bury their swords and refuse to take up arms. “A thousand and five” die without resistance at the hands of non-converted Lamanites and former Nephites. “More than the number who had been slain” of attacking Lamanites are converted. Most of attacking Lamanites are former Nephites.

Alma 25:5–7

3

In defeated Lamanite army, many Lamanites are converted to the Lord and are killed by wicked ex-Nephites.

Alma 25:13–16

4

After war, many Lamanites are converted and “bury their weapons of war.” They kept law of Moses.

Alma 26:31–34

4

Converted Lamanites show great love for others and hatred of sin; they will give up their lives rather than “take the life of their enemy.” Greatest love ever showed by Lehite people.

Alma 27:3, 8, 10, 23, 27–30

8

Converted Lamanites were zealous, beloved, and “highly favored people of the Lord.” They would never again “take up arms,” and they again allowed themselves to be killed rather than take up arms in self-defense. They were willing to be slaves, to perish, and did not fear death. They were “perfectly honest and upright.”

Alma 56:41–56

16

Sons of converted Lamanites courageous, do not fear death, thought more of others than themselves.

Alma 58:40

1

Sons of converted Lamanites strictly remember God, and their faith is strong in prophecies.

Helaman 6:1, 3–6, 20, 34, 36–37

9

Lamanites mostly righteous and preach to Nephites with “exceedingly great power.” Lamanites increase in righteousness, and they destroy secret combinations by preaching to the band.

Helaman 13:1

1

“The Lamanites did observe strictly to keep the commandments of God.”

Helaman 15:4–10

7

Lamanites are mostly righteous and are “firm and steadfast in the faith.” They buried their weapons. Lamanites blessed because they so diligently follow the Lord when converted.

3 Nephi 6:14

1

A few Lamanites are steadfast in the faith and will not depart from it.

3 Nephi 9:20

1

The Lord mentions the Lamanites were baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost during their conversion.

Total Count

162

Table 9. Book of Mormon accounts where Lamanites and Nephites are compared.* Except as noted, each entry is a separate instance (16 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Jacob 2:35

1

As he chastises the Nephites, Jacob says the Nephite sins are worse than Lamanite sins.

Jacob 3:3,5–9¶

6

Jacob continues, “Lamanites … are not filthy like unto you.” “Lamanites whom ye hate … are more righteous than you.” If Nephites do not repent, they also will receive a cursing and Lamanite “skins will be whiter than yours.” “Remember your own filthiness” not that of Lamanites.

Alma 9:15,23

2

“Far more tolerable for the Lamanites” than Nephites if the latter do not repent.

Alma 19:1–10

10

King Lamoni in a comatose state for two days and two nights. His wife, the queen, believes Ammon when he tells her that Lamoni “is not dead, but he sleepeth in God.” Ammon says, “there has not been such great faith among all the people of the Nephites.”

Alma 21:3

1

Former Nephites were “harder” than Lamanites.

Alma 24:28–30

3

Former Nephites were the majority of the murderers of converted Lamanites and had “become more hardened” and were in a state worse than the unconverted descendants of Laman and Lemuel.

Alma 26:31–34

4

Speaking of converted Lamanites, Ammon says they showed the greatest love ever seen in the land.

Alma 43:6

1

Amalekites (ex-Nephites) had a “more wicked and murderous disposition than the Lamanites.”

Alma 47:36

1

Nephite dissenters became more wicked than Lamanites: “more hardened and impenitent, and more wild, wicked and ferocious than the Lamanites.”

Alma 56:45

1

Helaman said, “never had I seen so great courage, nay, not amongst all the Nephites.”

Helaman 4:21–26

6

Nephites were wicked like “their brethren, the Lamanites.”

Helaman 6:1–2,18–21, 31–40

16

Lamanites mostly righteous. Many Nephites “grossly wicked.” Robber band prevalent. Lamanites increase in righteousness and destroy secret combinations. Nephites do the opposite. Nephites ripening for destruction.

Helaman 7:23–24¶

2

Nephi says to a Nephite crowd, the Lamanites “are more righteous than you.”

Helaman 13:1

1

Lamanites strictly observe God’s commandments, and Nephites remain “in great wickedness.”

Helaman 15

17

Nephites threatened with utter destruction because of their wickedness. Lamanites are mostly righteous.

3 Nephi 6:14–18

5

A few Lamanites are steadfast in the faith and will not depart from it. For the rest, “great inequality “ and “all manner of iniquity” is found. People “did wilfully rebel against God.”

4 Nephi 1:43,45

2

Nephites “and the Lamanites had become exceedingly wicked one like unto another.”

Moroni 9:7–10,20

5

Nephite “wickedness doth exceed that of the Lamanites.”

Total Count

84

¶Continuation of the previous entry (one line above)

*I did not include Alma 43:43–45 (“the Nephites were inspired by a better cause” than the Lamanites) because the Lamanites were led into war by Nephite dissenters, and the motivation of the Nephites versus that of the Nephite dissenters is what is being compared.

Table 10. Book of Mormon verses giving reasons for Lamanite unbelief and negative characteristics. Each entry is a separate instance (7 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Jacob 3:7,9

2

Lamanite “unbelief and their hatred towards [the Nephites] is because of the iniquity of their fathers.” “Their filthiness came because of their fathers.”

Mosiah 1:5

1

Unbelief of Lamanites is “because of the traditions of their fathers.”

Alma 9:16

1

Lamanites in ignorance “because of the traditions of their fathers.”

Alma 17:15

1

Lamanites were cursed “because of the traditions of their fathers.”

Alma 26:24

1

Lamanite’s “traditions of their fathers” were deeply set.

Alma 60:32

1

Tradition of Lamanites’ fathers “has caused their hatred.”

Helaman 15:4, 15

2

Lamanite “deeds have been evil continually … because of the iniquity of the tradition of their fathers.” Lamanites “have dwindled in unbelief because of the traditions of their fathers.”

Total Count

9

Table 11. Book of Mormon verses where Nephites identified Lamanites as their brethren.*,§ (CB = count of the number of times “brethren” is used.)

Reference

CV

CB

Summary

Testimony of Three Witnesses

1

1

Nephites and Lamanites were “brethren.”

2 Nephi 5:34

1

1

“We … had wars and contentions with our brethren.”

Jacob 2:35

1

1

Nephites “have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren.”

Jacob 3:5

1

1

Speaking to Nephites, Jacob said, “The Lamanites your brethren … are more righteous than you.”

Jacob 4:2–3

2

2

Records written on plates for “our children, and also our beloved brethren.”

Jacob 7:24,26

2

2

Nephites were hated by Lamanites “our brethren.”

Enos 1:11

1

1

Enos prays for “my brethren, the Lamanites.”

Jarom 1:2

1

1

“These plates” for “our brethren the Lamanites.”

Mosiah 1:5

1

1

“Our brethren, the Lamanites” do not know of records.

Mosiah 11:19

1

1

Wicked Nephites delighted in “shedding of the blood of their brethren.”

Mosiah 22:3

1

1

Gideon calls Lamanites “our brethren” while they are oppressing him and other Nephites.

Mosiah 25:11

1

1

Nephites were pained for the souls of “the Lamanites, who were their brethren.”

Mosiah 28:1

1

1

Sons of Mosiah and colleagues want to “impart the word of God to their brethren, the Lamanites.”

Alma 17:9

1

1

Much fasting and prayer for success at beginning of mission to “their brethren, the Lamanites.”

Alma 17:11

1

1

The Lord told sons of Mosiah and colleagues to “go forth among the Lamanites, thy brethren.”

Alma 17:30–31,33

3

3

Ammon’s fellow Lamanite servants were “his brethren.”

Alma 19:14

1

2

Ammon observed Lord’s Spirit fall upon “the Lamanites, his brethren.”

Alma 26:3,9,13–14,22–23,26

7

7

Joy is expressed for successful mission to Lamanites, “our dearly beloved brethren.”

Alma 26:27

1

1

Speaking to Nephites, the Lord calls the Lamanites “thy brethren.”

Alma 27:20–24

5

6

Report to Nephite chief judge of successful mission “among their brethren, the Lamanites.” Nephites offer land to converted Lamanites “their brethren” and offer military protection to these Lamanites (“our brethren”).

Alma 28:8

1

1

Converted Lamanite brethren were settled safely in the land of Jershon.

Alma 43:14,29

2

2

Even when describing Lamanite war actions, the Nephites write that the two nations are “brethren.”

Alma 48:21,23

2

2

Nephites forced to fight “their brethren, the Lamanites.”

Alma 49:7

1

1

Another Nephite description of Lamanite attitudes showing that Nephites viewed the Nephite and Lamanite nations as “brethren.”

Alma 59:11

1

1

Even in a defeat, Nephites view Lamanites as brethren.

Helaman 4:24

1

1

Nephites were “weak, like unto their brethren, the Lamanites.”

Helaman 11:24

1

1

In the Nephite view, some Lamanites “commenced a war with their brethren.”

Helaman 15:11–12

2

2

Lord made promises to “our brethren, the Lamanites.” (Samuel, the Lamanite prophet, speaking.)

3 Nephi 2:12

1

1

From the Nephite prospective, converted Lamanites join “their brethren, the Nephites.”

4 Nephi 1:43

1

1

Nephites are “vain like unto their brethren, the Lamanites.”

Mormon 2:26

1

1

Nephites “had become weak like unto our brethren.”

Mormon 9:35–36

2

2

Moroni writes for all book’s authors that they desired “our brethren” to be restored to Christ.

Ether 12:22

1

1

“The promise that these things should come unto their brethren through the Gentiles.”

Ether 12:38

1

1

Moroni bids farewell to Gentiles and to “my brethren whom I love.”

Moroni 1:4

1

1

Even under threat of death from Lamanites, Moroni refers to them as “my brethren.”

Moroni 10:1,8,18–19

4

4

Again, Moroni writes to “my brethren, the Lamanites.” Twice he calls them “beloved brethren.”

Total Count

57

59

* John Tvedtness produced a similar list, and most of these were obtained from his list (Tvedtness, “The Charge of ‘Racism’ in the Book of Mormon” 185).

§ I included only those instances where the word «brethren» was clearly connected to Lamanites or is strongly implied by surrounding words or comparison to verses elsewhere in the book. The connection is implied in 2 Nephi 5:34; Jacob 4:2–3; Mosiah 11:19; Alma 28:8; Alma 43:14,29; Alma 49:7; Alma 59:11; Helaman 11:24; Mormon 2:26; Mormon 9:35–36; Ether 12:22; Ether 12:38; Moroni 10:8,18–19. Other instances, not included, may also refer to the Lamanites as brethren an additional seven times (once per verse): Jacob 7:27; Words of Mormon 1:8,11; Mosiah 1:13; Alma 29:10; Helaman 13:8; Mormon 8:24.

Table 12. Book of Mormon accounts where Nephites tried to bring Lamanites back to the faith and vice versa (outreach).

Reference

CV

Instance

Summary

Jacob 7:24

1

Nephite attempt

Nephites reach out to Lamanites, without success.

Enos 1:14, 20

2

Nephite attempt

Nephites “did seek diligently to restore the Lamanites unto the true faith,” but their efforts are unsuccessful.

Mosiah 28:1–9

9

Sons of Mosiah Mission

Sons of Mosiah and others pled with Mosiah for permission to go to Lamanites to preach. They want peace and want Lamanites to also “rejoice in the Lord their God.” Mosiah asks Lord and lets them go.

Alma 17

39

SofM continued

Sons of Mosiah and colleagues go to Lamanites. Sons and others prepared by fasting, prayer, and study. They suffered much. Sons of Mosiah refused Nephite kingdom. Group splits up after arriving in Lamanite territory. Ammon goes to land of Ishmael, ruled by Lamoni. To Lamoni, Ammon says he wants to live among the Lamanites, “perhaps until the day I die,” and be a servant. He protects Lamoni’s flocks.

Alma 18

43

SofM continued

Lamoni is impressed with Ammon’s faithful service. Ammon preaches gospel to Lamoni.

Alma 19

36

SofM continued

Lamoni, his wife, and many other Lamanites are converted. King Lamoni has vision and sees Lord. Ammon prays in gratitude.

Alma 20

30

SofM continued

Lamoni and Ammon confront head Lamanite king, the father of Lamoni. Lamoni’s father is impressed with Ammon’s actions. Ammon’s imprisoned colleagues are released.

Alma 21

23

SofM continued

Aaron and others have difficulties, and some put in prison. Eventually they also have success, and many Lamanites are converted. Righteousness abounds among king Lamoni’s people.

Alma 22:1–27

27

SofM continued

Aaron preaches to head Lamanite king, Lamoni’s father. He and his household are converted.

Alma 23

18

SofM continued

Sons of Mosiah and colleagues given freedom to preach throughout the Lamanite lands. Thousands converted. Converted Lamanites “never did fall away.” Friendly relations with Nephites begin.

Alma 24

30

SofM continued

Converted Lamanites bury their swords and refuse to take up arms. “A thousand and five” die without resistance at the hands of non-converted Lamanites and former Nephites. “More than the number who had been slain” of attacking Lamanites are converted. Converted Lamanites have open correspondence with Nephites and view them as brethren.

Alma 25:13–17

5

SofM continued

Many more Lamanites are converted and “bury their weapons of war.” Sons of Mosiah and colleagues rejoice.

Alma 26

37

SofM continued

Ammon rejoices over the conversion of “our brethren, the Lamanites.”

Alma 27

30

SofM continued

Converted Lamanites flee because non-converted Lamanites start killing converted Lamanites again. Nephites give them land, protection, and citizenship.

Alma 28:1–6, 8

7

SofM continued

Lamanite armies followed the converted Lamanites as they journeyed to the Nephite lands. “A tremendous battle” ensues. Many Lamanites and Nephites killed.

Alma 29:14–17

4

SofM continued

Rejoicing over the successful mission to the Lamanites: “my joy is more full because of the success of my brethren, who have been up to the land of Nephi.”

Helaman 5:16–52

37

Nephi and Lehi Mission

Nephi and Lehi preach to Lamanites, “more part” are converted. Converted Lamanites lay down weapons and return captured land to the Nephites.

Helaman 6:1

1

NLM concluded

“The more part” of the Lamanites “had become … a righteous people.”

Helaman 6:4–9

6

Lamanite Mission

Roles are reversed. Lamanites preach to Nephites, “with exceedingly great power and authority.” Peace and prosperity, including freedom of travel, throughout whole land.

Helaman 13:2–39

38

Samuel the Lamanite attempt

Samuel, a Lamanite prophet, attempts to preach to the Nephites. He is rejected but Lord said to try again. He preaches from a city wall and warns Nephites to repent or be destroyed.

Helaman 14

31

StheL continued

Samuel prophesies of Christ’s birth and death and important mission to redeem “all mankind.”

Helaman 15

17

StheL continued

Samuel warns Nephites to repent; he mentions righteousness of Lamanites and promises to them.

Helaman 16:1–8

8

StheL concluded

Some Nephites believed Samuel’s words and repented. Most do not accept Samuel’s words, and he fled “unto his own country” after Nephites try to kill or capture him.

Ether 12:15

1

SofM concluded

Moroni calls the mission by “Ammon and his brethren” a great miracle.

Total Count

480

6

Table 13. Book of Mormon examples of kindness from one group to another. These are situations where one person or group helped or attempted to help one or more people from another group, where groups live in harmony, or where a kind attitude is expressed. Groups are international (Lamanites and Nephites) or intranational (e.g., economic classes within a nation). Each line represents a separate event, except as noted (67 separate events). (LR = life put at risk or life lost by the person or people acting kindly.)

Reference

CV

LR

Summary

Jacob 2:35

1

Jacob says Nephites have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites.

Jacob 3:3–9¶

7

Jacob praises good qualities of the Lamanites and uses them as a righteous example for wicked Nephites. He tells Nephites to ignore appearance and “filthiness” of Lamanites and worry about their own filthiness.

Jacob 7:15

1

Although he had preached against Christ, Sherem “was nourished for … many days” after he collapsed.

Enos 1:11–17

7

Enos prays “with many long strugglings” for Lamanites. He asks God to preserve Nephite records for the Lamanites, “that, perhaps, they might be brought unto salvation.”

Enos 1:18

1

Enos’ fathers also sought that the Nephite records would go to Lamanites.

Jarom 1:2

1

Writings on the small plates are for the benefit of the Lamanites.

Mosiah 2:11–14

4

By his example, King Benjamin showed that a righteous ruler is not above the people he or she serves.

Mosiah 6:7

1

Like his father, King Mosiah showed that a righteous ruler is not above the ruled. Mosiah helped grow food “that thereby he might not become burdensome to his people.”

Mosiah 9:1–2

2

x

Seeing good in Lamanites, Zeniff contended and fought with other Nephites to avoid attacking Lamanites.*

Mosiah 17:2–4

3

x

Alma pleads with King Noah to let Abinadi go in peace. Alma is cast out, and his life is threatened.

Mosiah 21:17

1

Widows and their children were supported.

Mosiah 22:3

1

Gideon calls Lamanites “our brethren” while they are oppressing him and other Nephites.

Mosiah 24:1,4–7

5

An example of wicked Nephites having good relations with Lamanites: Amulon and his group of Nephite settlers teach Lamanites the Nephite language and to write and keep records. Amulon and his group have prosperous relations with Lamanites and live among them. Lamanites prosper.

Mosiah 25:4–11

8

Nephites are concerned for the spiritual welfare of the Lamanites. Nephites rejoiced for deliverance of a separatist Nephite group and sorrowed for loss of life, but no anger expressed for injustices by Lamanites.

Mosiah 28:1–9

9

x

Mosiah’s sons and colleagues go to Lamanites after “many days” of pleas for permission to go.

Alma 1:27,30

2

If needy a person received help, “no respect to persons as to those who stood in need.” “They were liberal to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, whether out of the church or in the church.” People avoided expensive clothes and used their wealth to help others.

Alma 4:13

1

Despite evil actions of others, righteous people helped “the poor and the needy.”

Alma 6:6

1

“Children of God” told to “join in fasting and mighty prayer in behalf … of those who knew not God.”

Alma 16:16

1

“No inequality” was among all the Nephites.

Alma 17:19–25

7

x

To a Lamanite king, Ammon says he wants to live among the Lamanite people, “perhaps until the day I die,” and be a servant to the king.

Alma 17:26–39δ

14

xδ

Ammon protects king Lamoni’s flocks from plunderers.

Alma 18:8–10

3

Ammon remembers his assigned duties after a traumatic day protecting the king’s flocks. King is moved.

Alma 18:16δ

1

xδ

Ammon protected king’s flocks—and servants—from plunderers.

Alma 18:17

1

Ammon to king Lamoni, “whatsoever thou desirest which is right, that will I do.”

Alma 20:8–16

9

x

Lamoni refuses an order from head Lamanite king to kill Ammon, a Nephite.

Alma 20:17–27

11

x

Ammon defends the life of Lamoni, a Lamanite. Ammon uses his advantage in the fight only to win freedom for Lamoni and Ammon’s imprisoned missionary colleagues.

Alma 20:28–30µ

3

xµ

“The brethren of Ammon were brought forth out of prison.” They had patiently suffered there in their attempt to preach to the Lamanites.

Alma 21:13–15µ

3

xµ

“Aaron and a certain number of his brethren were taken and cast into prison.”

Alma 22:1–3

3

Aaron and brethren offer to become servants of head Lamanite king. He refuses their offer and asks them instead to “administer unto [him].”

Alma 23:1–3

3

Sons of Mosiah and colleagues granted freedom to preach throughout the Lamanite nation.

Alma 23:18

1

Converted Lamanites “were friendly with the Nephites” and “open a correspondence with [the Nephites].”

Alma 24:1–27γ

27

xγ

Converted Lamanites bury their weapons of war and will not defend themselves against their unconverted fellow Lamanites and former Nephites who seek to overthrow the (converted) king and destroy the converted people “out of the land.” One thousand and five are killed. Many unconverted Lamanites who participated in the killing are converted and choose to never use weapons again. Also, converted Lamanites correspond with Nephites and view Nephites as brethren.

Alma 26:23–24, 26–30µ

7

xµ

Sons of Mosiah and colleagues suffered much to bring gospel to Lamanites, including harassment from other Nephites and stoning and imprisonment among the Lamanites.

Alma 26:31–34γ

4

xγ

Converted Lamanites avoid use of weapons: “They had rather sacrifice their lives than even to take the life of their enemy.” Weapons buried “deep in the earth, because of their love towards their brethren.”

Alma 27:2–3

2

x

Converted Lamanites again refuse to use weapons and die at the hands of their unconverted countrymen.

Alma 27:8

1

Converted Lamanites offer to be slaves to their Nephite brethren until damage caused earlier was repaired.

Alma 27:9

1

Slavery was against Nephite law, so converted Lamanites’ offer was refused by Ammon.

Alma 27:20–24,26–27

7

x

Nephites give land, military protection, and citizenship to converted Lamanites.

Alma 27:28–30γ

3

xγ

Converted Lamanites would rather die “in the most aggravating and distressing manner” than smite others with a weapon of war. They were beloved.

Alma 28:1–6

6

x

Nephites protect the converted Lamanites, who have just moved to Nephite lands, at a tremendous cost. Many Nephites were killed. “Great mourning and lamentation heard … among all the people of Nephi.”

Alma 31:34–35

2

Alma prays for wicked Zoramites: “their souls are precious.”

Alma 35:6–9

4

People of Ammon (converted Lamanites) received and helped the poor, converted Zoramites, who were cast out of the Zoramite lands. People of Ammon ignore threats from Zoramite leader.‡ Also, “Alma and his brethren did minister unto them.”

Alma 38:3–4

2

x

Shiblon bound and stoned as he served among the Zoramites.

Alma 43:11–14

4

x

Nephites again protect the people of Ammon at great cost. People of Ammon help pay for the war.

Alma 44:21¶

1

x¶

The Nephite cost to protect people of Ammon: “The number of their dead was exceedingly great.”

Alma 48:11, 21–23

4

The leader of the Nephite armies (Moroni) “did not delight in bloodshed.” He rejoiced in liberty and preventing bondage and slavery. Nephites reluctant to go to war with Lamanites again, “they were sorry.”

Alma 53:10–12

3

x

Nephites still protecting the people of Ammon (converted Lamanites).

Alma 53:13–15§

3

x§

“Moved with compassion,” converted Lamanites were willing to break their oath to not use weapons so they could help struggling Nephites, “their brethren.”

Alma 53:16–22†

7

x†

Sons of converted Lamanites join Nephite army.

Alma 55:19

1

Moroni would not kill Lamanites when they were drunk.

Alma 56:1–5†

5

x†

Helaman leads two thousand sons of converted Lamanites.

Alma 56:6–8§

3

x§

Another mention that converted Lamanites were willing to break their oath so they could help Nephites. Helaman encouraged these Lamanites to keep the oath.

Alma 56:9–57†

49

x†

Sons of converted Lamanites fight; they do not worry about their own safety. Helaman reports that they showed “great courage,” more than he had ever seen among the Nephites.

Alma 57:1–27†

27

x†

Sixty more sons join Helaman’s group. The 2060 sons fight valiantly. All are wounded, but none die.

Alma 61:10–11

2

Righteous Nephites would not kill Lamanites or fellow citizens if they did not attack first.

Alma 61:14

1

Chief Judge Pahoran said force was a last resort. “Whatsoever evil we cannot resist with our words … .”

Alma 62:16–17, 27–29

5

Nephites accept their former enemies: captured Lamanites join the people of Ammon (converted Lamanites).

Helaman 1:7–8

2

Son of former chief judge, and brother of current one, does not receive special treatment because of his heritage or status. As others would be, he is indicted for treason and sentenced to death.

Helaman 5:51–52

2

Converted Lamanites lay down weapons and their hatred. They return captured land to Nephites.

Helaman 6:3

1

Nephite people of the church were very happy that the Lamanites converted; the two groups fellowshipped and rejoiced together. They “did have great joy.”

Helaman 6:7–9, 14

4

Peace and prosperity are found among Nephites and Lamanites. Nephites could travel in Lamanite lands, and Lamanites could travel through Nephite lands.

Helaman 11:21–22

2

Most Nephites and Lamanites “belong to the church.” “Exceedingly great peace” found in the land.

Helaman 15:1,4

2

x

Samuel the Lamanite calls wicked Nephites “my beloved brethren” as he urges them to repent.

Helaman 16:2,6–8¶

4

x¶

Nephites try to kill or capture Samuel.

3 Nephi 2:11–16

6

Lamanites and Nephites unite. Unified people called “Nephites.”

3 Nephi 3:14¶

1

Lamanite and Nephite armies are united.

3 Nephi 3:20–21

2

Gidgiddoni will not attack robbers because “the Lord would deliver us into their hands” for that offensive action. Opposite will occur if “we will wait till they shall come against us.”

3 Nephi 5:4

1

x

Prisoners of war released if they repented of their sins and promised to not murder again.

3 Nephi 6:3

1

Kindness to a former enemy: Those who promised to “keep the peace” were given land for subsistence.

3 Nephi 6:4

1

“They had formed their laws according to equity and justice.” Also, people had “great order in the land.”

3 Nephi 6:13

1

Some “would receive railing and persecution … and would not turn and revile again, but were humble.”

3 Nephi 26:19

1

“[People] had all things common among them, every man dealing justly, one with another.”

4 Nephi 1:2–4, 6–7, 10–11,13–18

13

All Nephites and Lamanites are converted and deal justly with each other. No “-ites” exist. “No contentions and disputations” exist. “They had all things common among them.” People are righteous, prosperous, and very happy for many years.

4 Nephi 1:34

1

Although smitten by persecutors, “the people of Jesus did not smite again.”

Mormon 3:11,16

2

x

Mormon refuses to lead Nephites in their desire to get revenge against the Lamanites.

Mormon 7:1

1

After the defeat of his Nephite army and before he is killed by Lamanites, Mormon writes to survivors.

Ether 12:36

1

Moroni prayed that God would give the Gentiles grace.

Ether 12:38

1

Moroni bids farewell to the Gentiles and to “my brethren whom I love.”

Moroni 1:1–4

4

After all he has seen in fighting Lamanites and being hunted by them, Moroni writes nicely, not spitefully, to the Lamanites, his brethren.

Moroni 10:1–2, 8, 18–19

5

Moroni wrote a message to his beloved brethren, the Lamanites.

Total Count

356

20

¶Continuation of the previous entry (one line above).

*See also Omni 1:27–28, c.f. Mosiah 9:1–3 with Omni 1:27–29 to see the likely connection.

δTwo descriptions of Ammon defending king Lamoni’s flocks and servants.

γDescriptions of the same event, converted Lamanites would die rather than use weapons again.

µSons of Mosiah and colleagues suffered during their mission to the Lamanites. These entries are considered one event, but the verses in Alma 26 suggest many more events occurred but are not detailed in the current record.

§Two descriptions of the same event.

†Descriptions of sons of converted Lamanites fighting in Nephite army (considered one event).

‡The nature of the threats is not stated, but perhaps included threats of violence.

Table 14. Book of Mormon accounts of Nephites or former Nephites acting unkindly towards Lamanites, another group, or a person from another group or class. Except as noted, each line is a separate instance (43 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Jacob 3:5

1

Some Nephites hate the Lamanites.

Mosiah 9:1–2

2

One Nephite military ruler desired to destroy the Lamanites. Plot foiled by Zeniff.*

Mosiah 11:18–19

2

King Noah’s people boast of their prowess over Lamanites. They delight in shedding blood.

Mosiah 11:26–29

4

King Noah and his people “sought to take away [Abinadi’s] life” for his preaching against their wickedness.

Mosiah 12:9–19¶

11

Nephite settlers arrest and imprison Abinadi, and he is brought before King Noah and questioned.

Mosiah 13:1–2

2

King Noah orders Abinadi killed.

Mosiah 17

20

Alma cast out and forced to flee for defending Abinadi. Abinadi executed.

Mosiah 18:32–34

3

King Noah sends his army to destroy a group of believers. They flee.

Mosiah 19:11–12

2

King Noah ordered men to leave their wives and children and flee farther into the wilderness.

Mosiah 20:1–5

5

Wicked former priests of King Noah kidnap 24 Lamanite women.

Mosiah 21:2–9

8

Nephite settlers (in Lamanite lands) attack Lamanites and are defeated.

Mosiah 21:10–11

2

Nephite settlers attack Lamanites a second time and again are defeated.

Mosiah 21:12–13

2

Nephite settlers attack Lamanites a third time, are defeated, and submit to Lamanites.

Mosiah 24:8–11

4

Amulon, a former priest of King Noah, subjugates Alma and his people. Death for people caught praying.

Mosiah 26:38

1

Church leaders “persecuted by all those who did not belong to the church of God”

Mosiah 27:1–2,32¶

3

Nephite “unbelievers” persecute Nephite “believers.”

Alma 1:2–15

14

Nehor, who advocated a different gospel, kills someone who opposed his ideas. He was executed.

Alma 1:19–20,25,28

4

Persecution of church members by people not in church.

Alma 1:22

1

Some church members “contend warmly with their adversaries” and even have fistfights.

Alma 4:6–9, 12–13, 15

7

People in church “began to persecute those that did not believe.” Alma sees “great inequality among the people.”

Alma 5:54–55

2

Nephites suppose they are better than others, persecute others, and withhold substance from needy.

Alma 8:13

1

Alma reviled, spit upon, and cast out by people of Ammonihah.

Alma 14:2–5, 7–10, 14–25

20

Nephites in Ammonihah persecute “believers” including Alma and Amulek. Believers cast out, and their wives and children, who believed, were executed.

Alma 15:1¶

1

People of Ammonihah who were cast out and stoned found in Sidon.

Alma 23:14

1

Ex-Nephites harden hearts of Lamanites who lived nearby.

Alma 24:28

1

Most of non-converted Lamanites who attacked converted Lamanites are former Nephites.

Alma 25:4–8

5

Former Nephites, who joined Lamanites, kill Lamanites in their army who become converted to the Lord.

Alma 26:23–25

3

Before sons of Mosiah and others went to Lamanites, some Nephites mocked the mission. They proposed extermination instead.

Alma 27:1–4,12

5

Unconverted Lamanites (motivated by Nephite dissenters) again kill converted Lamanites.

Alma 30:59

1

Korihor, who had preached wrong doctrine, is trampled to death by Zoramite people.

Alma 32:2–5

4

Wicked Zoramites will not allow poor and coarsely dressed among them to enter synagogues, even though the poor people had help build the synagogues.

Alma 35:3–6,8

5

Wicked Zoramites cast out converted Zoramites and ask people of Ammon (where the converted Zoramites went) to also cast the converts out.

Alma 38:3–4

2

Shiblon was persecuted (bound and stoned) by Zoramites.

Alma 50:30–31

2

Morianton “was angry with one of his maid servants, and he fell upon her and beat her much.”

Helaman 13:2–4

3

Nephites cast out Samuel, the Lamanite prophet; he returns, is refused entry, but preaches from the city wall.

Helaman 14:10¶

1

Nephites angry with prophet Samuel in part because he is a Lamanite. Nephites try “to destroy” him.

Helaman 16:2,6–8¶

4

Nephites try to kill Samuel, the Lamanite prophet. He is driven away again.

3 Nephi 1:6–7

2

Some “rejoice over their brethren” that promised signs “are not fulfilled” and made “a great uproar.”

3 Nephi 1:9

1

“Unbelievers” plan to put “believers” to death.

3 Nephi 1:29

1

Zoramites influence Lamanite youth to join robber band.

3 Nephi 6:10,12

2

“Great persecutions” and class distinctions occur.

3 Nephi 6:13

1

“Some did return railing for railing.”

3 Nephi 6:20–30

11

Gospel preachers “put to death secretly.” Perpetrators form a conspiracy.

3 Nephi 7:14,19

2

Prophets are stoned and cast out. Nephi’s brother was killed.

3 Nephi 8:25¶

1

“O that we… had not killed and stoned the prophets, and cast them out.”

3 Nephi 10:15¶

1

“Many have testified of these things at the coming of Christ, and were slain because” of this testimony.

3 Nephi 28:19–22

4

Three Nephites were “cast into prison by them who did not belong to the church.”

4 Nephi 1:26

1

After a long period of righteousness, class distinctions form again.

4 Nephi 1:29–34

6

Persecution of believers in Christ by a group that did not believe in Christ.

Mormon 3:7–10

4

Nephites swear to “avenge themselves of the blood of their brethren who had been slain” by Lamanites.

Total Count

196

*See also Omni 1:27–28, c.f. Mosiah 9:1–3 with Omni 1:27–29 to see the likely connection.

¶Continuation of the previous entry (one line above), as the same instance.

Table 15. Book of Mormon passages that teach people to avoid persecuting or oppressing others and to avoid arrogance and attitudes of superiority. Instead, a person should love and help others. Each line represents a separate instance or teaching (52 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

2 Nephi 9:30,42

2

Warnings to people “puffed up” from riches or learning. They despise the poor and persecute the meek.

2 Nephi 12:11–17

7

Pride and haughtiness will be put down.

2 Nephi 13:16–24

9

“Daughters of Zion are haughty.” “The Lord will smite.” “The Lord will take away.”

2 Nephi 15:21

1

“Wo unto the wise in their own eyes and prudent in their own sight!”

2 Nephi 20:5–19

15

Prophecy of wicked (Assyrians) being punished after the Lord used them to punish wicked Israel.

2 Nephi 20:33

1

“The haughty shall be humbled.”

2 Nephi 23:11,15

2

“Arrogancy of the proud [will] cease. “Haughtiness of the terrible” will be laid down.

2 Nephi 28:9–15

7

Condemnation of people being “puffed up,” having pride, persecuting the meek, and robbing poor “because of their fine sanctuaries” and “because of their fine clothing.”

2 Nephi 29:5

1

Gentiles condemned for persecuting the Jews. Lord “will return all these things” on their heads.

Jacob 2:13–14,16–21

8

Class distinctions and attitudes of superiority are evil, “one being is as precious in his sight as the other.” Riches should be used to bless others and help the less fortunate.

Mosiah 2:13

1

King Benjamin taught that slavery was wrong.

Mosiah 2:26

1

King Benjamin said, “I … am no better than ye yourselves are.”

Mosiah 4:16–26

11

“Succor those that stand in need of your succor.”

Mosiah 18:27–29

3

People who have means should freely help those who are in need.

Mosiah 23:7

1

“Ye shall not esteem one flesh above another, or one man shall not think himself above another.”

Mosiah 23:15

1

“Every man should love his neighbor as himself.”

Mosiah 27:2

1

King Mosiah decrees that “unbelievers” may not persecute “believers.”

Mosiah 27:3–4

2

Church says no persecutions of others, so all are equal. “Every man should esteem his neighbor as himself.”

Mosiah 29:32

1

King Mosiah desired “that this land be a land of liberty,” everyone’s rights and privileges preserved.

Alma 1:17

1

“The law could have no power on any man for his belief.”

Alma 1:21

1

Strict church law given that people should not persecute others in or out of the church.

Alma 1:26

1

By example, righteous Nephites taught that preachers and teachers are not above hearers and learners.

Alma 4:6–9, 12–13, 15

7

Inequality, attitudes of superiority, and withholding substance (from needy) are evil.

Alma 5:30–31

2

Mocking or persecuting another person disqualifies one from being saved.

Alma 5:53–54

2

“Supposing that ye are better one than another” and persecuting others are evil.

Alma 5:55

1

Withholding substance from the poor and needy is wrong.

Alma 27:9

1

Slavery was against the law of the Nephites.

Alma 28:13

1

Sin and transgression cause great inequality.

Alma 30:7–12

6

Contrary to God’s commands to have a law “which should bring men on to unequal grounds.” Under Nephite law, people punished for crimes, not beliefs.

Alma 31:5

1

“Preaching of the word … had more powerful effect … than the sword.’

Alma 31:12–28, 30

18

Zoramites put themselves above others. Condemnation of this belief.

Alma 32:2–5

4

Despising people who are poor or dress coarsely is wrong.

Alma 34:28–29

2

If a person does not help the needy, then his or her prayers to God are in vain.

Alma 34:40

1

Poor Zoramites told to not revile against those who abused them, “lest ye become sinners like unto them.”

Alma 38:14

1

Do not say you are better than others, pray for forgiveness and to bless others.

Alma 48:14

1

Although taught to defend themselves, Nephites “taught to never give an offense” and to only “raise the sword” in self-defense.

Helaman 3:34

1

Some in church persecuted others. “This was a great evil.”

Helaman 4:12

1

“Smiting … brethren upon the cheek” (persecuting others) and “oppression to the poor” are evil.

Helaman 6:17

1

Lifting oneself above another is evil.

Helaman 13:22

1

Love of riches leads to persecutions and other iniquities.

3 Nephi 6:10,12–15

5

Inequality, persecution, and class distinctions are evil. People are puffed up with pride.

3 Nephi 12:10–12

3

“Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute … for great shall be your reward in heaven.”

3 Nephi 12:38–41

4

“Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

3 Nephi 12:43–45

3

“Love your enemies … do good to them that hate you.”

3 Nephi 18:22–25

4

Do not forbid any person from meeting with you or cast any person out. Pray for people. Follow Christ’s example, he prayed and invited all to come to him. “Whosoever breaketh this commandment suffereth himself to be led into temptation.”

3 Nephi 18:28–33

6

Do not cast out a person even if he or she is not currently worthy to partake of the sacrament or is unrepentant. Continue to minister to that person. Pray for that person.

3 Nephi 24:5

1

Judgment will come against those who oppress hirelings, widows, or fatherless or “turn aside the stranger.”

4 Nephi 1:26

1

Class distinctions are evil. These distinctions are a sign of evil encroaching into Lehite society.

Mormon 3:15

1

The Lord said, “vengeance is mine, and I will repay.”

Mormon 4:5

1

“By the wicked that the wicked are punished.”

Mormon 8:19–20

2

“He that smiteth shall be smitten again.” Vengeance and judgment are God’s, not man’s.

Mormon 8:36–37, 39–40

4

Moroni condems persecution and oppression that he sees in people who live in the latter days.

Total Count

165

Table 16. Book of Mormon accounts of exploitation. Except as noted, each line is a separate instance (11 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Jacob 2:31–35

5

For sexual reasons, some Nephites led “away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness.”

Alma 24:1–2

2

Former Nephites (Amalekites and Amulonites) induce unconverted people to arms against converted Lamanites.

Alma 27:2,12

2

Amalekites (former Nephites) again stir up unconverted Lamanites against converted Lamanites.

Alma 35:8–11, 13

5

Zoramites incite Lamanites against people of Ammon (who accepted converted Zoramites) and Nephites.

Alma 43:4–8,20–21,43–44¶

9

Zerahemnah appointed former Nephites over Lamanite army, to “preserve their hatred towards the Nephites.” No protective clothing given to Lamanites, only Nephite dissenters had something more than a loincloth.

Alma 46:30–33

4

Moroni tries to prevent Amalickiah from reaching Lamanites, to keep Amalickiah from stirring up Lamanites to come to war.

Alma 47:1–35¶

35

Amalickiah stirs up Lamanites to anger against Nephites. He conspires and becomes king of Lamanites.

Alma 48:1–6¶

6

Amalickiah stirs Lamanites to anger and starts war against Nephites.

Alma 49:10, 25–27¶

4

Amalickiah “did care not for the blood of his people.” Lamanite army defeated and retreats. Amalickiah “exceedingly angry with his people” and swears to drink Moroni’s (leader of Nephite army) blood.

Alma 51:9–12

4

A second time, Amalickiah stirs up Lamanites to war against Nephites.

Alma 54:16–18,23–24¶

5

Ammoron (brother of killed Amalickiah and a former Nephite) justifies the war to avenge wrongs by the first Nephi against the first Laman.*

Alma 55:1¶

1

Moroni recognizes that Ammoron “had a perfect knowledge of his fraud.”

Alma 60:32¶

1

Moroni recognizes the Lamanite tradition that was exploited by dissenting Nephites.

Alma 63:14–15

2

Nephite dissenters induce Lamanites to war against Nephites.

Helaman 1:14–17

4

Son of Ammoron incites Lamanites to attack Nephites. Army is led by a Nephite dissenter.

Helaman 4:1–5,8

6

Two groups of Nephite dissenters induce Lamanites to war against Nephites.

Helaman 11:24

1

Another group of Nephite dissenters stir up Lamanites to war.

Ether 8:7–12

6

Jared’s daughter induces her father and Akish into a plot to kill her grandfather, the king.

Total Count

102

¶Continuation of the previous entry (one line above), as the same instance.

*But he and his brother (presumably not descendants of Laman because they were ex-Nephites) were not willing to give kingdom to whom it “rightly belonged,” the descendants of Laman.

Table 17. Book of Mormon prophecies, messages, or invitations that pronounce blessings, potential blessings, or divine responsibilities upon the Gentiles. Except as noted, each line is a separate prophecy, invitation, or distinct part of a larger prophecy or statement (38 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Title Page

2

The Book of Mormon would come forth “by way of the Gentile.” Book of Mormon written to Gentiles, and one purpose is to help convince them that “Jesus is the Christ.”

1 Nephi 10:11,14

2

Lehi prophesies that Gentiles will receive the gospel.

1 Nephi 13:10–40,42

32

Gentiles will come to America, scatter and smite Lehite descendants, prosper upon the land, have “the power of the Lord … with them,” and be delivered from “all other nations.” Gentiles humbled themselves before Lord. Although they will have and value the “record of the Jews” (Bible), they will stumble. “Satan hath great power over them.” God will not let Gentiles destroy Lehite descendants, and God will bring the gospel to Gentiles. (They will not “remain in that awful state of blindness.”) They will bring forth Book of Mormon record. They will bring the scriptures to Lehite descendants.

1 Nephi 14:1–3,5¶

4

If they “shall hearken unto the Lamb of God,” Gentiles will be blessed and numbered with Lehites and Israel.

1 Nephi 15:7,13–14,17

4

Gentiles will receive the gospel and bring it to Lehite descendants.

1 Nephi 21:6,22–23

3

Messiah will be a light to Gentiles. Lord will help them, and they will help gather Israel.

1 Nephi 22:6–11

6

Gentiles will help gather Israel. “Lord God will raise up a mighty nation among the Gentiles.”

2 Nephi 1:5–7

3

God will lead people to America. Land consecrated to them; they are cursed if wicked, at liberty if righteous.

2 Nephi 6:6–7

2

Gentiles will help house of Israel.

2 Nephi 6:12

1

Gentiles blessed if they repent and forsake evil and “fight not against Zion.”

2 Nephi 10:8–9

2

Gentile nations “shall be great in the eyes of [God]” in gathering the House of Israel.

2 Nephi 10:10–12

3

Gentiles will be blessed in America. It “shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles.”

2 Nephi 10:18

1

Gentiles will afflict Lehite descendants, but Lord will soften Gentiles. Gentiles will help Lehite descendants. Gentiles “shall be like unto a father to [Lehite descendants].”

2 Nephi 21:10

1

Gentiles will seek “root of Jesse.”

2 Nephi 26:12

1

“It must needs be that the Gentiles be convinced also that Jesus is the Christ.”

2 Nephi 27:6

1

“Lord God shall bring forth … the words of a book.”

2 Nephi 28:32

1

The Lord “will be merciful unto [the Gentiles] …, if they will repent and come unto me.”

2 Nephi 30:3

1

Many Gentiles “shall believe the words which are written;” they will take the words to the Lehite descendants.

Jacob 5

77

Allegory of olive tree, symbolic of Lord’s nurturing of Israel, is given. Gentiles have a role (wild olive tree).

Jacob 6:2–3

2

Those who work in Lord’s vineyard are blessed.

3 Nephi 15:22–23

2

“Gentiles should be converted through … preaching.” Christ would be manifest to them “by the Holy Ghost.”

3 Nephi 16:4

1

A record of Christ sayings to Lehites “shall be manifest unto the Gentiles” and from them to scattered Israel.

3 Nephi 16:6

1

“Blessed are the Gentiles, because of their belief in me.”

3 Nephi 16:7, 9, 13

3

Gentiles will receive gospel after Israel rejects it, and the Father will be merciful to Gentiles.. Gentiles will be allowed to persecute Israel. If Gentiles repent, “they shall be numbered among my people.”

3 Nephi 20:15, 27–28

3

Gentiles will receive the Holy Ghost and the fulness of the gospel.

3 Nephi 21:2–6, 8–11, 22–25

13

Gospel will be made known to the Gentiles, who will then take the gospel to the Lehite descendants. This is important so Gentiles have opportunity to “be numbered among my people.” Gentiles will “be set up as a free people” to allow God’s covenant with Israel to be fullfilled. Gentiles will assist in building the New Jerusalem.

3 Nephi 22:2–3

2

Gentiles will be inherited by the Lord’s people.

3 Nephi 23:1–4

4

Isaiah’s words important because he spake concerning house of Israel. Therefore, he also spoke to Gentiles. Savior’s words will “go forth unto the Gentiles.

3 Nephi 26:8

1

Mormon intends for his words to go to Lehite descendants via Gentiles, as Jesus prophesied.

3 Nephi 28:27,32

2

The Three Nephites will be “among the Gentiles” and will do a “great and marvelous work” among them.

3 Nephi 29:1

1

“These sayings shall come unto the Gentiles.”

3 Nephi 30

2

Jesus said, “turn, all ye Gentiles, from your wicked ways … that ye may be numbered with my people.”

Mormon 5:9–11

3

Mormon speaks “to the Gentiles who have care for the house of Israel, that realize and know from whence their blessings come.” The Gentiles will sorrow over “the destruction of this people.”

Mormon 5:19

1

Blessings that Book of Mormon people might have received are reserved for Gentiles.

Mormon 7:8

1

Record of Jews “shall come unto the Gentiles from the Jews” and from the Gentiles to the Lehite descendants.

Mormon 8:25

1

Lehite saints also prayed for “him that the Lord should suffer to bring these things forth.”

Ether 4:13

1

Gentiles invited to “come unto me.”

Ether 12:22

1

Lehite descendants to receive gospel through Gentiles.

Ether 12:28

1

Lord will show Gentiles “that faith, hope and charity” brings “the fountain of all righteousness.”

Total Count

193

¶Continuation of the previous entry (one line above).

Table 18. Book of Mormon prophecies, messages, or invitations that pronounce blessings, potential blessings, or divine responsibilities upon the Jews or House of Israel. Each entry is a separate prophecy or a distinct part of a larger prophecy (76 instances).

Reference

CV

Summary

Title Page

2

Book of Mormon written to Jews. One purpose of book is to help convince them that “Jesus is the Christ.”

1 Nephi 10:2–4

3

After Jews were destroyed and taken to Babylon, they would return again to Jerusalem. God would raise up a Messiah among the Jews.

1 Nephi 10:12–14

3

House of Israel would be “scattered upon all the face of the earth,” then “they should be gathered again” after Gentiles receive gospel.

1 Nephi 13:39,42

2

“Other books” will come from Gentiles to Jews and Lehite descendants to convince them that Bible is true. God will “manifest himself” unto the Jews.

1 Nephi 14:26

1

Sealed words will “come forth in their purity … unto the house of Israel.”

1 Nephi 15:7,12–20

10

Jews, or house of Israel, will be restored in the latter days.

1 Nephi 19:10–11

2

At Christ’s death, some righteous in Israel will be visited with the Lord’s voice, “unto their great joy.”

1 Nephi 19:15–16

2

God will remember his covenant to House of Israel.

1 Nephi 19:19

1

Nephi speaks “unto all the house of Israel.”

1 Nephi 19:23–24

2

Isaiah wrote “unto all the house of Israel.”

1 Nephi 20:1,9–12,14,17

7

God has chosen House of Jacob. God will not give his glory “unto another.” The Lord will fulfill his word and is sending a prophet to lead “thee by the way thou shouldst go.”

1 Nephi 21

26

God will remember and redeem the House of Israel. “Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.” “Yet will I not forget thee.” “I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands.”

1 Nephi 22:3–14,19

13

Nephi explains Isaiah’s prophecy that Lord will gather Israel. All “who fight against Zion shall be cut off.”

2 Nephi 1:5–7

3

God will lead people to America. Land consecrated to them; they are cursed if wicked, at liberty if righteous.

2 Nephi 3:6–21

16

Joseph (of Egypt) prophesied of a seer who will help bring the gospel to the House of Israel and that Moses would deliver Israel out of Egypt.

2 Nephi 3:24

1

A descendant of Joseph (Nephi’s brother) would be mighty in doing much to restore Israel.

2 Nephi 6:5

1

Jacob (Nephi’s brother) read words of Isaiah about Israel.

2 Nephi 6:6–7

2

House of Israel will be helped by the Gentiles. “They shall not be ashamed that wait for me.”

2 Nephi 6:8–9

2

People at Jerusalem will return after the Babylonian captivity.

2 Nephi 6:11–18

8

Despite suffering many afflictions, Israel will be restored. “The Mighty God shall deliver his covenant people.” Their enemies will be destroyed. “The people of the Lord shall not be ashamed. For the people of the Lord are they who wait for him; for they still wait for the coming of the Messiah.”

2 Nephi 7:1–3

3

Despite its iniquity, the Lord still will redeem Israel. If one doubts, remember the Lord controls nature.

2 Nephi 8

25

“Lord shall comfort Zion.” “Redeemed of the Lord shall return.” Lord pleads “the cause of his people.” A plea for Israel to follow the Lord and remember his promises. Israel’s oppressors will be put down.

2 Nephi 9:1–2

2

House of Israel “shall be restored to the true church and fold of God” and “gathered home” to their lands.

2 Nephi 10:7–9

3

House of Israel “shall be gathered in from their long dispersion.”

2 Nephi 10:13–17

5

The Lord will fulfill his covenants. Those fighting Zion “shall perish.”

2 Nephi 10:21–22

2

Lord remembers those on “isles of the sea” and those he “has led away … from the house of Israel.”

2 Nephi 13:10

1

“Say unto the righteous that it is well with them.”

2 Nephi 14:2–6

5

Isaiah prophesied redemption of Israel. Shelter from heat, storm, and rain and a defence will be provided.

2 Nephi 15:26–30

5

The Lord will gather Israel. People will come rapidly, without sleeping or taking off their shoes.§

2 Nephi 16:13

1

“They [a remnant] shall return.”

2 Nephi 17:3

1

The name of Isaiah’s son (Shearjashub) means “the remnant shall return.”

2 Nephi 17:4–8

5

Ahaz promised that Ephraim’s and Syria’s attack on Judah “shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass.”

2 Nephi 19:1–7

7

“The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light [Messiah].” Nation multiplied. Joy increased.

2 Nephi 20:20–34

15

“The remnant shall return … unto the mighty God.” Their enemies will be destroyed.

2 Nephi 21:11–16

6

“The Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people.”

2 Nephi 24:1–3

3

Israel “shall return to their lands of promise.” Lord will give Israel rest from sorrow, fear, and bondage.

2 Nephi 24:32

1

“The Lord hath founded Zion, and the poor of his people shall trust in it.”

2 Nephi 25:11

1

Jews would return to Jerusalem after Babylonian captivity.

2 Nephi 25:16–18

3

“The Lord will set his hand again the second time to restore his people from their lost and fallen state.”

2 Nephi 25:21

1

Joseph’s seed “should never perish.”

2 Nephi 26:12

1

Nephi “spake concerning the convincing of the Jews, that Jesus is the very Christ.”

2 Nephi 27:6

1

“Lord God shall bring forth … the words of a book.”

2 Nephi 27:28

1

“Lebanon shall be turned into a fruitful field.”

2 Nephi 27:33–34

2

“Jacob shall not now be ashamed.” They “shall fear the God of Israel.”

2 Nephi 29

14

Jews are Lord’s covenant people. God will “set my hand again the second time to recover my people, which are of the house of Israel.” Opposition to God’s efforts and anti-Semitism are condemned.

2 Nephi 30:7

1

“Jews … also shall begin to believe in Christ; and they shall begin to gather in … and as many as shall believe in Christ shall also become a delightsome people.”

Jacob 4:14–18

5

How can the Jews build upon the “stone” they rejected? Jacob says he will explain “this mystery.”

Jacob 5

77

Jacob rehearses the allegory of olive tree, symbolic of Israel. The house of Israel is tame olive tree.

Jacob 6:1–4

4

The Lord will fulfill his covenant with the house of Israel. “He stretches forth his hands unto them all the day long.” Those who work in Lord’s vineyard are blessed.

Mosiah 12:22–23

2

“The Lord shall bring again Zion.” “The Lord hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem.”

Mosiah 15:29–30

2

“The Lord shall bring again Zion.” “The Lord hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem.”

3 Nephi 5:21,23–26

5

The Lord “hath blessed the house of Jacob.” Lord’s covenant to gather house of Jacob will be fulfilled.

3 Nephi 15:5,8

2

The Lord covenanted with Israel. The covenant “is not all fulfilled.”

3 Nephi 16:4–5

2

Israel will receive the gospel from Gentiles and will be gathered from throughout the earth.

3 Nephi 16:9–15

7

If the Gentiles (who have smitten the house of Israel) do not repent, Israel “shall tread them down.”

3 Nephi 16:17–20

4

“The Lord shall bring again Zion.” “He hath redeemed Jerusalem.”

3 Nephi 20:11–13, 18–23, 25, 27–46

30

Remnants of the house of Israel will be gathered from all over the earth. “The Father hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem.”

3 Nephi 21

29

When Lord’s words to the Book of Mormon people come from Gentiles to Lehite descendants, the Lord has commenced fulfilling his covenant with the house of Israel. The Lord will gather people from all nations.

3 Nephi 22

17

“Enlarge the place of thy tent … inherit the Gentiles.” “With great mercies will I gather thee.” To those who were forsaken and to sinners who embrace the gospel, “with great mercies will I [the Lord] gather thee.” “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper.”

3 Nephi 23:1–4

4

Isaiah words are great. He spoke on “all things concerning my people which are of the house of Israel.”

3 Nephi 24:1–4, 6–7, 10–12, 16–18

12

Sons of Levi will be purified. “Return unto me and I will return unto you, saith the Lord of Hosts.” Pay tithes, and “ye shall be a delightsome land.” Those who fear Lord to be his. Discern righteous and wicked.

3 Nephi 25:2–3

2

Those who fear Lord shall “grow up as calves in the stall” and shall “tread down the wicked.”

3 Nephi 25:5–6

2

The Lord will send Elijah before “the great and dreadful day of the Lord.”

3 Nephi 28:28–29

2

Three Nephites will be among the Jews.

3 Nephi 29:1–3, 8–9

5

Lord’s covenant to Israel will be fulfilled. This is underway when “these sayings” come to the Gentiles.

4 Nephi 1:49

1

Records hidden to come again “unto the remnant of the house of Jacob,” according to the Lord’s promises.

Mormon 3:21

1

The Jews are “the covenant people of the Lord.” Mormon writes to persuade them that Jesus is the Christ.

Mormon 5:12–14

3

Mormon’s account “written unto the remnant of the house of Jacob” and will go to Jews, to persuade them that Jesus is the Christ” and to help them be restored to their lands. All to help God fulfill his covenant.

Mormon 5:20–21

2

After Lehite descendants smitten by Gentiles, Lord will remember his covenant with Abraham and house of Israel. The Lord will remember the prayers for the house of Israel.

Mormon 7:8

1

A record of gospel will go from Jews to the Gentiles.

Mormon 8:15

1

Moroni links having an “eye single to [God’s] glory” and “the welfare of the ancient and long dispersed covenant people of the Lord.” Person bringing Book of Mormon record to light would have these traits.

Mormon 8:21–22

2

“He that shall breathe out wrath and strifes … against the covenant people of the Lord … the same is in danger to be hewn down and cast into the fire.” “All [the Lord’s] promises shall be fulfilled.”

Mormon 9:37

1

Moroni prays, “may God the Father remember the covenant which he hath made with the house of Israel.”

Ether 4:14–15

2

Israel invited to “come unto me.” If they believe, they will know that God “remembered the covenant.”

Ether 13:3–12

10

New Jerusalem built “unto remnant of the seed of Joseph.” Gathering also will occur to “Jerusalem of old.”

Moroni 10:31

1

Invitation to Israel to “put on thy beautiful garments” so covenants to House of Israel “may be fulfilled.”

Total Count

460

§٢ Nephi ١٥:٢٦–٣٠ has been interpreted in two opposite ways. First, the Lord calls the Assyrian army which then attacks rebellious Israel (Gardner, Second Witness pp. 238–239). Second, as stated in this table, Israel is gathered in the latter days as an ensign is raised to the world and people travel rapidly by train or airplane (LeGrand Richards, Israel! Do You Know? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1954,1990], p. 182).

Table 19. Book of Mormon prophecies, messages, or invitations that pronounce blessings or potential blessings specifically to Lamanites or to Lehite descendants. Each line is a separate prophecy or a distinct part of a larger prophecy (50 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

Title Page

2

Book of Mormon written to Lamanites. They are a remnant of the house of Israel. One purpose of the book is to help “the remnant” learn their heritage and the Lord’s covenants. “They are not cast off forever.”

1 Nephi 5:17–18

2

Lehi says plates of brass would go to all “who were of his seed” of “all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.”

1 Nephi 13:11–12,14,30–31

5

God angry with Lehite descendants, and they are smitten by Gentiles. However, God will not let Gentiles destroy Lehite descendants.

1 Nephi 13:38–39

2

Scriptural record from Jews and “other books” will come to Lehite descendants via Gentiles.

1 Nephi 15:7,12–17

7

Lehites are branch of the house of Israel. Lehite descendants will receive gospel via the Gentiles.

1 Nephi 19:23–24

2

Nephi read Isaiah to Nephites because Isaiah’s words pertain to them, “a remnant of the house of Israel.”

1 Nephi 22:7–8

2

Gentiles would scatter Lehite descendants and then bring gospel to them.

2 Nephi 1:5–7,9

4

The Lord gave Lehites America for their inheritance. They will be cursed if wicked, at liberty if righteous.

2 Nephi 3:2

1

“May the Lord consecrate also unto thee [Joseph, Nephi’s brother] this land.”

2 Nephi 3:3,23

2

Seed of Joseph (Nephi’s brother) “shall not utterly be destroyed.”

2 Nephi 3:5

1

Joseph (of Egypt) saw Lehites as a righteous branch of Israel. Messiah manifest to them in the latter days.

2 Nephi 3:24

1

A descendant of Joseph (Nephi’s brother) would be mighty in doing much to restore Lehites.

2 Nephi 4:2

1

Joseph (of Egypt) prophesied of the Lehites and their future.

2 Nephi 4:3–9

7

Lehi blessed the children and seed of Laman and Lemuel. He blessed the children that cursing “be answered upon the heads of your parents.” God will be merciful to children and seed of Laman and Lemuel. “In the end thy seed shall be blessed.”

2 Nephi 4:11

1

Sam and his posterity are blessed.

2 Nephi 6:5

1

Isaiah’s words about house of Israel apply to Lehites because they are part of the house of Israel.

2 Nephi 9:1–3

3

Jacob presented Lord’s covenants to Israel, so Nephites could rejoice in blessings to come to their children.

2 Nephi 9:53

1

Nephite seed “shall not utterly be destroyed” and “shall become a righteous branch unto the house of Israel.”

2 Nephi 10:1–2

2

Nephite descendants would “perish …because of unbelief,” but many will be restored to “the true knowledge of their Redeemer.”

2 Nephi 10:10, 12, 18–22

7

Gentiles will afflict Lehite descendants, but Lord will soften Gentiles. Gentiles will help Lehite descendants. Gentiles “shall be like unto a father to [Lehite descendants].” They have claim to America for their inheritance. The Lord remembers the Lehites.

2 Nephi 11:2

1

Nephi likened Isaiah’s words unto his people.

2 Nephi 25:4

1

Nephites “are of the house of Israel.”

2 Nephi 26:14–16

3

After Lehite descendants are smitten by Gentiles, the descendants will receive the writings of their ancestors who were destroyed.

2 Nephi 28:2

1

“Things … written out of the book shall be of great worth … especially unto our seed” (part of Israel).

2 Nephi 29:2,13

2

God will honor promises made to Nephi about his seed. Nephite descendants will have other records.

2 Nephi 30:3–6

4

Lehite descendents will receive the “words which are written” from Gentiles. The descendants will hear the gospel and rejoice. “They shall be a pure and a delightsome people.”

Jacob 3:5–6

2

Because Lamanites are monogamous and chaste, Lord will be merciful to them. “One day they shall become a blessed people.”

Enos 1:10

1

“I have given unto them this land, and it is a holy land.”

Enos 1:13,15–18

5

Lord covenanted with Enos and his fathers to bring Nephite records to Lamanites.

Alma 9:14–17,24

5

Lord will be merciful to the Lamanites. “At some period of time they will be brought to believe in his word.”

Alma 17:15

1

Despite “curse of God,” “the promises of the Lord were extended unto them on the conditions of repentance.”

Alma 26:36

1

God has been mindful of the Lehites, who are part of Israel.

Alma 37:9–10,19

3

Records kept by Nephites helped restore “many thousands of the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth … , and [the Lord] will also still show forth his power in [the records] unto future generations.”

Alma 46:23

1

“We are a remnant of the seed of Jacob; … we are a remnant of the seed of Joseph.”

Helaman 7:24

1

Lord will bless the Lamanites, “lengthen out their days and increase their seed.”

Helaman 15:10–16

7

Lord will bless Lamanites “because of their firmness when they are once enlightened,” “even if they should dwindle in unbelief” and “notwithstanding they shall be driven to and fro upon the face of the earth.”

3 Nephi 5:22

1

“Insomuch as the children of Lehi have kept [God’s] commandments he hath blessed them and prospered them according to his word.”

3 Nephi 10:4–7

4

Lehites are part of Israel, and the Lord will gather the Lehites “if ye will repent and return unto me.”

3 Nephi 10:17

1

Jacob testified of “a remnant of the seed of Joseph.” Mormon believes the Lehites fulfill “these things.”

3 Nephi 15:12–13

2

Lehites are “a remnant of the house of Joseph.” “The Father” gave the Lehites America for their inheritance.

3 Nephi 16:16

1

Christ said the land of America is a dwelling place for the Lehites.

3 Nephi 20:10–22, 25–28

17

Lehites are a remnant of Israel. God gave land of America for inheritance of Lehites. “If the Gentiles do not repent” after scattering “my people,” then the Lehites will overpower the Gentiles.

3 Nephi 21:2–5, 7, 12–26

20

Gentiles shall bring gospel and Book of Mormon to Lehite descendants (“work of the Father” commences then). Unless Gentiles repent Jacob will be “a lion” among them. Lehites will build New Jerusalem.

3 Nephi 26:8

1

Mormon intends for his words to go to Lehite descendants via Gentiles, as Jesus prophesied.

3 Nephi 29:8

1

Do not “make game of … any of the remnant of the house of Israel.” Lord remembers his covenant to them.

4 Nephi 1:49

1

Records hidden to come again “unto the remnant of the house of Jacob,” according to the Lord’s promises.

Mormon 5:9–11,15

4

Lehite descendents will learn of Nephite destruction and will be sorry. Also, the destruction is told, “that the seed of this people may more fully believe his gospel.”

Mormon 7:1–2, 8–10

5

Lehite descendants are a remnant of Israel. They will receive record of the Jews through the Gentiles. They are part of the house of Israel and therefore people of the first covenant.

Mormon 8:23–24

2

“As the Lord liveth he will remember the covenant which he hath made with [the Lehite saints].”

Ether 12:22

1

Lehite descendants to receive gospel through Gentiles.

Total Count

146

Table 20. Book of Mormon verses that prophesy or describe wickedness among the Jews or the House of Israel, and verses that prophesy of the consequences of that wickedness. Except as noted, each line is a separate prophecy or description (43 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

1 Nephi 1:4,13,18–20

5

Lehi and other prophets warned Jews of impending destruction unless they repent. Jews sought to kill Lehi.

1 Nephi 2:1,13¶

2

Wickedness among Jews at Jerusalem noted again.

1 Nephi 3:17–18

2

Jerusalem would be destroyed because of wickedness. The people had rejected the prophet’s words.

1 Nephi 7:13–14

2

Jerusalem would be destroyed. Prophets rejected. Jeremiah put in prison. Lehi’s life threatened.

1 Nephi 10:2–3

2

Jews of Lehi’s day would be destroyed and many “carried away captive into Babylon.”

1 Nephi 10:11–13

3

Jews would dwindle in unbelief and slay Messiah. Israel would be “scattered upon all the face of the earth.”

1 Nephi 11:27–28,32–35

6

Jesus would be rejected “by the people.” “House of Israel” would “fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”

1 Nephi 15:17

1

Jews, or house of Israel, would reject the Lord.

1 Nephi 17:30–31,41–44

6

Israelites under Moses were wicked and were punished. Jews at time of Lehi were also wicked and will be destroyed.

1 Nephi 19:7–11, 13–14

7

When the Lord comes 600 years after the Lehites left Jerusalem, “the world” judges him “to be a thing of naught.” “Because they crucify the God of Israel” and reject God, Jews will “be scourged by all people” and “hated among all nations.” Calamities would occur when Christ dies.

1 Nephi 20:1–2, 4–5,8,18

6

House of Jacob has not followed the Lord.

1 Nephi 21:1

1

“The wickedness of the pastors of my people”

1 Nephi 22:5

1

Because they rejected “Holy One of Israel,” House of Israel will be scattered “and shall be hated of all men.”

2 Nephi 6:8–11

4

After return from Babylon, people at Jerusalem will scourge and crucify the Holy One of Israel. “After they have hardened their hearts and stiffened their necks against the Holy One of Israel, … the judgments of the [Lord] shall come upon them.” “They shall be smitten and afflicted … and hated.”

2 Nephi 7:1–2,10–11

4

“For your iniquities have ye sold yourselves.” Israel is following the wrong path. It will bring sorrow.

2 Nephi 8:12–13, 17

3

Israel should not “be afraid of man, who shall die,” nor forget the Lord. Jerusalem “hast drunk at the hand of the Lord the cup of his fury.”

2 Nephi 10:3–6

4

Wicked Jews would kill Jesus and suffer “destructions, famines, pestilences, and bloodshed.” Survivors “shall be scattered among all nations.”

2 Nephi 12:5–10

6

House of Jacob has “gone astray”; “their land is also full of idols.” “The fear of the Lord and the glory of his majesty shall smite thee.”

2 Nephi 13:1–9, 11–26

25

Jerusalem and Judah would suffer because of their wickedness.

2 Nephi 14:1¶

1

After war, women unsupported, unmarried, and childless. “Seven women … take hold of one man.”†

2 Nephi 15

30

“Their root shall be rottenness … because they have cast away the law of the Lord of Hosts.”§

2 Nephi 16:5,9–12

5

Isaiah dwelt with “people of unclean lips.” The Lord’s teachings are rejected, suffering will result.

2 Nephi 17:1–2,5–8

6

Ephraim joined with Syria and attacked Judah. Within 65 years, Ephraim will “be broken.”

2 Nephi 17:9–25

17

“If ye will not believe surely ye shall not be established.” An alliance with Assyria would bring calamity.‡

2 Nephi 18:1,3–4

3

Maher-shalal-hash-baz means “to speed to the spoil, he hasteneth the prey.” Ephraim to be destroyed soon.

2 Nephi 18:5–15, 17, 19–22

16

Calamities prophesied against Judah because “this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah.”

2 Nephi 19:1–2

2

“The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light.”

2 Nephi 19:8–21

14

Syrians and Philistines will “devour Israel.” Wickedness abounds.

2 Nephi 20:1–6

6

The Lord will send Assyria “against a hypocritical nation.”

2 Nephi 25:2,6,9–10,12–16,18

10

Nephi observed wickedness among Jews. They would suffer destruction and wars. They would reject Messiah. Jerusalem would be destroyed after Christ came, and Jews would be scattered and scourged.

2 Nephi 27:1–5

5

All nations of the Jews “will be drunken with iniquity and all manner of abominations.”

Jacob 4:14–15,17

3

“Jews were a stiffnecked people.” “They will reject the stone upon which they might build.”

Jacob 6:4

1

House of Israel called “a stiffnecked and a gainsaying people.”

Mosiah 3:9

1

Christ would come to “his own,” but they would scourge and crucify him.

Mosiah 3:14–15

2

“God saw that his people were a stiffnecked people.”

Mosiah 15:5

1

Christ would allow himself to be mocked, scourged, cast out, and disowned “by his people.”

Mosiah 13:29,32

2

“Children of Israel … were a stiffnecked people, quick to do iniquity, and slow to remember the Lord.”

3 Nephi 9:16

1

“I came unto my own, and my own received me not.”

3 Nephi 15:18–19

2

Lehites separated from Israelites because of their iniquity, which has kept them from knowing about Lehites.

3 Nephi 16:7–9

3

Because of unbelief of House of Israel, Gentiles will receive fullness of gospel in latter days. Gentiles would scatter, cast out, and tread upon Israel. House of Israel smitten and hated (“hiss and a by word”).

3 Nephi 17:14

1

Jesus “troubled because of the wickedness of the people of the house of Israel.”

3 Nephi 20:38

1

“Ye have sold yourselves for naught.”

3 Nephi 24:7–9, 13–15

6

“Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them.” People have robbed God, spoken against him, said “it is vain to serve God,” and called proud happy.

Mormon 3:21

1

“The Jews, the covenant people of the Lord,” slew Jesus.

Ether 4:14–15

2

Unbelief has caused Israel to remain in an “awful state of wickedness.”

Total Count

232

¶Continuation of the previous entry (one line above)

†This verse is a continuation of 2 Nephi 13 and describes a desperate situation for women after many men are killed by war (see Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon: Volume 2 Second Nephi–Jacob (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007) 225.

§٢ Nephi ١٥:٢٦–٣٠ has been interpreted in two opposite ways. First, as stated in this table, the Lord calls the Assyrian army which then attacks rebellious Israel (Gardner, Second Witness pp. 238–239). Second, Israel is gathered in the latter days as an ensign is raised to the world and people travel rapidly by train or airplane (LeGrand Richards, Israel! Do You Know? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1954,1990], p. 182).

‡ Gardner, Second Witness pp. 247–256.

Table 21. Book of Mormon passages condemning anti-Semitism. Each line is a separate instance (11 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

1 Nephi 22:14, 19

2

“Every nation which shall war against thee, O house of Israel, shall be turned one against another, and they shall fall into the pit which they digged to ensnare the people of the Lord.” “All they who fight against Zion shall be cut off.”

2 Nephi 6:7,13–18

7

“The Mighty God shall deliver his covenant people.” Their enemies will be destroyed.

2 Nephi 8:21–23

3

The Lord’s people will no longer drink from the “cup of [the Lord’s] fury.” The Lord “will put it into the hand of them that afflict thee.”

2 Nephi 10:13–17

5

Anyone who fights against Zion, Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female, “shall perish”

2 Nephi 27:3

1

“All the nations that fight against Zion, and that distress her, shall be as a dream of a night vision.”

2 Nephi 29

14

Anti-Semitism is condemned. Gentiles are warned. God “will return all these things upon your own heads.” God’s promises to Israel will be honored. God speaks to more than just people of Bible.

2 Nephi 33:14

1

“Respect the words of the Jews” and other scriptures or be condemned.

3 Nephi 22:11–17

7

“Thou shalt be far from oppression for thou shalt not fear, and from terror for it shall not come near thee… . whosoever shall gather together against thee shall fall for thy sake.”

3 Nephi 29:8–9

2

Do not persecute the Jews or others of the House of Israel. “Ye need not any longer hiss, nor spurn, nor make game of the Jews, nor any of the remnant of the House of Israel.” The Lord will fulfill his covenant with them.

Mormon 4:5

1

“It is by the wicked that the wicked are punished.”

Mormon 8:21–22

2

“He that shall breathe out wrath and strifes … against the covenant people of the Lord who are the house of Israel … the same is in danger to be hewn down and cast into the fire.”

Total Count

45

Table 22. Book of Mormon passages that prophesy of wickedness among the Gentiles and contain warnings for them to repent. Each line is a separate prophecy or a distinct part of a larger prophecy (17 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

1 Nephi 13:4–9, 26–34

15

“Great and abominable church” formed among Gentiles. Gentiles “stumble” and are in an “awful state of blindness.” God will not let them destroy the Lehite descendants and will bring gospel to them.

1 Nephi 14:5–6

2

“Wo be unto the Gentiles” if “they harden their hearts against the Lamb of God.”

2 Nephi 6:12

1

Gentiles blessed if they repent and “fight not against Zion.”

2 Nephi 26:19–22

4

Gentiles will smite Lehite descendants; Gentiles are wicked.

2 Nephi 27:1–5

5

All nations of the Gentiles “will be drunken with iniquity and all manner of abominations.”

2 Nephi 28:32

1

“Wo be unto the Gentiles.” Gentiles “will deny me,” but God reaches out and will bless them if they repent.

2 Nephi 29

14

Gentiles have persecuted Jews. God “will return all these things upon your own heads.” Gentiles should not dismiss the record of Nephites that will come forth.

3 Nephi 16:8–15

8

“Wo … unto the unbelieving of the Gentiles.” Lord allowed Gentiles to smite Israel, but if Gentiles do not repent they will be smitten. Gentiles “lifted up in … pride … above the people of the whole earth.” If they repent, “they shall be numbered among my people.” If not, Israel “shall tread them down.”

3 Nephi 20:15–17, 19–20, 27–28

7

“If the Gentiles do not repent after the blessing which they shall receive, after they have scattered my people,” “I will return their iniquities upon their own heads.”

3 Nephi 21:6,12–25

15

If they repent, Gentiles will be “numbered among … the remnant of Jacob.” “Wo be unto the Gentiles except they repent.”

3 Nephi 30

2

Jesus said, “turn, all ye Gentiles, from your wicked ways … that ye may be numbered with my people.”

Mormon 5:9, 20–24

6

Lehite descendants “should be counted as naught” among Gentiles and be driven and scattered by the Gentiles. The Gentiles need to repent!

Mormon 8:27–33, 35–41

14

The Book of Mormon would come forth in a day of great wickedness, including that people do not care for others. “The sword of vengeance hangeth over you”

Ether 2:11

1

Gentiles need to repent, a warning to “not bring down … the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done.”

Ether 4:6,13

2

To receive special blessings from the Lord, Gentiles need to “repent of their iniquity” and “come unto me.”

Ether 8:23–25

3

Gentiles need to remove secret combinations from among them.

Ether 12:28,35

2

Lord will show Gentiles their weakness and will “prove them” if they “have not charity.”

Total Count

102

Table 23. Book of Mormon accounts of armed conflict or accounts related to armed conflict. These are wars between Nephites and Lamanites or civil wars among Nephites or Jaredites.

Topic

Abbreviation in Table 23

Nephite-Lamanite War

NL War

Nephite-Lamanite Short War

NL Sh.

Nephite-Lamanite Major War

NL Maj.

Nephite Civil War

N Civ.

War Attitutes/Motives

Attitu.

Jaredite War (number)

J War

Reference

CV

NL War

NL Sh.

NL Maj.

N Civ.

Attitu.

J War

Summary

1 Nephi 12:2–3, 15–16

4

x

Nephi sees in vision “wars, and rumors of wars, and great slaughters with the sword among my people” and final Lamanite-Nephite war. Latter linked to “fountain of filthy water which thy father saw” and “the depths of hell.”

2 Nephi 5:14,34

2

x

x

Nephi reports preparations for war and “wars and contentions with our brethren.” Lamanites hate the Nephites.

2 Nephi 12:2–4

3

x

After Lord’s kingdom is established and people learn of the Lord’s ways, “nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.”

2 Nephi 21:9

1

x

“They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.”

2 Nephi 26:2

1

x

Nephi notes that “great wars and contentions” would occur “among [his] people.”

2 Nephi 26:32

1

x

“The Lord God hath commanded that men … should not contend one with another.”

2 Nephi 30:15

1

x

“They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.”

Jacob 1:10

1

x¶

Nephi had “wielded the sword of Laban in their defence.”

Jacob 7:24–26

3

x

x

Wars and contentions occurred in Jacob’s time. Lamanites hate the Nephites

Enos 1:14

1

x

Angry Lamanites seek to destroy Nephites and their records.

Enos 1:24

1

x

“I saw wars between the Nephites and Lamanites.”

Jarom 1:7–9,13

4

x

“Many times” the Lamanites came to battle against Nephites. Nephites prevail.

Omni 1: 2–3,10

3

x

“Much war and contention” between Nephites and Lamanites reported.

Omni 1:17

1

x

Many civil wars occurred among people of Zarahemla.

Omni 1:24

1

x

“A serious war and much bloodshed between the Nephites and the Lamanites”

Omni 1:28

1

x

A battle occurred among a group of Nephites.*

Words of Mormon 1:13–14

2

x

War in reign of King Benjamin reported. Lamanite invasion repelled, many thousands of Lamanites killed.

Mosiah 1:14

1

x

Lamanites hate Nephites.

Mosiah 9:1–2

2

x¶

Seeing good in Lamanites, Zeniff contended and fought with other Nephites to avoid attacking Lamanites. “Greater number of our army was destroyed.”*

Mosiah 9:10–19

10

x

x

Lamanites want to bring Nephite setters into bondage and fear settlers will get too strong. Lamanites attack. Nephites repel attack.

Mosiah 10:1–2, 6–20

17

x

x

Second fray between Nephite settlers (in Lamanite territory) and Lamanites. Lamanites justified war because they believed Nephites had wronged them. Lamanites defeated.

Mosiah 11:16–18

3

x

x

Lamanites “exercise their hatred” and attack Nephite settlers again. Attack repelled.

Mosiah 19:6–15,18–26, 28

20

x

x

Lamanites attack and conquer Nephite settlers. Settlers placed in bondage. Internal conflict between King Noah and priests and men who fled with them. King is killed.

Mosiah 20

26

x

After kidnapping by rogue Nephite settlers, Lamanites retaliate against other Nephites, but Nephites repel attack and pacify Lamanites. Settlers remain in bondage.

Mosiah 21:2–9

8

x

x

Nephite settlers (in Lamanite lands) grow weary of subjugation under the Lamanites. Settlers attack Lamanites and are defeated.

Mosiah 21:10–11

2

x

x

Angry Nephite settlers attack Lamanites a second time and again are defeated.

Mosiah 21:12–13

2

x

Nephite settlers attack Lamanites a third time, are defeated, and submit to Lamanites.

Mosiah 23:25–39

15

x

Nephite kidnappers of Lamanite women pacify Lamanite army and join the Lamanites. This combined group captures a group of Nephite settlers.

Mosiah 29:1–11, 16–17, 21–24,35–36

19

x

King Mosiah’s sons refuse to be king. He proposes that the Nephites have judges instead of kings to “make for the peace of this people,” to avoid potential contentions about who should be king and bloodshed because of iniquity.

Alma 2:8–22

15

x

Dissenting Nephites (Amlicites) take up arms against other Nephites.

Alma 2:23–38

16

x

Nephite nation is attacked by Lamanites and Nephite dissenters. Attack is repelled.

Alma 3:20–23

4

x

Another attack of Lamanites against Nephites repelled.

Alma 16:1–9

9

x

Lamanites destroy Nephite city of Ammonihah, attack one other area, and take captives. Lamanite army repelled and captive people recovered.

Alma 16:12

1

x

A Lamanite-Nephite war occurred three years after the last war.

Alma 20:10,13

2

x

Head Lamanite king states hatred for Nephites.

Alma 22:33–34

2

x

“The Lamanites were an enemy to [the Nephites].” Nephites kept Lamanites to south.

Alma 25:1–3

3

x¶

x

Ammonihah attack (and probably war three years later) continued. Upset Lamanites sought vengeance against Nephites.

Alma 27:1

1

x¶

x

Attacks against Nephites were fruitless.

Alma 28:1–3

3

x

Lamanites attack Nephites and are repelled in “a tremendous battle,” greatest battle yet.

Alma 28:4–6,9–14

9

x

The cost of war is terrible.

Alma 35:10–11,13

3

x

Zoramites influence Lamanites to come to war against Nephites.

Alma 43:3–54

52

x¶

x

Lamanites led, at least in part, by Nephite dissenters begin war with Nephites. Zerahemnah (leader of Lamanite army) was motivated by a desire for power. Nephites motivated to protect lands, families, liberties, and people of Ammon; Lord commanded Nephites to defend their families. Lamanites “fight like dragons,” but Nephites prevail.

Alma 44:1–23

23

x¶

x

Zerahemnah desires to gain power and place Nephites in bondage. Nephites fighting for faith, family and liberty. Nephites defeat Lamanite army despite being outnumbered. Lamanites covenant never to come against Nephites again.

Alma 46:1–7, 11–13, 17–21, 28–35

23

x

x

Amalickiah, a Nephite, desires to be king and amasses followers. They are willing to fight other Nephites until they see they are outnumbered. Moroni motivates people to preserve their liberty. Many of Amalickiah’s followers are captured. Amalickiah and a few others escape.

Alma 48:1–16, 21–25

21

x

x

About one year after covenanting to not come to war, Lamanites led by Nephite dissenters come against Nephites. Moroni prepared Nephite defenses. Nephites reluctantly fight. They are taught to defend themselves and only kill in self-defense. By keeping God’s commandments, he will help them know how to defend themselves.

Alma 49:1–28

28

x¶

Lamanites come against more fortified Nephites. Lamanites are defeated, but their king (Amalickiah) swears to drink blood of leader of the Nephite army.

Alma 50:1–7,9–12

11

x

Nephites prepare for next war. As protective measure, Nephites “drove all the Lamanites who were in the east wilderness into their own lands.”

Alma 50:21

1

x

Nephite quarrelings, murderings, plunderings, and other abominations brought war.

Alma 50:25–36

12

x

Land dispute among Nephites escalates into an armed conflict.

Alma 51:9–37

29

x

x

Six years after last war, a great, six-year war between Nephites and Lamanites begins. Amalickiah leads Lamanite army. Nephites are distracted by civil war. Lamanite army captures many Nephite cities, and many Nephites are killed. Amalickiah is killed.

Alma 52

40

x¶

Ammoron, Amalickiah’s brother, becomes Lamanite leader. War is fought on two fronts. Nephites retake one city.

Alma 53

23

x¶

Lamanites make some gains. Sons of converted Lamanites join Nephite army.

Alma 54

24

x¶

x

Ammoron and Moroni exchange letters. Prisoner exchange proposed. Motives given.

Alma 55

35

x¶

Nephite prisoners of war released by stratagem. Nephites make other gains.

Alma 56

57

x¶

Helaman leads sons of people of Ammon. They are courageous and fight valiantly.

Alma 57

36

x¶

Nephites regain two more cities. Sons of people of Ammon fight valiantly.

Alma 58

41

x¶

Nephites regain more territory. They drive Lamanites out of one part of the land.

Alma 59

13

x¶

Lamanites capture city of Nephihah. Moroni “was exceedingly sorrowful.”

Alma 60

36

x¶

x¶

Moroni accuses Pahoran and Nephite government of neglect.

Alma 61

21

x¶

x

x

Pahoran replied. A “freemen” vs. “king-men” civil war had begun among Nephites. “Whatsoever evil we cannot resist with our words … let us resist … with our swords.”

Alma 62:1–42, 44–45

44

x¶

x¶

x

King-men and Lamanites defeated. Six-year war ends. Many hardened by war.

Alma 63:14–15

2

x

Eight years after six-year war, Nephite dissenters again lead Lamanites unsuccessfully against Nephites.

Helaman 1:14–33

20

x

Two years after last war, another Nephite dissenter leads Lamanites against Nephites. Invasion repelled.

Helaman 3:17,22

2

x

“The wars and contentions began to cease… among the people of the Nephites.”

Helaman 4:1–10, 13, 16, 18–19

14

x

x

“Much bloodshed” occurs in an intra-Nephite contention. Sixteen years after last war, Nephite dissenters again induce Lamanites to war against Nephites. This war lasts five-years. Lamanites capture capital and “almost all their lands.” Nephites regain only half.

Helaman 10:18

1

x

Civil war begins among the Nephites. “They were divided against themselves and began to slay one another with the sword.”

Helaman 11:1–2

2

x¶

War occurs “throughout all the land among all the people of Nephi.”

Helaman 11:24–33

10

x

x

Nephite dissenters induce some Lamanites to war again. They become guerrilla fighters (and a band of robbers) and fight both Nephite and Lamanite armies.

3 Nephi 2:11–13,17–18

5

x

Nephites and Lamanites unite to fight robber band. The Nephites and Lamanites “gain some advantage,” but later the robbers “did gain many advantages.”

3 Nephi 3

26

x¶

x

War between Nephites-Lamanites and robbers continues as robbers demand surrender and Nephites and Lamanites gather together in one place to defend themselves. Leader of the robber band claims “many wrongs” were committed unto his people. Leader of Nephite-Lamanite army will not take offensive action.

3 Nephi 4:1–28

28

x¶

Robber band defeated by united Lamanites and Nephites.

3 Nephi 11:28–30

3

x

“The devil … stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another… . This is my doctrine, that such things should be done away.”

3 Nephi 12:9

1

x

“And blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.”

4 Nephi 1:2,15

2

x

People dealt justly. “No contention … because of the love of God” in people’s hearts.

Mormon 1:8–12

5

x

Great, final war begins between the Nephites and Lamanites. Nephites defeat Lamanites. Peace exists for about four years.

Mormon 2:1–9,16,20–29

20

x¶

War continues. Over a 23-year period, Nephites retreat before Lamanites, hold and repel Lamanities and robbers, and make a treaty with Lamanites and robbers.

Mormon 3:1,4–11

9

x¶

x

War continues, Nephites beat Lamanites twice. Nephites, motivated by revenge, want to attack Lamanites. Mormon refuses to lead Nephites.

Mormon 3:15

1

x

The Lord said, “vengeance is mine, and I will repay.”

Mormon 4:1–4

4

x¶

Nephites attack Lamanites and are beaten.

Mormon 4:5

1

x

“The wicked … stir up the hearts of the children of men unto bloodshed.”

Mormon 4:6–23

18

x¶

x

Lamanites attack and are beaten. A “horrible scene of … blood and carnage” was there. This was the greatest wickedness ever seen among Israel. Human sacrifice done. Nephites “began to be swept off by [the Lamanites] even as a dew before the sun.”

Mormon 5:3–11

9

x¶

x

Nephites retreat before the Lamanite army. Mormon saw “an awful scene of blood and carnage.” This “calamity of the house of Israel” was the result of wickedness.

Mormon 6:1–15

15

x¶

Many thousands of Nephites killed at final, great battle at Cumorah.

Mormon 7:4

1

x

Do not delight in shedding of blood. Go to war only if God commands.

Mormon 8:2–3,7–8

4

x¶

x

Mormon and other Nephites are killed. “Lamanites are at war one with another.”†

Ether 6:21–28

8

x

Jaredites choose to have a king despite the brother of Jared’s warning that “surely this thing leadeth into captivity.”

Ether 7:4–5,7–9,15–21

12

4

Civil war begins among the Jaredites. Four wars occur.

Ether 8:2–6

5

2

Two more Jaredite civil wars occur.

Ether 9:1–12

12

1

After splitting into two kingdoms, a multi-year war within one kingdom leaves only 30 survivors. Great evil led to the war.

Ether 10:5–9, 14–15, 30–32

10

4

At least four more wars occur among Jaredites. Two additional “rebellions” occur.

Ether 11:4, 7, 15–18

6

5

Five more Jaredite armed conflicts occur (respectively, “exceedingly great war,” “wars and contentions,” “gave battle,” “did overthrow,” and “did overthrow”).

Ether 13:15–16, 18–19, 22–31

14

1

A great civil war occurs among the Jaredites.

Ether 14

31

2

Two wars occur between two rival Jaredite groups.

Ether 15:1–32

32

1

Continuation of one war¶, a four-year pause, then final war. Jaredites destroyed.

Moroni 1:1–3

3

x¶

Moroni wanders to avoid being killed by Lamanites.

Moroni 9:2,7–10,16–17

7

x¶

More details of final war between Nephites and Lamanites.

Total Counts

1137

7

20

3

14

40

20

*c.f. Mosiah 9:1–3 with Omni 1:27–29 to see the likely connection.

¶Continuation of a previous entry (in same column above), i.e. the same conflict.

† Although the Nephites were “destroyed,” the record states that many Nephites became Lamanites during the course of the final Nephite-Lamanite war, and Nephite survivors were absorbed into the Lamanite group (Mormon 6:15; Moroni 1:1–2, 9:24). Therefore, I include this mention of civil war among the count of Nephite civil wars.

Table 24. Book of Mormon passages that mention conspiracies (secret combinations). Each line is a separate instance (37 total).

Reference

CV

Summary

2 Nephi 9:9

1

The devil “stirreth up” “secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness.”

2 Nephi 10:15

1

The Lord will destroy “secret works of darkness, and of murders, and of abominations.”

2 Nephi 26:22–23

2

Secret combinations prophesied among Gentiles. “The Lord God worketh not in darkness.”

Alma 37:21–22, 25–26, 28–31

8

Secret combinations led and will lead to destruction. Participants must repent before “fully ripe.”

Helaman 1:7–12

6

Kishkumen murders Pahoran, the chief judge, as part of a conspiracy. The conspirators swear secrecy.

Helaman 2:3–11

9

Kishkumen, Gadianton, and fellow conspirators attempt to murder Helaman, the chief judge.

Helaman 2:13–14

2

“This Gadianton did prove the overthrow, yea, almost the entire destruction of the people of Nephi.”

Helaman 3:23

1

Peace in the land except “the secret combinations which Gadianton the robber had established.”

Helaman 6:15–30. 37–39

19

Two Nephite chief judges are murdered by secret band. “Gadianton’s robbers and murderers” grow among Nephites and gains control of their government. Lamanites eliminate band by preaching word of God to them.

Helaman 7:4–6,25

4

Nephi tells a Nephite crowd “wo be unto you because of that great abomination” (Gadianton’s band).

Helaman 8:1, 4, 27–28

4

Nephi condemned “secret works of darkness” and prophesied a murder involving members of the secret band.

Helaman 10:3

1

“Secret works of darkness” among the wickedness of the Nephites.

Helaman 11:2

1

Secret band of robbers were behind the destructive wars among the Nephites.

Helaman 11:10

1

Nephites “swept away the band of Gadianton from amongst them.”

Helaman 11:25–33

9

Another group becomes “robbers of Gadianton.” They make “great havoc” among both Nephites and Lamanites.

3 Nephi 1:27–29

3

Gadianton robbers “do much slaughter among the people.” Both Nephites and Lamanites join the secret band.

3 Nephi 2:11–13, 17–18

5

Gadianton robbers are “so numerous” that Lamanites and Nephites unite and fight them.

3 Nephi 3:1–12, 14–15, 17

15

Robbers demanded surrender of Nephite and Lamanites, but they refuse. Robbers promised to attack.

3 Nephi 4:1–29

29

Robber band attacks united Nephites and Lamanites and is defeated. Two robber leaders are killed.

3 Nephi 5:4–6

3

“They did put an end to all those wicked, and secret, and abominable combinations.”

3 Nephi 6:27–30

4

Murderers conspire to protect each other and destroy the Lord’s people and the government.

3 Nephi 7:1–2, 6, 9–11

6

Chief judge murdered by conspiracy, Nephite government destroyed, and the people separated into tribes.

3 Nephi 9:9

1

Secret combinations that destroyed “the peace of my people and the government of the land” “was above all the wickedness of the whole earth.

3 Nephi 30:2

1

“Turn, all ye Gentiles, from your wicked ways; and repent … of your secret abominations.”

4 Nephi 1:42

1

“The wicked part of the people began again to build up the secret oaths and combinations of Gadianton.”

4 Nephi 1:46

1

“The robbers of Gadianton did spread over all the face of the land.”

Mormon 1:18

1

“These Gadianton robbers, who were among the Lamanites, did infest the land.”

Mormon 2:8, 10, 27–28

4

“The land was filled with robbers.” Robbers and Lamanites fought against the Nephites.

Mormon 8:9

1

“Robbers” continued after the Nephite nation was destroyed.

Mormon 8:27, 40

2

“The blood of saints shall cry unto the Lord, because of secret combinations and the works of darkness.”

Ether 8:7–25

19

Jared, his daughter, Akish, and Akish’s kinsfolk form a conspiracy to kill the king. These secret combinations are “most abominable and wicked above all, in the sight of God.” Secret combinations “are had among all people.” They caused destruction of the Jaredites and Nephites and will destroy any nation that upholds them.

Ether 9:1–12

12

A conspiracy leads to splitting of Jaredites into two kingdoms. Conspiracy spreads within one kingdom, and a civil war occurs. All but 30 people are killed.

Ether 9:26–27

2

Heth conspires and kills his father, the king.

Ether 10:33–34

2

Robbers adopt “the old plans … and sought again to destroy the kingdom.” Com fights robbers but does not prevail.

Ether 11:7,15,22

3

“Wicked combinations,” “that secret combination,” and “secret society” cause great wickedness among Jaredites.

Ether 13:15, 18, 26

3

Secret combinations abound.

Ether 14:8–10

3

Secret combinations again are noted as contributing to the terrible war and wickedness among the Jaredites.

Total Count

190

THE BOOK OF MORMON AS A RESURRECTED BOOK AND A TYPE OF CHRIST

George L. Mitton

Abstract: This essay emphasizes the remarkable participation of the Book of Mormon in the gospel symbolism of death and resurrection. It explains how the Book of Mormon itself may be seen as a resurrected book, witnessing Christ’s resurrection in a remarkable way.

[Editor’s Note: Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article is reprinted here as a service to the LDS community. Original pagination and page numbers have necessarily changed, otherwise the reprint has the same content as the original.

See George L. Mitton, “The Book of Mormon as a Resurrected Book and a Type of Christ,” in Remembrance and Return: Essays in Honor of Louis C. Midgley, ed. Ted Vaggalis and Daniel C. Peterson (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation; Salt Lake City: Eborn Books, 2021), 121–46. Further information at https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/remembrance-and-return/.]

Overcoming death through the Resurrection is at the heart of Christ’s great achievement and promise for mankind. It is a theme that undergirds all Christian doctrine, bringing meaning and purpose to the disciple’s life. We are reminded of it in the ordinances, such as in baptism by immersion, which incorporates rich symbols of Christ’s burial and resurrection;[1] in the Lord’s Supper, which reminds us of his death while looking forward to a promised association with him in the Resurrection; and in the rites of the temple, which help us to contemplate and prepare for an eventual reunion with God beyond the grave. It may even be seen in the anointing of the sick with oil, where healing by God’s power may be viewed as an anticipation and assurance of the Resurrection and the Judgment, in which all things are to be set in final order.[2] The very ubiquity of symbols of the Resurrection suggests we should be alert to recognize many symbolic things that can bring grateful contemplation of the promised life to come.

My purpose here is to emphasize the remarkable participation of the Book of Mormon in the gospel symbolism of death and resurrection. I will explain how the Book of Mormon itself may be seen as a resurrected book, witnessing Christ’s resurrection in a special way. In addition to providing instructive teachings on resurrection, and including a wonderful description of the resurrected Lord, I believe that the Book of Mormon has been brought about by the power of God through a miraculous procedure that causes it to exemplify the pattern set by the life and mission of Christ, including His burial and resurrection.

There are many ways in which the Book of Mormon typifies Christ. Important counterparts between the life and mission of the Lord and the book may be seen in the book’s origin in heaven; its teachings in and to the world about the doctrine from above; its rejection, burial, and subsequent resurrection out of the ground; the attestation of its reality by eleven special witnesses chosen of the Lord; and with angelic assistance, the ascension to heaven of the golden plates on which the book was written, with promise of their future return. Finally, both the Lord and the Book of Mormon will be of great importance at the Final Judgment. I will discuss these and other notable counterparts below, first approaching the concept of resurrected books with some background understandings and intimations from the past. This will be followed by a more detailed consideration of the Book of Mormon as a type and symbol along with the ritual manner of its production, and brief comments on implications and purposes.

Resurrected Books—Hints and Suggestions from the Past

In 1830, soon after publication of the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith restored another ancient text now known as the Book of Moses. In that book, the Lord declared that

…all things have their likeness, and all things are created and made to bear record of me, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual; things which are in the heavens above, and things which are on the earth, and things which are in the earth, and things which are under the earth, both above and beneath: all things bear record of me. (Moses 6:63)[3]

In connection with the concept of resurrected books generally—and the Book of Mormon in particular—this language is especially instructive and appropriate. I will now discuss some additional scriptures and writings that appear relevant, or that place the Book of Mormon in close relationship with the Resurrection.

A passage from Psalms states that “Truth shall spring out of the earth; and righteousness shall look down from heaven” (Psalm 85:11). From the early days of the Church, this scripture has been considered by Latter-day Saints as a biblical prophecy about the Book of Mormon.[4] There is also a passage with strong affinity to it in the Book of Moses which reads: “And righteousness will I send down out of heaven; and truth will I send forth out of the earth,” but to which is added a significant statement of purpose: “to bear testimony of mine Only Begotten; his resurrection from the dead; yea, and also the resurrection of all men” (Moses 7:62). This would be a basic purpose of the Book of Mormon. Considered thus, the Book of Mormon may be seen as an important witness of the Resurrection, and even more so as we recognize that the symbol of its coming forth from the earth is reminiscent of the Lord’s resurrection.

Ezekiel 37 is of special interest to the Latter-day Saints. It contains the familiar prophecy of the two sticks that come together in the latter days in connection with the gathering or restoration of Israel. The stick of Judah and the stick of Joseph are seen as representative of the Bible and the Book of Mormon, as well as the tribes of Israel associated with them (Ezekiel 37:16–21).[5] An important purpose of the Book of Mormon is to provide a sign of the gathering of Israel. The chapter in Ezekiel has two powerful themes—resurrection and Israel’s restoration. Notably, the chapter opens with the prophecy of the dry bones that come together: God breathes life into them, and they live again. This recalls the moment of Creation when the breath of life made Adam a living soul (Genesis 2:7).[6] Conventional scholarship has generally considered the coming together and revival of the dry bones as entirely symbolic of Israel’s gathering and restoration, and basically holds that resurrection is primarily a New Testament concept. For example, N. T. Wright, in his notable book on the Resurrection, sees the “dry bones” prophecy as “the most obviously allegorical or metaphorical” of passages.[7] However, in an important recent study, Harvard Professor Jon D. Levenson has shown that very much more was taught and understood about resurrection in Old Testament times than has generally been assumed.[8] In harmony with the teaching of the Book of Mormon that there was a very substantial knowledge of resurrection among ancient prophets, the Latter-day Saints understand references to revival of the “dry bones” as allusions to a literal bodily resurrection. Viewed thus, the “dry bones” prophecy is seen both as a metaphor for Israel’s restoration and also an anticipation of a literal resurrection. In this way, the scattering and gathering of Israel may be seen as a significant symbol of death and resurrection. When related to the prophecy of Ezekiel, the Book of Mormon provides a strong corroborating witness that God will overcome death and “resurrect” both the individual body and the covenant nation.

In the Book of Mormon the words of Isaiah are held in great esteem.[9] Indeed, some of Isaiah’s prophecies are interpreted as related to the Book of Mormon itself. For instance, Mormon sees Isaiah as having prophesied that those who have gone before Mormon will “cry, yea, even from the dust will they cry unto the Lord” and the knowledge about them shall come “out of the earth…even as if one should speak from the dead.”[10] Isaiah 29 is considered of particular importance to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.[11] It employs similar imagery, saying “thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground…and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust” (Isaiah 29:4). Like imagery alluding to the grave is found many places in the Book of Mormon, notably in 2 Nephi chapters 26 and 27, which consider Isaiah’s prophecy as anticipating the latter-day restoration of the Nephite text. In both the Book of Mormon and the Bible these expressions relate to the graves of the conscious dead and to the revival of their past thought.[12] These strong resurrection overtones relate directly to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon.

The Significance of Hidden Books and Records

In a very informative study, John Tvedtnes has brought together many examples from the ancient world in which books and records have been hidden away and buried with the obvious purpose and intent of allowing them to become available again at a future time.[13] This is, of course, a conspicuous motif in the Book of Mormon.[14] Throughout his study Tvedtnes compares many similarities of practice, especially involving sacred texts of the ancient Near East. His study demonstrates “that various elements of the Book of Mormon story have antecedents in the ancient world,” including “the concept of writing and hiding books in such a way that they could be discovered by future generations; the use of special containers, such as stone boxes, in which to hide records; and hiding the books in mountains.”[15] As well as writings, important sacred relics were also hidden for future use, even as relics were found together with the Book of Mormon plates.[16]

The idea of converting thought to written form evokes the theme of durability or permanence. In regard to the concept of resurrected books, it is important to note the frequency with which sacred writings were hidden in coffins, tombs, cemeteries, or in other contexts connected with burial of the dead. At these solemn occasions resurrection might readily be considered and pondered. The ancient practice of anointing with oil might be performed on the book to be hidden, as it is also performed in preparing the dead for burial. This suggests a desire for preservation and the anticipation of a future revival of the book as with the dead.[17] Would those who conceived of and had hope of a resurrection not be inclined to see the revival of a sacred hidden book from its grave as emblematic of the resurrection? As Tvednes observed, “Interment of the dead and of texts in tombs is analogous to the burial of records in the ground. Just as the dead will be resurrected, so too the records will come forth to future generations.”[18]

A Surprising Account from the Renaissance

It is fitting that a writing from the Renaissance contains allusions to the concept of resurrected books. “Renaissance,” of course, means “re-birth,” and the name evokes a period of resurgence in learning stimulated by the revival of ancient books that had been lost. Elsewhere I have expressed my understanding that the Renaissance was a “marvelous and mysterious period that did so much to help prepare the world for what the Latter-day Saints see as the last days—for conditions that would allow the restoration and teaching of the everlasting gospel.” I added my opinion that it “may be that we should consider the possibility that the Renaissance period was not only a preparation for but also a prefiguration and a witness of what was to come,” and further that it was “perhaps even a kind of grand allegory not told as a story or parable but actually acted out in history.”[19] Be that as it may, this important time saw the introduction of printing and a renewal of the biblical scriptures in a form to make them available to many more people than ever before. Establishment of a scriptural background and literacy was a necessary preparation for the coming forth, understanding, and acceptance of the Book of Mormon.

That said, it was with astonishment that I encountered some recently discovered writings of John Dee (1527–1609), a polymath of the English Renaissance, whose vivid accounts suggested to me for the first time the concept of resurrected books and its application to the Book of Mormon. Dee was learned in many subjects and served as a respected advisor, tutor, and astrologer to Queen Elizabeth I. He assembled the largest private library in the land and was also a passionate antiquarian, doing much to further the preservation of ancient manuscripts, records, and monuments.[20] Importantly, among Dee’s efforts were “his strivings towards a complete restitution of the ancient wisdom” and in “laying the foundation for a restitution of the Christian faith.”[21]

In spite of his scholarly attainments, Dee became a controversial figure because he thought his knowledge would be insufficient unless it incorporated direct revelation or communication with the angels. This he diligently sought, and together with his colleague and scryer (seer) Edward Kelley (1555–1597) and the use of a “shew-stone,”[22] he recorded much in the way of claimed personal revelation. Some thought Dee’s revelations were authentic; others that Dee and Kelley were deceived or deceivers; yet others saw their writings as the result of black or white magic—which caused him no end of persecution. As for myself, I believe that there may be some truth in more than one of these perspectives on Dee’s complex and challenging writings. I will also offer that my own reading of his revelations had mixed results, not only raising many serious questions but also providing some significant insights.

Fifty years after Dee’s death, many of what he termed “actions” with the angels were compiled and published by Meric Casaubon.[23] In this compilation, under the heading Liber Resurrectionis, appears a part of Dee’s 1586 account of the important revelatory episode that I discuss here.[24] Unfortunately, the Casaubon account of Dee’s experience was incomplete and did not contain enough detail to give a clear understanding and appreciation of what Dee said had transpired. Fortunately, a supplementary account from Dee that was lost for nearly four centuries was found and first published in 1965 under the title “An Unknown Chapter in the Life of John Dee.”[25] I refer to this additional source also to help provide a brief summary of the events in Dee’s report of greatest interest to the Latter-day Saints.

John Dee’s Book of Resurrection

In approaching the accounts from John Dee and Edward Kelley, it is important to observe that they were greatly interested in alchemy, and that the incident discussed here occurred in connection with their alchemical laboratory. While the forerunner of modern chemistry, alchemy was also a spiritual discipline that employed many symbols. Much of that symbolism was impressive and persisted and was widely influential in the ritual of Freemasonry[26] and elsewhere. Alchemists were concerned with the transformation of matter. Such changes could be seen by them as miraculously brought about by the direct intervention of God or Christ. It was believed that the transformation of matter would symbolize and help bring about a desired transformation in the soul of the alchemist himself. Moreover, it appears that changes in matter in alchemical experiments were often conceived of as bearing a relationship to death and resurrection and to the transformation of Christ in the Resurrection.[27] This background of alchemical speculation provides a significant backdrop to Dee’s account.

In beginning his narrative, Dee states that he was “enjoined by God Almighty to commit those things to writing which He communicates to us” and that “without any doubt, when the fulness of the appointed time has run its course…many of the things which we have received and understood by divine communication and in secret…will be published and known to the world in a most abundant, manifest, complete, and effective way” to the honor of God.[28] As to the time, from Dee’s choice of words here, I infer that he may allude to the “dispensation of the fulness of times” (Ephesians 1:10).[29]

Dee recounts that on 10 April 1586 Kelley heard a voice requiring their attention, and that they “then repaired speedily to our oratory (the accustomed place of divine visitation)[30] where…we waited for the word of the Lord.”[31] When the word came, they were surprised to be directed to gather up the books and papers containing their revelations and burn all of them in the furnace. This would be the alchemical furnace where experimental transformations were effected—“the large tiled stove next to Dee’s oratory.”[32] These writings were precious to them, and Kelley was reluctant to carry out the commandment. Dee, however, encouraged him, likening the action to the test of Abraham’s faith when he was commanded to offer Isaac in the “holocaust”—a sacrificial burnt offering.[33] This “arrested sacrifice” has always been interpreted as a type of the Lord’s sacrificial death and resurrection (Genesis 22:5–13). Isaac was saved by divine intervention, but loss of him would have prevented fulfillment of solemn promises made to Abraham. Similarly, if their writings were to be lost, Dee and Kelley would also suffer the sad consequences and contradiction of unrealized promises. However, the Voice reassured them, although the books and papers were to be completely burned: “Do I not resuscitate the dead? Go then, and have faith.”[34] Stones were removed from the mouth of the furnace, and eventually all of the materials were placed in the opened furnace and burned entirely.[35]

In a miraculous sequel, Dee says that a few days later Kelley was looking out his window and saw “the Gardiner” pruning trees, and then “on the Rock in the Garden he seemed to mount up in a great pillar of fire.”[36] Kelley sought Dee, and together they went into the garden to see what they could find. Dee said that “(to the prayse of God his truth and power,) there I found three of my Books lying, which were so diligently burnt….”[37] Dee added that “I fell on my knees with great thanks yielding to the God Almighty, and so did [Kelley] whose mind and body were mervailously affected at the sight….”[38] After thankful prayer by Dee and Kelley, “[s]uddenly appeared by us the self-same Gardiner like person” who directed Kelley to follow him.[39] The angelic figure was “apparently visible to Dee,”[40] who described “the spiritual creature,” noting that “his feet seemed not to touch the ground by a foot height.”[41] Kelley is led by the spiritual being to the furnace, “the bricks now plucked away which stopped the mouth of the Furnace….”[42] A “great light” appeared within as they recovered many more of the books and papers that had been burned, which Kelley then brought to Dee as “the Gardiner” departed once again in a “fiery cloud.”[43]

What are we to think of Dee’s surprising account, so different than most of his other writings? I have provided here a brief review of it. So far as I have observed, writers who discuss Dee tend to be silent on this incident, or if they mention it do not appear to recognize the exceptional imagery of death and resurrection that gives it significant meaning. This symbolism ought to be the most evident thing about it, as the appearance of “the Gardiner” reminds us of the New Testament narrative where Mary first supposed the resurrected Christ to be the gardener (John 20:15). To this is added the concept of the holocaust or sacrificial burnt offering, “a similitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father” (Moses 5:7; Jacob 4:5). The essential idea is that revealed books that had perished were “resurrected” in a setting emblematic of Christ’s death and resurrection. Indeed, Dee’s own account of this incident may in a sense be considered a “resurrected book,” since it was lost and later restored.

I do not attempt to say whether Dee’s account is real or imaginary, but review it here because of its inherent interest and that it caused me to ponder how its striking idea of resurrected books might apply elsewhere. A recent biographer of Dee has commented on this incident that “[o]f all the episodes in these manuscripts, the sixteenth-century’s most remarkable account of angelic magic, this most defies historical explanation. History cannot account for what Kelley did and what Dee believed he saw. It can only describe the consequences.”[44] For my part, whatever caused the creation of these documents, the consequence was to alert me to recognize and consider a most interesting and important aspect of the Book of Mormon.

The Lord and the Book of Mormon:

Illustrative Counterparts

The Book of Mormon teaches that “all things which have been given of God from the beginning of the world, unto man, are the typifying” of Christ (2 Nephi 11:4). The Book of Mormon itself is a strong example of this principle. Seeing it as a “resurrected book” and as a similitude of the resurrected Christ recognizes a type of great import. However, the broader context should be surveyed to identify other counterparts between the book and the life and mission of the Lord. Here I list chronologically and briefly discuss twelve illustrative counterparts. Doubtless more could be adduced, but a consideration of these basic examples should make clear that the Book of Mormon may be understood as a most significant type of the Christ.

Counterpart 1: An Origin in Heaven

In the Gospel of John, the Lord spoke of himself as the “bread of life,” saying that “my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven” and that “the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world” (John 6:32–35). He then added plainly, and with allusion to the Resurrection: “I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day” (John 6:38–39). That he brought his teachings from the Father above is clear also from his intercessory prayer in which he said: “Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me” (John 17:7–8). These and related passages firmly establish the important New Testament doctrine that Christ and his mission began in Heaven and that he was sent of God the Father to accomplish His divine purposes.[45]

The Book of Mormon also provides a witness of Christ’s heavenly origin, and does so in a remarkable manner. It also shows that the Book of Mormon had its origin in the same heavenly place. This is well established in the opening chapter. There we read that about 600 B.C. at Jerusalem the prophet Lehi was “carried away in a vision, even that he saw the heavens open, and…God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God” (1 Nephi 1:8). He was shown “One descending out of the midst of heaven, and he beheld that his luster was above that of the sun at noon-day. And he also saw twelve others following him…and they came down and went forth upon the face of the earth” (1 Nephi 1:9–11). Manifestly, this refers to the commissioned Christ and the Apostles, the Greek word for apostle meaning literally a “sent one.” At the time it was shown Lehi in vision, this would have been a future event.

In the same heavenly vision, the Lord “gave unto [Lehi] a book, and bade him that he should read” (1 Nephi 1:11). What he learned in his visions is the basis of his teachings, that “which he had both seen and heard…and also the things which he read in the book, [which] manifested plainly of the coming of a Messiah, and also the redemption of the world.” (1 Nephi 1:18–19; cf. John 3:31–32, emphasis added). His teachings were abridged by his son Nephi and written “upon plates” (1 Nephi 1:17). This vision, which is doubtless the source of Lehi’s prophetic authority in which he became a “sent one,” is also the beginning of the Book of Mormon, which thus can be traced to its origin at the throne of God, likewise the place of Christ’s commission. The description of the plates as gold in appearance accords with the mentioned “luster” of the Lord, the glory of God, and the light and brilliance of the celestial court above.

It should be observed that since the publication of the Book of Mormon in 1830, many visionary accounts from the ancient Near East have been discovered and studied together with biblical sources. These other examples or apocalypses have similar motifs, and help us to understand better the nature of Lehi’s experience when they are compared with it. Referred to as “Throne-Theophanies” or “Heavenly Ascents,” these visions are of supreme importance with respect to the calling of the prophets and to the origins of their teachings, testimony, and authority.[46]

Of very important interest for the Book of Mormon is the motif of the “Heavenly Book” such as Lehi was given to read while in his vision. “The heavenly book motif…appears throughout the Judeo-Christian scriptures, but it truly comes into its own in apocalypses where it is ubiquitous.” [47] In his classic and wide-ranging study of this concept, the Swedish scholar Widengren found that “Few religious ideas in the Ancient Near East have played a more important role than the notion of the Heavenly Tablets, or the Heavenly Book…the oft-recurring thought that the Heavenly Book is handed over at the ascension in an interview with a heavenly being.”[48] He also shows how the prophets received their commission there. Thus they became a “sent one” to take the teachings of the heavenly book to be disseminated on earth.[49] With its origin in heaven, the Book of Mormon itself may be seen as a “Heavenly Book” because it is based on and transfers teachings to earth from the Book in the heavenly realm. Brent McNeely has examined basic elements of the heavenly book motif as identified by Widengren and compared them to Lehi’s vision and the events at the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, finding close agreement.[50] Jeffrey Bradshaw and David Larsen also explore this theme with respect to the heavenly record given to Enoch in the ancient book of 1 Enoch and the latter-day Book of Moses.[51]

Counterpart 2: “Incarnation” of the Lord and the Book

In his vision, Lehi saw the Lord “descending out of the midst of heaven” and that He “came down and went forth upon the face of the earth” (1 Nephi 1:9–11). This is what is known as the descent and incarnation of Christ, notably referred to by John in the opening of his Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God”—[and] the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:1–2, 14). It is important to recall that while the Lord is called “the Word,” the Book from above is also known as the “word” of God.

Based on an interpretation of John’s statement, at times Christians have also deemed the Bible an “incarnation,” or an embodiment of the teachings from above in a form compatible on earth. This is a helpful and insightful analogy. A recent study explained the concept: “Logos, the Word, was the very embodiment of the Creator, revealed to Creation through the incarnation…and through the abiding physical manifestation of the gospel book that contained his teachings, itself incarnated”—it became, literally, the “Word made flesh, or rather, the Word made word.”[52] This is not an unreasonable view, for some early Christian writers even regarded “Christ as text.”[53] Being so closely associated with the Heavenly Book, the Lord was seen as the personification of it, possessing and expressing the teachings from above. In this manner, just as with the biblical scriptures, the Book of Mormon, in its capacity as a “Heavenly Book,” may also be viewed as an “incarnation” in likeness to that of the Lord.

Counterpart 3: Christ as “Temple” and the “Temple-like” Book

The concept of the book incarnate can be related to the idea of the temple—an assigned place where god and man may meet. Whereas Christ “spake of the temple of his body” (John 2:21), the scriptural book “was itself a sacred space—a tabernacle of the Word and a place for the enshrinement and contemplation of ideals. This space could be inhabited both by the maker and the viewer.”[54] A holy book, such as the Book of Mormon, may thus be considered a temple-like place—that is a special prepared place where God and man can better communicate, or where the Lord through his Spirit can meet with prayerful readers to enhance their understanding.

LeGrand Baker has studied the temple-like characteristics of the Book of Mormon in some detail. He found that the prophet Mormon, who edited and arranged it, had to be very familiar with “all facets of ancient Israelite temple worship” and concluded that “his commentary is so precisely matched to the legitimate purpose, workings and theoretical structure of the ancient Israelite temple drama that the Book of Mormon is virtually an ancient Israelite temple in its own right.”[55]

Counterpart 4: Heavenly Teachings from Christ and the Book

Having descended to earth and sent of the Father from the Heavenly Court above, Christ and the apostles who assist him are “sent ones” who disseminate the heavenly teachings of God. The Book of Mormon might also be seen figuratively as a “sent one,” its doctrines originating from God and the Heavenly Book above, and primarily brought to earth by the prophet Lehi for dissemination among the people (1 Nephi 1:19).

Counterpart 5: After Their Rejection, the Lord and the Book are Buried

John said of Christ that “He came unto his own, and his own received him not” (John 1:11). Isaiah had prophesied that the Savior, as a ‘Suffering Servant,’ would be “rejected of men,” a prediction quoted in the Book of Mormon (Isaiah 53:3; Mosiah 14:3). The Crucifixion was the culmination of that rejection, after which his body was buried in the tomb by his followers. In the Book of Mormon, after the people “have all dwindled in unbelief” and “rejected the gospel of Christ,” the prophet Moroni hid the writings in the earth as he was specifically commanded by God (Ether 4:3).

A study of Christ’s discourse to the Nephites brings out the concept that the ‘Suffering Servant’ in Isaiah, which refers to Christ, may also apply to others who typify Him, and also specifically to the Book of Mormon as a servant, “using a literary device called personification, which applies human attributes to inanimate objects.”[56]

Counterpart 6: Christ and the Book Teach the Spirits of the Dead

In a significant event known as the Descensus, Christ went in the spirit to teach the spirits of the dead while his body was in the tomb awaiting the Resurrection (1 Peter 3:18–20; 4:6).[57] In early times, “the Christian Faith once proclaimed more widely a tenet that was a consolation to believers as they anticipated their inevitable deaths: Christ’s descent to the dead.”[58] Revelation to the Latter-day Saints causes them to regard this event as one of great importance in beginning to provide for the instruction and salvation of the dead. We might consider that the buried Book of Mormon went “underground,” and that its teachings were made available to help teach the dead. In President Joseph F. Smith’s 1918 vision of Christ among the spirits, he saw the Lord organize the prophets of old to assist in their instruction. The revelation specifically included mention of “the prophets who dwelt among the Nephites,” the prophets of the Book of Mormon who taught of the Christ and whose teachings would have been informed by Lehi’s early doctrines as derived from the Heavenly Book (D&C 138:49).

Counterpart 7: Christ and the Book “Come Forth” from the Grave

When Joseph (of Arimathea) entombed the body of Christ, it was placed in a “new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre” (Matthew 27:60). After the Resurrection of the Lord, “they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre” (Luke 24:2). The “stone was rolled away: for it was very great” (Mark 16:4). When Joseph (Smith) unearthed the golden plates of the Book of Mormon from the hillside, he found that “under a stone of considerable size, lay the plates, deposited in a stone box” (Joseph Smith—History 1:51). He explained: “Having removed the earth, I obtained a lever, which I got fixed under the edge of the stone, and with a little exertion raised it up. I looked in, and there indeed did I behold the plates” (Joseph Smith—History 1:52).

Thus, when both the Lord and the Book of Mormon plates were interred, they were each placed in a stone enclosure with the opening covered by a large stone that later had to be removed. The New Testament narratives pertaining to the Resurrection offer parallels to Joseph Smith’s experience in “resurrecting” the Book of Mormon. First of all, there was the angel dressed in white who proclaimed the resurrection,[59] and the Book of Mormon was also proclaimed by an angel (Moroni). Their celestial glory and brilliance that marked the events was reflected also in the glorious golden plates. The title page of the Book of Mormon says that it was “hid up unto the Lord [buried], to come forth in due time.” Come forth appears to be resurrection language, for in the account of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead—an account that has many parallels to the New Testament resurrection narratives—Jesus “cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth” (John 11:43, emphasis added). Again, John says “the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth” in the resurrection (John 5:28–29). The Book of Mormon has the very same usage.[60]

There are other similarities to be considered, such as the body of Jesus being wrapped in linen clothes (John 19:40, 20:6–7). Lucy Mack Smith tells of her son Joseph taking the plates from where they were hidden, “wrapping them in his linen frock.”[61] Wife Emma’s account tells of the plates being “wrapped in a small linen table cloth, which I had given [Joseph] to fold them in.”[62] In another and most significant parallel, there were serious restrictions on seeing and touching the risen Lord and the plates (John 20:17; Ether 5:1). However, later when witnesses were permitted, Jesus said “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see” (Luke 24:39). Likewise, the Eight Witnesses of the Book of Mormon testified that when they saw the golden plates they “did handle with [their] hands” the leaves that had been translated. These parallels suggest the need for further study to identify other possible relationships.

Counterpart 8: Witnesses Called of God Testify of Christ and the Book

The resurrected Christ and the resurrected Book of Mormon each have eleven official witnesses who were called of God to testify of their reality.[63] Of the Christ, Peter said, representing the apostles, “Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead” (Acts 10:40–41). In the Book of Mormon, it had been prophesied that three witnesses would be called to “behold it, by the power of God…and they shall testify to the truth of the book and the things therein…and there is none other which shall view it, save it be a few according to the will of God, to bear testimony of his word…that the words of the faithful should speak as if it were from the dead” (2 Nephi 27:12–13). The three were chosen by revelation (D&C 17:1–5). Later eight more witnesses were designated. The testimonies of these witnesses are found in the published Book of Mormon.[64] In the New Testament, Thomas was a belated witness separated from the others, as was Martin Harris with the Book of Mormon.[65]

In both the New Testament and in Latter-day Saint history, some other persons were also allowed to view these sacred things. Angelic assistance was present in both the ancient and modern witness accounts. In the New Testament, the Apostles saw attending angels in “white apparel,” and Joseph Smith described the attending angel Moroni as clothed in a “robe of most exquisite whiteness.”[66] It is such similarities between the two accounts that are impressive. In his biography of Joseph Smith, John Henry Evans noted the criticism that some of the Book of Mormon witnesses were close relatives, yet he observed that Joseph “would have to select them from among those who were believers; and believers at this particular time were few…Anyway, that is not really an objection, in view of the fact that the men otherwise are qualified.”[67] It should be remembered that some New Testament witnesses of the Resurrection were close relatives also.

Counterpart 9: Christ and the Book have Secret or Reserved Teachings

Jesus taught a body of secret or reserved doctrines during his forty-day ministry after the Resurrection (Acts 1:3). The Book of Mormon has a reserved portion that has been “sealed” and is currently withheld, but will yet be revealed (2 Nephi 27:6–11).

Counterpart 10: Christ and the Book Open a New Dispensation

In the latter-day restoration of the Gospel and the Church, the resurrected Lord and the resurrected Book of Mormon begin a new dispensation—“the dispensation of the fulness of times” (Ephesians 1:10). The Lord appeared directly to Joseph Smith in the First Vision and otherwise, and gave much revelation to the Prophet for doctrine and for guidance on organization and procedures. The Book also is the source of much doctrinal correction and understanding and is of very substantial assistance in matters of Church operations and administration. The “Book of Mormon had a profound formative influence on Joseph Smith’s doctrinal and institutional development during the nascent days of the nineteenth-century Mormon restoration.”[68]

Counterpart 11: Both Christ and the Book Ascend Back to Heaven

After the Resurrection, as Jesus prepared to depart from the Apostles, he called them to be his witnesses, and “while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight” (Acts 1:9). Two attending angels in “white apparel” said “this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

Of the golden plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated, the Prophet Joseph Smith recalled that “they remained safe in my hands, until I had accomplished by them what was required at my hand. When, according to arrangements, the messenger called for them, I delivered them up to him; and he has them in his charge” (Joseph Smith-History 1:60). The messenger was the attending Angel Moroni, for both the plates and the Lord had angelic assistance at the ascent. From another account by Joseph of a visit by Moroni which describes his manner of departure, we learn that “instantly [Joseph] saw, as it were, a conduit open right up into heaven, and he ascended till he entirely disappeared” (Joseph Smith-History 1:43). It appears that the golden plates, a “Heavenly Book,” returned to heaven as did the Lord, each with angelic company. Even as the Lord shall return again, it appears that the Book of Mormon plates also will be fully restored to earth (2 Nephi 27:11; D&C 101:32–34, 121:27–28).

Counterpart 12: The Lord and the Book Are Authoritative at the Judgment

It is well established in the scriptures that Christ will be judge of mankind in the Final Judgment.[69] The “Father…hath committed all judgment unto the Son” (John 5:22). His teachings are to be found not only in the Bible, but also in the Book of Mormon as they were taught by the Lord himself and the Nephite prophets. Thus, at the end of the Book of Mormon, Moroni writes of the Judgment, and of resurrected words, when he declares: “ye shall see me at the bar of God; and the Lord God will say unto you: Did I not declare my words unto you, which were written by this man, like as one crying from the dead, yea, even as one speaking out of the dust?” (Moroni 10:27). The Book of Mormon is an important source for the heavenly teachings of Christ, and contains standards and commandments by which people will be judged.

In the Book of Mormon account of the appearance of Christ to the Nephites, the Lord explained: “And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross…that I might draw all men unto me, that as I have been lifted up by men even so should men be lifted up…to stand before me, to be judged of their works” (3 Nephi 27:14). We have here the concept of a reciprocal or two-way judgment, where men first judge Christ and later are to be judged by Him accordingly.[70] How the Book of Mormon is judged is also of consequence here because it is a type of Christ and like the Bible contains many of his words and teachings.[71] The Lord had said: “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” (John 12:48; cf. 2 Nephi 29:11).

Ritual Aspects of the Book of Mormon Translation

It is most important to recognize that many things in this study point to the fact that the Book of Mormon was produced by a ritual procedure. Things among the counterparts identified above appear to be of a symbolic and ritual nature. A basic chiastic pattern is likely, with the pivotal center of death and resurrection—descent from heaven/ascent to heaven. This pattern would apply to both the Lord and the Book.

In an insightful commentary, Jan Shipps has shown that many happenings in Latter-day Saint history may be seen as a “recapitulation” of things in ancient sacred history.[72] This is true to a notable degree regarding the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, which she sees as beginning the recapitulation process by affording people who came to America the sacred history and teachings of a people that came before them. She even likens it to “the priests’ discovery in the recesses of the temple of a book said to have been written by Moses [that] told the people in King Josiah’s reign about those who came to Israel before them.”[73] Josiah’s averred recovery from the temple of what were thought to be pure writings from the past (a “resurrected book”?)provided a basis for his reformation. Generally thought to be the book of Deuteronomy, Josiah’s discovery can be understood as coming forth from a special mountain, for modern studies of the ancient temple have shown that temples were considered an imitation of the sacred mountain where revelation was received by the prophets—“the mountain of the Lord’s house” (Isaiah 2:2).[74] The Book of Mormon followed a similar pattern: coming forth from a dedicated hillside tomb and providing teachings from the past to support a gospel restoration.

Joseph Smith lived a richly symbolic life—a ritual life, if you will.[75] If with angelic guidance he was led through a ritual procedure to enable the Book of Mormon to come forth, it may well help explain some of the unusual things Joseph did, experienced, or symbolized. We should use caution as we consider and interpret Joseph’s unusual actions until we better understand the symbolic or ritual things he was given to do. We have much to learn about these eternal things, and about the purpose and meaning of some things Joseph experienced.

As an example of the challenge to better understand Joseph Smith’s procedures, I suggest considering how he went about arranging things, under angelic direction,[76] to begin translating the Book of Mormon. At the time he was destitute. He was also under strict warning by the angel not to use the golden plates for gain or to show them to persons not authorized.[77] He had to use what was at hand at the little house where he stayed. During at least part of the beginning period of the translation, he reportedly had a blanket or curtain hanging between him and his scribe, “apparently used at an early point to shield the scribe from a view of the plates, spectacles, or breastplate.”[78]

Martin Harris was scribe at an early time in the translation, and several reports of this setting appear to have come from him.[79] Critical writers have asserted without evidence that Joseph did this to deceive his scribe. One minister who had interviewed Harris about his experience claimed that “Smith concealed behind the blanket, pretended to look through his spectacles, or transparent stones, and would…repeat what he saw, which, when repeated aloud, was written down by Harris, who sat on the other side of the suspended blanket.”[80] This was his negative interpretation despite receiving Harris’s fervent witness. However, there is a very different way to interpret the arrangement that is edifying and enlightening. It also is more explanatory and much more to good purpose and in accord and meaningful in the surrounding events and circumstances. It is also clear that God placed His approval on this humble place and arrangement by conducting there a most important, extensive, and sacred activity.

To begin the translation, in his very humble circumstances, Joseph could have arranged the space in an intentional pattern to shield the sacred things from unauthorized view, but also provide the most essential symbol of the temple, with a curtain or veil separating “the inner sanctuary or Most Holy Place, the Holy of Holies,” and “where inner surfaces are said to be gilded” representing “heaven on earth.”[81] With Joseph, the golden plates and other relics provided symbols of celestial light and glory at the heavenly place of God’s throne. Today, there is growing recognition of the very great importance of the ancient temple in the theology and practices of the early Christians.[82] It is most significant that Joseph Smith’s actions draw attention to the basic importance of the temple and its symbolism at the earliest stages of his mission of restoration. What he was led to do anticipated later revelation about the temple and its reestablishment.[83]

In the ancient Israelite temple, only the High Priest was authorized to pass beyond the veil into the Holy of Holies, commune with God, and return with any message or blessing for the people. With Joseph Smith also, access was restricted. The symbolism of the setting is clear: “Those who passed through the curtain passed from earth to heaven or from heaven to earth.”[84] With the golden plates, Joseph also had very special possessions of the ancient High Priest, including the Urim and Thummim and the breastplate. His presence in the designated sacred area implies access to God’s revelation. In Joseph Smith’s arrangement for the translation, we have symbolized the heavenly ascent of the prophet, and we have once again the concept of the Heavenly Book being read by the prophet while in the heavenly realm, with its words passing through the veil in its descent and “incarnation.”

Some may think this an extravagant interpretation of what Joseph did and symbolized, but we must remember this occurrence was at the birth and modest beginnings of something of uppermost importance that would grow to be of great consequence: “out of small things proceedeth that which is great” (D&C 64:33; cf. Alma 37:6–7).[85] There was simplicity in Joseph’s veil arrangement, yet it represented things most profound. Joseph Smith was very guarded in what he said about the sacred translation process, but it clearly involved an anticipatory ritual procedure that amounted to a prophecy of what was to come. What we glean from the available sources is a mere glimpse of what occurred—but what a marvelous glimpse it is, with many insights and associations. For example, the birth of the Book of Mormon bears comparison with circumstances at the birth of Christ. Each came in fulfillment of earlier Messianic prophecy,[86] and each was anticipated by angelic announcement.[87] Each occurred in the humblest of circumstances, with descent and incarnation, elements of the miraculous and angelic presence at the birth. Each came with strong recognition and representation—as by the symbolic veil and otherwise—of cosmic earth/heaven relationships: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men” (Luke 2:14).

Closing Comments and Suggestions

What purpose is to be served in seeing the Book of Mormon as a type of Christ, or as a resurrected book? The Book of Mormon is a powerful witness for Christ in many ways, and this concept provides yet another impressive dimension to that witness. As a tangible type of the Resurrection it shows that the Resurrection of Christ was a literal bodily resurrection. It may also help to bring before us a constant reminder and appreciation of God’s great purpose, of which death and resurrection is a vital part of the process. God has said “this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39). It may also provide a warning and a more lively sense of the coming Judgment. Moreover, the calling of new witnesses to the reality of a miraculous event, emblematic of the Resurrection, can refresh and contribute added support to the New Testament witness for a skeptical world in the latter days.

We have seen how the rites and ordinances of the Gospel symbolize death and resurrection in a setting that reminds us of Christ and His atoning sacrifice. Beyond that, perhaps we should enlarge our view and see many things that God has arranged about us that may bring frequent remembrance of death and resurrection. This could include night followed by day; daily sleep and awakening; illness followed by recovery; war and peace; and winter followed by spring when many things are brought back to life. It could include religiously significant things such as sin and repentance;[88] the apostasy and restoration of the Church;[89] the scattering and gathering of Israel as discussed above; and the loss and subsequent restoration of the priesthood and of the Temple.[90] We could see the burial or loss and revival of many important writings from the past as symbolic of death and resurrection. Although the Book of Mormon is sacred and more richly symbolic, other restored books may well be considered as “resurrected.”

If the sensitive Christian is to confess the hand of God in all things (D&C 59:21), should not any good, beautiful, or helpful thing that is revived and restored from the past—“of good report or praiseworthy”[91]—be seen as evidence of God’s great power to restore, and thus betoken the resurrection? Should we not see God as having caused such restorations for a divine purpose? It may often be the case that an example from the past, when things were more true, faithful or righteous, could offer a powerful corrective for a wayward generation.[92] Many of these things are important considerations for salvation. Latter-day Saints can see the Book of Mormon as a prime example of such a witness. It is a vital part of the “restitution of all things” (Acts 3:21), while resurrection is God’s great gift and promise to mankind: “And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves” (Ezekiel 37:13).

George L. Mitton received a master’s degree in political science from Utah State University and did additional graduate studies at the University of Utah and Columbia University. He is retired from a career in education and state government in Oregon. He served for a decade as an associate editor of the FARMS Review and has published there, in Dialogue, and in BYU Studies.

1 Romans 6:3–5.

2 James 5:14–16. Note the language and imagery of resurrection and judgment. Anointing and “the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up,” and sins will be forgiven [judgment]; cf. C. F. D. Moule, “The Judgment Theme in the Sacraments,” in The Background of the New Testament and its Eschatology,

ed. W. D. Davies and D. Daube (Cambridge: University Press, 1964), 464–481. In the Book of Mormon, see 2 Nephi 9:22 and context.

3 Cf. Hebrews 8:5; 1 John 5:7; 2 Nephi 11:4; Alma 30:44; D&C 77:2, 88:45–47.

4 E.g. Joseph Smith in Messenger and Advocate 2, no. 3 (December 1835):227. See also Orson Pratt, Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, no. 6, part 39 (Liverpool: R. James, 1851). Available at http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/OP-BOM.html.

5 Cf. 1 Nephi 13:34–41; 2 Nephi 3:11–13, 29:8–14; D&C 27:5.

6 See also Genesis 1:2. For a discussion of how various dimensions of the Hebrew word ruach (breath/spirit) come together in the creation story and in

Ezekiel 37, see Andrew Chester, Messiah and Exaltation: Jewish Messianic and Visionary Traditions and New Testament Christology (Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), 125–127.

7 N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 119.

8 Jon D. Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel: The Ultimate Victory of the God of Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006). Further on the Jewish roots of the Christian hope of a resurrection, see Kevin J. Madigan and Jon D. Levenson, Resurrection: The Power of God for Christians and Jews (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008).

9 3 Nephi 23:1–3; Mormon 8:23.

10 See Mormon 8:22–26.

11 See Robert A. Cloward, “Isaiah 29 and the Book of Mormon,” in Isaiah in the Book of Mormon, ed. Donald W. Parry and John W. Welch (Provo: FARMS, 1998): 191–247.

12 For biblical examples see Cloward, “Isaiah 29 and the Book of Mormon,” 235.

13 John A. Tvedtnes, The Book of Mormon and Other Hidden Books: “Out of Darkness unto Light” (Provo: FARMS, 2000).

14 Ether 4:3; Mormon 8:4, 14–17.

15 Tvednes, Other Hidden Books, 5–6.

16 For examples see Tvednes, Other Hidden Books, 119–123.

17 For an ancient Israelite example of anointing books for burial see “Testament of Moses 1:16–18,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983), 1:927. For additional discussion and references see Hugh Nibley, “Sealed Up to Come Forth in Their Purity”?, in An Approach to the Book of Mormon, 3rd ed. (v. 6 of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley) ed. John W. Welch (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1988), 173–175.

18 Tvednes, Other Hidden Books, 24 (emphasis added).

19 George L. Mitton, “Concern for the Things of Eternity,” FARMS Review 20, no. 1 (2008): xiv.

20 For biographical detail I have primarily relied on Peter J. French, John Dee: The World of an Elizabethan Magus (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972, 1984) and the more recent Glyn Parry, The Arch-Conjuror of England: John Dee (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011).

21 Håkan Håkansson, Seeing the Word: John Dee and Renaissance Occultism (Lund, Sweden: Lunds Universitet, 2001), 237, 267.

22 Deborah E. Harkness, “Shows in the Showstone: A Theater of Alchemy and Apocalypse in the Angel Conversations of John Dee (1527–1608/9),” Renaissance Quarterly 49, no. 4 (1996): 707–737.

23 John Dee, A True & Faithful Relation of What Passed for many yeers Between Dr. John Dee (A Mathematician of Great Fame in Q. Eliz. and King James their Reignes) and Some Spirits, ed. Meric Casaubon (London: D. Maxwell for T. Garthwait, 1659). Facsimile edition (New York: Magickal Childe Publishing, 1992). Original spelling.

24 Dee, True & Faithful Relation, 418–419.

25 C. H. Josten, “An Unknown Chapter in the Life of John Dee,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 28 (1965): 223–257. Josten says it was a “recent accidental discovery among the manuscripts of that passionate collector of any kind of information on Dee, Elias Ashmole,” 223. Cited by French, John Dee, 120, it led me in 1982 to find and contemplate Josten’s discovery, and later to view the oil portrait of Dee in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, and his interesting “shew-stone” and other relics in the British Museum, London.

26 Timothy Hogan, The Alchemical Keys to Masonic Ritual (Privately printed, 2007).

27 Consider the lecture of Betty Jo Teeter Dobbs, Alchemical Death and Resurrection: The Significance of Alchemy in the Age of Newton (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Libraries, 1990). For Dee specifically see Deborah E. Harkness, John Dee’s Conversations with Angels: Cabala, Alchemy, and the End of Nature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 195–214. For further discussion of Dee in relation to “Alchemy and the transmutation of the human soul,” see Håkansson, Seeing the Word, 223–230.

28 Josten, Unknown Chapter, 226.

29 One of Dee’s marginal notes reads: “The fulness of time has not yet come for our power to be made manifest.” Josten, Unknown Chapter, 244.

30 Dee’s parenthetical comment. The oratory was a reserved place for prayer and meditation in connection with the alchemical laboratory. In Kunrath’s noted drawing of such a laboratory from 1607, the oratory is a tent within the laboratory, likely reminiscent of the ancient tabernacle and based on the understanding of the temple as a place for divine communication. It is conveniently reproduced in Frances A. Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972), opposite p. 49. The oratory “implies that prayer was integral to the work of alchemy.” Harkness, Conversations with Angels, 28.

31 Josten, Unknown Chapter, 247.

32 Parry, Arch-Conjuror, 190.

33 See Josten, Unknown Chapter, 251 and context.

34 Josten, Unknown Chapter, 252.

35 Ibid., 252–253.

36 Dee, True & Faithful Relation, 418. Original spelling. An allusion to Christ’s being “taken up…into heaven” in Acts 1:11. A biblical “great pillar of fire,” Parry, Arch-Conjuror, 191.

37 Dee, True & Faithful Relation, 418 (original spelling).

38 Ibid, 418 (original spelling).

39 Ibid, 418 (original spelling).

40 Parry, Arch-Conjuror, 191.

41 Dee, True & Faithful Relation, 419.

42 Ibid, 419. Earlier, “stones” were mentioned at the furnace opening. Both bricks and the tile sides were made of hardened clay, which is a form of rock.

43 Dee, True & Faithful Relation, 419; cf. Acts 1:9.

44 Parry, Arch-Conjuror, 191.

45 Cf. John 1:14, 3:13–17, 8:42, 16:28–30; Romans 8:3; Hebrews 2:9–18.

46 For an overview, Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993). For a Latter-day Saint treatment of Lehi’s vision in relation to ancient sources see Blake T. Ostler, “The Throne-Theophany and Prophetic Commission in 1 Nephi: A Form-Critical Analysis,” BYU Studies 26, no. 4 (1986): 67–95. See also Stephen O. Smoot, “The Divine Council in the Hebrew Bible and the Book of Mormon,” Interpreter 27 (2017): 155–180.

47 Leslie Baynes, The Heavenly Book Motif in Judeo-Christian Apocalypses: 200 B.C.E.–200 C.E. (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2012), 23.

48 Geo Widengren, The Ascension of the Apostle and the Heavenly Book (King and Saviour III) (Leipzig, Germany: Harrassowitz, 1950), 7.

49 Widengren, Heavenly Book, 28–39.

50 Brent E. McNeely, “The Book of Mormon and the Heavenly Book Motif,” in Reexploring the Book of Mormon, ed. John W. Welch (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1992), 26–28.

51 Jeffrey M. Bradshaw and David J. Larsen, In God’s Image and Likeness 2: Enoch, Noah, and the Tower of Babel (Salt Lake City: The Interpreter Foundation, 2014), 46–48, 72–73, 97.

52 Michelle P. Brown, “The Book as Sacred Space,” in Sacred Space: House

of God, Gate of Heaven, ed. Philip North and John North (London: Continuum, 2007), 45.

53 Baynes, Heavenly Book Motif, 196, see also 8, 169–171, 185–188, 190–191,

193–195, 199, 205; Cf. 2 Corithians 3:1–3.

54 Brown, “Book as Sacred Space,” 48.

55 LeGrand L. Baker, The Book of Mormon as an Ancient Israelite Temple: Nineteen Temple Characteristics of the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Eborn Books, 2012), 21–22. Note the insightfulness of seeing the Book of Mormon metaphorically as temple in a study of that part of the book which relates the appearance and teaching by Christ at the temple; cf. John W. Welch, “Seeing Third Nephi as the Holy of Holies of the Book of Mormon,” Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 19, no. 1 (2010): 36–55.

56 Gaye Strathearn and Jacob Moody, “Christ’s Interpretation of Isaiah 52’s ‘My Servant’ in 3 Nephi,” Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 18, no. 1 (2009): 4–15, quotation from p. 11.

57 For a summary of New Testament and frequent Early Church teachings on the Descensus, see Martin F. Connell, “Descensus Christi ad Inferos: Christ’s Descent to the Dead,” Theological Studies 62, no. 2 (2001): 262–282. See also David L. Paulsen, Roger D. Cook, and Kendel J. Christensen, “The Harrowing of Hell: Salvation for the Dead in Early Christianity,” Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 19, no. 1 (2010): 56–77.

58 Connell, “Christ’s Descent to the Dead,” 262.

59 Mark 16:5–7.

60 See the Book of Mormon Title Page; 2 Nephi 27:10; Alma 40:4, 21; Mormon 5:12. cf. D&C 76:64–65; Moses 7:55–57.

61 Lavina Fielding Anderson, ed. Lucy’s Book: A Critical Edition of Lucy Mack Smith’s Family Memoir (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2001), 385–386.

62 Saints’ Herald 26, no. 19 (1879): 290, as cited in Matthew B. Brown, Plates of Gold: The Book of Mormon Comes Forth (American Fork, UT: Covenant Communications, 2003), 78.

63 Cf. Mark 16:14 and context.

64 For detail see Richard Lloyd Anderson, Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1981); see also M. H. McKay and G. J. Dirkmaat, From Darkness unto Light: Joseph Smith’s Translation and Publication of the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2015), 141–161.

65 John 20:24–29; Anderson, Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses, 108–109.

66 Acts 1:10 and Joesph Smith–History 1:31–32.

67 John Henry Evans, Joseph Smith: an American Prophet (New York: McMillan, 1946), 398.

68 Gerald E. Smith, Schooling the Prophet: How the Book of Mormon Influenced Joseph Smith and the Early Restoration (Provo: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2015), 3; see also John W. Welch, “The Book of Mormon as the Keystone of Church Administration,” in A Firm Foundation: Church Organization and Administration, ed. David J. Whittaker and Arnold K. Garr (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011), 15–57.

69 Matthew 25:31–46; John 5:22–27, 9:39; Acts 10:42, 17:31.

70 Cf. Matthew 7:2: “For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged.”

71 On the importance of heavenly books at the Judgment, see Baynes, Heavenly Book Motif, 197–199.

72 Jan Shipps, Mormonism: The Story of A New Religious Tradition (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985), 41–65.

73 Shipps, Mormonism, 58. See 2 Kings 22:8–13 and 2 Chronicles 34:14–21.

74 John M. Lundquist, The Temple of Jerusalem: Past, Present and Future (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2008), xiii–xvi.

75 George L. Mitton, “Moroni and the Ritual Life of Joseph Smith,” FARMS Review 16, no. 1 (2004): xxvi–xxix.

76 Joseph Smith received numerous instructive visitations from angelic messengers. One study compiled a list of 59 spiritual visitors and 22 known appearances to him by the angel Moroni. H. Donl Peterson, Moroni: Ancient Prophet, Modern Messenger (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2000), 132–134, 146–150.

77 Joseph Smith—History 1:42–46; cf. Mormon 8:14–16.

78 Richard E. Turley Jr., Robin S. Jensen and Mark Ashurst-McGee, “Joseph the Seer,” Ensign 45, no. 10 (October 2015): 55. Also reproduced on the same page in this article is a painting showing Joseph and his scribe at the work of translation with the curtain between them.

79 For a review of these accounts, see Roger Nicholson, “The Spectacles, the Stone, the Hat, and the Book: A Twenty-first Century Believer’s View of the Book of Mormon Translation,” Interpreter 5 (2013): 168–175.

80 John A. Clark, Gleanings by the Way (Philadelphia: W.J. & J.K. Simon, 1842), 230 (emphasis added); “This was Harris’s own account of the matter to me,” 230–231.

81 Lundquist, Temple of Jerusalem, 17–19.

82 Margaret Barker, On Earth as It Is in Heaven: Temple Symbolism in the New Testament (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), ix–xii, 73–80; Margaret Barker, Temple Themes in Christian Worship (London: T&T Clark, 2007; John W. Welch, The Sermon on the Mount in the Light of the Temple (Farnham, England: Ashgate, 2009).

83 I am preparing an essay which will discuss these matters in more detail.

84 Barker, On Earth as It Is in Heaven, 10.

85 When Joseph Smith begins his work, “out of weakness he shall be made strong” (2 Nephi 3:13).

86 Isaiah 7:14, 29:11–14.

87 Luke 1:26–33; Joseph Smith-History 1:30–35.

88 Cf. Romans 6:23, 8:13.

89 Cf. D&C 1:30. Consider the Church as the “body of Christ” (1 Corinthians 12:27).

90 See Christ’s body as temple in John 2:18–22, referring to the Resurrection.

91 Articles of Faith 1:13.

92 The Book of Mormon speaks of writings “sealed up to come forth in their purity” (1 Nephi 14:26).

COMING DOWN AND BRINGING DOWN: PEJORATIVE ONOMASTIC ALLUSIONS

TO THE JAREDITES

IN HELAMAN 6:25, 6:38, AND ETHER 2:11

Matthew L. Bowen

ABSTRACT: Mormon uses pejorative wordplay on the name Jaredites based on the meaning of the Hebrew verb yārad. The onomastic rhetoric involving the meaning of yārad first surfaces in Helaman 6 where Mormon also employs wordplay on the name Cain in terms of qānâ or “getting gain.” The first wordplay occurs in the negative purpose clause “lest they should be a means of bringing down [cf. lĕhôrîd] the people unto destruction” (Helaman 6:25) and the second in the prepositional phrase “until they had come down [cf. yārĕdû/yordû] to believe in their works” (Helaman 6:38). Mormon uses these pejorative wordplays as a means of emphasizing the genetic link that he sees between Jareditic secret combinations and the derivative Gadianton robbers. Moroni reflects upon his father’s earlier use of this type of pejorative wordplay on “Jaredites” and yārad when he directly informs latter-day Gentiles regarding the “decrees of God” upon the land of promise “that ye may repent and not continue in your iniquities until the fullness be come, that ye may not bring down [cf. *tôrîdû/hôradtem] the fullness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land hath hitherto done” (Ether 2:11). All three of these onomastic allusions constitute an urgent and timely warning to latter-day Gentiles living upon the land of promise. They warn the Gentiles against “coming down” to believe in and partake of the works and spoils of secret combinations like the Jaredites and the Nephites did, and thus “bringing down” their own people to destruction and “bringing down” the “fullness of the wrath of God” upon themselves, as the Jaredites and the Nephites both did.

The Jaredites occupy a conspicuous place within Mormon’s (and Moroni’s) history. Brant Gardner writes: “Mormon does not blame Nephite woes on Satan — he blames the Jaredites. They were the model from history of how a nation might be utterly destroyed. More than simply being a model for destruction, Mormon asserts that Jaredite history actively affected the Nephites. Mormon carefully links the Jaredite secret combinations to destruction, then links both Jaredites and the destruction of governments to the secret combination he calls the Gaddianton robbers.”[1] Gardner sees a genetic relationship between Jaredite secret combinations and the robbers.[2] In other words, the Gaddiantons represented a Jaredite infection of Nephite society.

There are at least two textual peculiarities in Helaman 6:25, 38 (where Mormon details the menace of Gaddianton secret combinations) and one in Ether 2:11 (as part of a warning) that offer striking support for Gardner’s theses. Using unique collocations Mormon and Moroni appear to create distinctive onomastic allusions to the Jaredites based on the Hebrew verb yārad (“go down” or “come down”; causative “bring down”).[3] Whether or not the Book of Mormon name Jared, in terms of etymology, ultimately represents the same name as that of the patriarch Jared (Hebrew yered or yāred) mentioned as the father of Enoch in Genesis 5:18–20, the Nephites almost certainly understood it as such. Thus, the two aforementioned statements Mormon makes regarding Gaddianton secret combinations and the warning Moroni gives latter-day Gentiles in the context of the Jaredite covenant and Jaredite destruction require a close reexamination.

In this article, I propose that Mormon’s statements in Helaman 6 — a block of text in which he also makes distinctive onomastic allusions to Cain in terms of qānâ/“get[ting] gain” (Helaman 6:17, 27)[4] — constitute onomastic allusions to the names Jared and Jaredites in terms of the Hebrew verb yārad (“come down”; causative “bring down”): “it is these secret oaths and covenants which Alma commanded his son should not go forth unto the world, lest they should be a means of bringing down [cf. lĕhôrîd] the people unto destruction” (Helaman 6:25; emphasis in all scriptural citations is mine);[5] “[the Gaddiantons] had seduced the more part of the righteous [Nephites] until they had come down [cf. yārĕdû] to believe in their works and partake of their spoils” (Helaman 6:38). These pejorative allusions to the Jaredites emphasize the genetic relationship between the secret combinations which “brought down” Jaredite civilization to destruction and the “Nephite” secret combinations which did much the same to Nephite civilization.

I further propose that Moroni, reflecting upon and building on the earlier pejorative wordplays of his father in Helaman 6:25 and 6:38, issues an allusive warning to the latter-day Gentiles in the promised land, of whom the Jaredites serve as a stark antetype. Moroni, using onomastic rhetoric similar to that of his father, warns latter-day Gentiles against becoming like the Jaredites: “And this [i.e., the Book of Mormon] cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God, that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fullness be come, that ye may not bring down [cf. *tôrîdû/hôradtem] the fullness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land hath hitherto done” (Ether 2:11). The Book of Mormon would come forth in a time when the latter-day Gentiles already would be “ripen[ing] in iniquity” (Ether 2:9; cf. also Ether 9:20). When Moroni’s onomastic allusion to “Jaredites” is recognized in the context of Mormon’s earlier warning, his own ominous warning and accompanying invitation to repent in Ether 2:11 emerge as even more emphatic, urgent, and timely.

The Names Jared and Jaredites and “Descending”

To know with certainty the origin and meaning of the name Jared as a “Jaredite” name, one must more precisely ascertain the origins and language of the Jaredites. Given that Amaleki,[6] Mormon,[7] and Moroni[8] describe the Jaredites as has having come from “the tower” or “the great tower,” an Asiatic origin if not an outright Mesopotamian origin seems certain.

If such is the case, the name Jared as attested in the Book of Mormon plausibly represents a hebraized cognate of the Semitic/Akkadian noun wardu(m) or warad, which denotes “slave, servant”[9] (cf. theophoric warad- names like Warad-Sin, “Servant of the moon[-god]”), a noun which in turn derives from the Akkadian verb, warādu(m), “go down,” “descend.”[10] Akkadian wardu(m)/warādu(m) provides a useful analogy for the name Jared in terms of yered/yārad, “go down” or “come down”[11] (i.e., “descend”). The Nephites may have understood the name Jared either as “slave/servant [of Deity]” or “as a hypocoristicon meaning God shall/has descended”[12] and the gentilic designation Jaredites as “those who go down” or “bring down” (cf. yōrĕdîm, môrîd[îm]; see further below).

Mormon fully intended to give an account of the Jaredites, as he mentions near the end of the book of Mosiah: “And this account [i.e., from the plates of Ether] shall be written hereafter; for behold, it is expedient that all people should know the things which are written in this account” (Mosiah 28:19). Mormon never lived to give that account, but Moroni does give that account in the form of his abridged book of Ether. As David Richins has pointed out,[13] Moroni’s version of the Jaredite narrative associates the name Jared in several early scenes with “going down” or “coming down”:

Go to and gather together thy flocks, both male and female, of every kind, and also of the seed of the earth, of every kind, and thy family, and also Jared thy brother and his family, and also thy friends and their families, and the friends of Jared [yered or yāred] and their families. And when thou hast done this thou shalt go at the head of them down [cf. tered] into the valley which is northward. (Ether 1:41–42)

And it came to pass that Jared [yered/yāred] and his brother and their families, and also the friends of Jared and his brother and their families, went down [cf. yārĕdû] into the valley which was northward — and the name of the valley was Nimrod, being called after the mighty hunter — with their flocks which they had gathered together, male and female, of every kind. (Ether 2:1)

And it came to pass that when they [the Jaredites] had come down [cf. yārĕdû] into the valley of Nimrod, the Lord came down [cf. yārad] and talked with the brother of Jared [yered/yāred]. And he was in a cloud, and the brother of Jared saw him not. (Ether 2:4)

As editor Moroni appears to have crafted the narrative to include onomastic wordplay on the name Jared (written in the Hebrew Bible as yered or yāred), a patriarchal name as noted above,[14] which sounds very similar to the Hebrew verb yārad (“descend,” “go down”). The people of Jared “come down” into the valley of Nimrod, the appointed place where the Lord “comes down” to “meet” them. Moroni describes the Lord “coming down” or descending in a theophanic cloud and his “talk[ing] with them” in language that recalls the exodus and the wilderness “tent of meeting”:

And it came to pass, as Moses entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar [ʿammûd heʿānān] descended [yērēd], and stood [wĕʿāmad] at the door of the tabernacle, and the Lord talked with Moses. (Exodus 33:9)

And the Lord descended [wayyēred] in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. (Exodus 34:5)

And the Lord spake suddenly unto Moses, and unto Aaron, and unto Miriam, Come out ye three unto the tabernacle of the congregation [ʾōhel môʿēd]. And they three came out. And the Lord came down [wayyēred] in the pillar of the cloud [bĕʿammûd ʿānān], and stood [wayyaʿămōd] in the door of the tabernacle, and called Aaron and Miriam: and they both came forth. (Numbers 12:4–5)

Thus, Moroni appears to have intentionally described the Lord’s theophanic “condescensions” using language from Exodus and its etiological descriptions of the function of the tent of the meeting.[15] We witness the same phenomenon as the narrative progresses. Moroni records, “And it came to pass at the end of four years that the Lord came again unto the brother of Jared [yered/yāred] and stood in a cloud and talked with him. And for the space of three hours did the Lord talk with the brother of Jared and chastened him because he remembered not to call upon the name of the Lord” (Ether 2:14; see further Ether 4:1; 6:2, 19, 21 which echo the foregoing wordplay on [brother of] Jared/yārad).

Thus, Moroni seems to have made an ongoing narrative effort to associate the name Jared with the Lord’s theophanic “condescensions” or “coming[s] down” and the origin of the Jaredites as a people with “coming down” or “going down.” One might even go further in surmising that the importance of the name Jared in the foregoing semiotic context offers a plausible explanation for why Moroni consistently opts for the circumlocution “the brother of Jared” over the name Moriancumer (attested only Ether 2:13) in telling his Jaredite narrative. Indeed, this same onomastic principle seems to hold for Mormon’s and Moroni’s respective uses of the term “Jaredites” in Moroni 9:23 and “people of Jared” on the title page of the Book of Mormon and in Moroni 1:1.[16] The term “Jaredites” itself suggests the notion of yōrĕdîm “those who go down” (and eventually “go down to destruction”). In other words, the name “Jaredites” or “people of Jared” tells their story.

“A Means of Bringing Down the People unto Destruction” (Helaman 6:25)

In Helaman 6, Mormon identifies the Jaredite secret combinations — which Alma warned his son Helaman against disclosing to the public (Alma 37:27–29, 32) — with the Gaddianton robbers: “Now behold, it is these secret oaths and covenants which Alma commanded his son should not go forth unto the world, lest they should be a means of bringing down [cf. lĕhôrîd] the people unto destruction [cf. ʾăbaddôn]” (Helaman 6:25).

Several things about Mormon’s statement require commentary here. First, Mormon uses calculated, name-driven language to link the Gaddianton problem to the Jaredites, forcing the audience to see the genetic relationship between the two. He partially achieves this through an allusive wordplay on Jaredites in terms of the causative verbal form of the root yārad, perhaps an infinitival form like lĕhôrîd or a functional equivalent.

The causative form of the verb yārad constitutes the key term in several Hebrew idioms that describe persons being “brought down” to the spirit world, of which “destruction” serves as one description. The accession narrative of Solomon in the Deuteronomistic History contains a pair of examples useful in understanding Mormon’s collocation in Helaman 6:25. 1 Kings 1 presents an aging David as something of a dotard, behind whose back Nathan and Bathsheba orchestrate the transfer of the succession of the throne from the expectant Adonijah to Bathsheba’s son, Solomon. 1 Kings 2, however, presents David with a revived lucidity ordering the elimination of political enemies as revenge and as insurance against potential threats against Solomon’s throne.

First, David orders the killing of Joab, his top military commander and longtime devoted servant, with the words: “Do therefore according to thy wisdom, and let not his hoar head [i.e., his grey hair] go down [wĕlōʾ-tôrēd] to the grave [šĕʾôl] in peace” (1 Kings 2:6). David then orders the killing of Shimei, the son of Gera from the tribe of Benjamin (the tribe of Saul, David’s predecessor) with the words: “Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; but his hoar head bring thou down [wĕhôradtā] to the grave [šĕʾôl, Sheol] with blood” (1 Kings 2:9).

Regarding the chilling scene of killings that follow, Walter Brueggemann writes: “Solomon’s ascent to power is orchestrated by a series of killings that parallel the violent choreography of The Godfather.”[17] This episode, with its Mafia-style executions, thus constitutes a fitting illustration of Mormon’s use of the collocation “bringing down the people to destruction” with the verb yārad (lĕhôrîd) as a description of the deeds of the Gaddiantons and their Jaredite origin.

The term rendered “destruction” in translation, as Mormon uses it, also represents more than the reader initially may realize. As a semantic “matching”[18] (or so-called “parallelistic”) term to Hebrew Sheol (šĕʾôl) is Abbadon (the “place of destruction, underworld”),[19] usually translated “destruction.” A few examples will suffice: “Hell [Sheol, šĕʾôl] and destruction [Abbadon, ʾăbaddôn] are before the Lord: how much more then the hearts of the children of men?” (Proverbs 15:11); “Hell [Sheol, šĕʾôl] and destruction [Abbadon; Ketiv: ʾăbaddô, Qere: ʾăbaddôn] are never full; so the eyes of man are never satisfied” (Proverbs 27:20); “Hell [šĕʾôl, Sheol] is naked before him, and destruction [Abbadon, ʾăbaddôn] hath no covering” (Job 26:60). Psalm 30:3, 9 [MT 4, 10] attests similar yārad-based idioms involving the Hebrew nouns bôr (“cistern,” “pitfall,” “world of the dead”) and šaḥat (“pit, grave”)[20] which constitute additional euphemisms or synonyms[21] for the “underworld” (i.e., the spirit world): “O Lord, thou hast brought up my soul from the grave [Sheol, šĕʾôl]: thou hast kept me alive, that I should not go down [Ketiv: miyyôrdî; Qere: miyyordî, literally, from my going down] to the pit [the world of the dead, bôr]”; “What profit is there in my blood, when I go down [bĕridtî] to the pit [šāḥat]?” Additional examples could be multiplied here.

In the verses that follow his yārad (lĕhôrîd)-wordplay in verse 25, Mormon carefully alibis Alma the Younger, whose instructions to Helaman regarding the Gaddianton oaths Mormon had earlier been included in Alma 37:27–32, from any culpability in the Gaddianton problem (see Helaman 6:26). This he does while maintaining the genetic link to Cainitic and Jareditic secret combinations (see Helaman 6:27–28). When Mormon subsequently asserts that Satan “put[s] it in the heart of Gaddianton to still carry on the work of darkness, and of secret murder” he uses the language of continuity: Gaddianton “still carr[ied] on” what he had acquired from Jaredite sources — the same Jaredites who had earlier in their turn, carried the works of darkness from records that harked back to Cain and his followers. In other words, Mormon sees Cainitic, Jareditic, and Nephite secret combinations on a kind of continuum.

“They Had Come Down to Believe in Their Works”

Mormon’s second wordplay on “Jaredites” is even more transparent than the first. In an effort to describe the severe worsening of the Gaddianton problem, Mormon contrasts the approach of the Lamanites to that of the Nephites (see especially Helaman 6:20, 37–40). The Lamanites of that period knew the truth articulated by Mormon in Alma 31:5 (“the preaching of the word … had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them”); the Nephites did not:

And it came to pass that the Lamanites did hunt the band of robbers of Gaddianton. And they did preach the word of God among the more wicked part of them, insomuch that this band of robbers was utterly destroyed from among the Lamanites. And it came to pass, on the other hand, that the Nephites did build them up and support them, beginning at the more wicked part of them, until they had overspread all the land of the Nephites and had seduced the more part of the righteous until they had come down [yārĕdû or yordû] to believe in their works and partake of their spoils and to join with them in their secret murders and combinations. (Helaman 6:37–38)

The diction and wordplay in terms of yārad here are deliberate: in “coming down” to believe in Gaddianton the Nephites “had come down” to become just like the Jaredites — those who “go down” — the source of the Gaddianton problem. For a second time in the same text in which he uses wordplay on Cain to emphasize the antiquity of the origin of secret combinations generally,[22] he employs an onomastic wordplay that points to the Jaredites in order to emphasize the genetic relationship between Jaredite secret combinations and Nephite secret combinations. Mormon emphasizes the horror of the Nephite moral condition: the Nephites were becoming Jaredites and all that such portended for the future.

“That Ye May Not Bring Down the Fullness

of the Wrath of God Upon You”

All of the foregoing prepares us to return to Moroni’s account of the Jaredites and the scenes in Ether 1–2 in which he associates Jaredite origins with “going down” (yārad). In Ether 2:8–12, Moroni suddenly breaks off his narrative of the Jaredite migration to describe the Lord’s oath to the brother of Jared and the penalty for the violation of that oath. Moroni summarizes the oath thus: “that whoso should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should be swept off when the fullness of his wrath should come upon them” (Ether 2:8). Moroni draws the conclusion “we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land” (Ether 2:9) fully evident in the destruction of two nations: the Jaredites, whose story he is telling, and the Nephites, whose demise he has personally witnessed. Cainitic secret combinations of the Jaredite strain destroyed both the Jaredites and the Nephites. This suggests that Moroni’s diction is anything but happenstantial:

And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God, that ye may repent and not continue in your iniquities until the fullness be come, that ye may not bring down [cf. *tôrîdû/hôradtem] the fullness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land hath hitherto done. (Ether 2:11)

Moroni reflects on his father’s statements in Helaman 6:25 (“it is these secret oaths and covenants which Alma commanded his son should not go forth unto the world lest they should be a means of bringing down the people unto destruction”) and 6:38 (“[the Gaddiantons] had seduced the more part of the righteous [Nephites] until they had come down to believe in their works and partake of their spoils”) in his use of the collocation “that ye may not bring down the fullness of the wrath of God upon you.” The Nephites had, in essence, become “Jaredites” (i.e., pejoratively “those who go down” to destruction) by “com[ing] down to believe in” what amounted to “Jaredite” works and “bring[ing] down” their own “people unto destruction.”[23]

Mormon and Moroni saw the latter-day Gentiles in the land of promise as the potential third in a sequence of annihilations: Jaredites (ancient Gentiles), Nephites (Israelites), and latter-day Gentiles. All of this helps us better appreciate Moroni’s plaintive warning and plea at the end of Ether 8 following his description of the formation of secret combinations among the Jaredites:

And now I Moroni do not write the manner of their oaths and combinations, for it hath been made known unto me that they are had among all people; and they are had among the Lamanites. And they have caused the destruction of this people of which I am now speaking, and also the destruction of the people of Nephi. And whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain [cf. Cain/ qayin and qānâ, Ether 8:15–16], until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed; for the Lord will not suffer that the blood of his saints which shall be shed by them shall always cry unto him from the ground for vengeance upon them and yet he avenge them not. Wherefore, O ye Gentiles, it is wisdom in God that these things should be shewn unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you, which are built up to get power and gain, and the work — yea, even the work of destruction — come upon you; yea, even the sword of the justice of the Eternal God shall fall upon you, to your overthrow and destruction, if ye shall suffer these things to be. Wherefore the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you, that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation because of this secret combination which shall be among you; for woe be unto it because of the blood of them who have been slain, for they cry from the dust for vengeance upon it, and also upon those who built it up. For it cometh to pass that whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries. And it bringeth to pass the destruction of all people, for it is built up by the devil, which is the father of all lies, even that same liar which beguiled our first parents, yea, even that same liar which hath caused man to commit murder from the beginning, which hath hardened the hearts of men that they have murdered the prophets and stoned them and cast them out from the beginning. Wherefore I Moroni am commanded to write these things, that evil may be done away, and that the time may come that Satan may have no power upon the hearts of the children of men, but that they may be persuaded to do good continually, that they may come unto the fountain of all righteousness and be saved. (Ether 8:20–26)

Conclusion: A Warning to

the Latter-day Gentiles on the Land of Promise

Mormon uses wordplay on “Jaredites” based on Hebrew yārad in the negative purpose clause “lest they [the secret combinations’ oaths and covenants] should be a means of bringing down [cf. lĕhôrîd] the people unto destruction” (Helaman 6:25) and in prepositional phrase “until they had come down [cf. yārĕdû/yordû] to believe in their works” (Helaman 6:38). He does so as a means of accentuating the genetic relationship between Jareditic secret combinations and the Gaddianton robbers. Moroni reflects upon his father’s use of this type of pejorative wordplay on “Jaredites” in terms of yārad when he directly addresses latter-day Gentiles against adopting Jareditic secret combinations as the Nephites had done, so “that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fullness be come, that ye may not bring down [cf. *tôrîdû/hôradtem] the fullness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land hath hitherto done” (Ether 2:11).

The use of all three pejorative, yārad-based wordplays on Jared/ Jaredites serve as a pointed warning to latter-day Gentiles who would occupy new world lands of promise in the latter-day. Cainitic and Jareditic secret combinations destroyed both an Israelite nation (the Nephites) and a gentile nation (the Jaredites). The Jaredites not only served as Mormon’s (and Moroni’s) model for how an entire nation might destroy itself but also as a prototype for all Gentiles in the land of promise, especially those who would occupy it in the latter-days (see, e.g., the Lord’s promise to the brother of Jared: “there shall be none greater than the nation which I will raise up unto me of thy seed upon all the face of the earth,” Ether 1:43). At the present moment, latter-day Gentiles on the land of promise continue to “ripen in iniquity” (cf. Ether 2:9; 9:20) and thus stand in real danger of becoming “Jaredites” — i.e., yōrĕdîm — or “those who go down” to destruction and “bring down” destruction upon themselves through secret combinations like the Jaredites did and the Nephites who embraced the secret combinations of their Jaredite predecessors.

[Author’s Note: I would like to thank Suzy Bowen, Jeff Lindsay, Allen Wyatt, Victor Worth, Tanya Spackman, Don Norton, and Daniel C. Peterson.]

Matthew L. Bowen was raised in Orem, Utah, and graduated from Brigham Young University. He holds a PhD in Biblical Studies from the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, and is currently an associate professor in religious education at Brigham Young University- Hawaii. He is also the author of Name as Key-Word: Collected Essays on Onomastic Wordplay and The Temple in Mormon Scripture (Salt Lake City: Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2018). He and his wife (the former Suzanne Blattberg) are the parents of three children: Zachariah, Nathan, and Adele.

1 . Brant A. Gardner, “Mormon the Writer: Turning History into Story,” in Give Ear to My Words: Text and Context of Alma 36-42 (48th Annual Brigham Young University Sidney B. Sperry Symposium), eds. Kerry M. Hull, Nicholas J. Frederick, and Hank R. Smith (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, 2019), 480-81. I have chosen to use the alternative spelling given to the robbers (Gaddianton) as opposed to the traditional spelling (Gadianton). On the spelling of Gaddianton with the doubled d (–dd–), see John W. Welch and Kelly Ward, “Thieves and Robbers,” July 1985 FARMS Update (reprinted in John W. Welch, ed., Reexploring the Book of Mormon: A Decade of New Research [Provo, UT: FARMS, 1992], 249).

2 . Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, Volume 5: Helaman–Third Nephi (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), 255.

3 . Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden, NDL: Brill, 2001), 434-35. Hereafter cited as HALOT.

4 . See Matthew L. Bowen, “Getting Cain and Gain,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 15 (2015): 115-41, https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/getting-cain-and-gain/. Regarding the genesis of Cainitic secret combinations among the Nephites that ultimately destroyed them, Mormon writes, “Yea, they began to seek to get gain that they might be lifted up one above another. Therefore they began to commit secret murders and to rob and to plunder that they might get gain” (Helaman 6:17). Verses later, Mormon asserts that these “secret oaths and combinations” had their ultimate origin with “that same being who did plot with Cain that if he would murder his brother Abel, it should not be known unto the world. And he did plot with Cain and his followers from that time forth.” Relatedly, Moroni describes the genesis of the Cainitic secret combinations among the Jaredites that destroyed that civilization: “And Akish did administer unto them the oaths which was given by them of old, who also sought power, which had been handed down even from Cain, who was a murderer from the beginning. And they were kept up by the power of the devil, to administer these oaths unto the people, to keep them in darkness, to help such as sought power to gain power” (Ether 8:15-16); “And whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed” (Ether 8:22). These descriptions directly play on the name Cain which is etiologically tied to the verb qny, denoting “get,” “acquire,” “(pro)create.” (See Genesis 4:1; Moses 5:16, 31, 50).

5 . Book of Mormon citations herein will generally follow Royal Skousen, ed. The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009), https://bookofmormoncentral.org/content/book-mormon-earliest-text.

6 . See Omni 1:22.

7 . Mosiah 28:17; Helaman 6:28.

8 . Title page of the Book of Mormon; Ether 1:1-5, 33.

9 . Jeremy Black, Andrew George, Nicholas Postgate, eds., Concise Dictionary of Akkadian (SANTAG 5; Wiesbaden, DEU: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000), 434. Hereafter cited as CDA.

10 . Ibid., 433.

11 . HALOT, 434-435.

12 . Paul Y. Hoskisson, s.v., “Jared,” Book of Mormon Onomasticon, https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php/JARED.

13 . David Richins, “The Descent of the Jaredites,” The Lunch Is Free (blog), September 22, 2016, https://thelunchisfree.com/2016/09/22/the-descent-of-the-jaredites/.

14 . See Genesis 5:15-16, 18-20; 1 Chronicles 1:2; 4:18.

15 . See Matthew L. Bowen, “‘Where I Will Meet You’: The Convergence of Sacred Time and Sacred Space as the Etiological Function of the Tent of Meeting” in Sacred Time, Sacred Space, and Sacred Meaning Temple: Proceedings of the Third Interpreter Foundation Matthew B. Brown Memorial Conference, The Temple on Mount Zion, 5 November 2016, ed. Stephen D. Ricks and Jeffrey M. Bradshaw (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation; Salt Lake City: Eborn Books, 2020), 1–42.

16 . As part of a letter to his son Moroni, Mormon writes: “And if they [the Nephites] perish, it will be like unto the Jaredites, because of the willfulness of their hearts, seeking for blood and revenge” (Moroni 9:23). Moroni uses the collocation “people of Jared” on the title page of the Book of Mormon (“an abridgment taken from the book of Ether also, which is a record of the people of Jared, which were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people”) and Moroni 1:1 (“Now I Moroni after having made an end of abridging the account of the people of Jared...”). Latent in this collocation is the notion of “the people” who “went down” (ultimately to destruction).

17 . Walter Brueggemann, Great Prayers of the Old Testament (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2008), 48.

18 . Michael P. O’Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 87-109.

19 . HALOT, 3.

20 . HALOT, 1473.

21 . See, e.g., Paul R. Williamson, Death and Afterlife: Biblical Perspectives on the Ultimate Questions (Downers Grove, IL: Apollos, 2018), 41.

22 . Bowen, “Getting Cain and Gain,” 127-28.

23 . The wordplay on Jared/Jaredites raises questions for future study about the figure of Korihor, the antichrist with a Jaredite name (see “Corihor” as attested in Ether 7:3-4, 7, 9, 13-15, 13:17, 14:27-28), whom Alma characterizes as “the means of bringing many souls down to destruction” (Alma 30:47).

POLYGAMISTS AND POLITICAL ACTIVISTS:

THE UNLIKELY MARRIAGE IN

PIONEERING THE VOTE

Hanna Seariac

Review of Neylan McBaine, Pioneering the Vote: The Untold Story of Suffragists in Utah and the West (Salt Lake City: Shadow Mountain, 2020). 240 pages. $19.99 (hardback).

Abstract: Pioneering the Vote by Neylan McBaine provides a cogent and concise history of the role of Latter-day Saint women in the suffrage movement. McBaine interweaves a fictionalized narrative centered on Emmeline Wells with primary source excerpts and summaries of particular events. The book brings to life the women described and succeeds in explicating many of the important barriers that Latter-day Saint women faced while trying to participate in the suffrage movement — namely, polygamy. McBaine accurately portrays the aversion to polygamy, but she could have spent more time describing why and how Latter-day Saint women found polygamy empowering. While the book succeeds in recounting history and begins to analyze Latter-day Saint women’s role in this movement, more interaction with Latter-day Saint theology as a way of showing why women would feel passionately about obtaining suffrage while still maintaining polygamous relationships would create a more complete picture. Nevertheless, McBaine’s historic contribution to this field of study acts as a milestone from which we can advance to more nuanced discussions about the way polygamy empowered women.

February 14, 1870, marks the first day a woman ever cast a ballot in the United States.[1] Seraph Cedenia Young Ford, the grandniece of Brigham Young, cast her vote in a Salt Lake City municipal election on this day in response to the passage of an equal suffrage law in Utah. One cannot ignore the role polygamy had in the subsequent drafting of disenfranchisement laws, reacting to the widespread, women-based support for polygamy. Polygamy cast Utah’s suffrage in a different light, and many famous suffragettes such as Susan B. Anthony vocally opposed this practice, which complicates our understanding of the suffrage movement. For a time following 1870, Utah did not permit women to vote, but in 1895, when proposing statehood, Orson F. Whitney argued in favor of woman suffrage, saying: “She was designed for it. She has a right to it.”[2] Utah included this proposal while petitioning for statehood, and it was subsequently granted. Although the Nineteenth Amendment passed in 1920, not all women had the right to vote at that point because of naturalization laws.[3] Just over a hundred years later, all women have secured the right to vote within the United States of America.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a distinct relationship with promulgating women’s suffrage. Sarah Kimball in Woman’s Exponent wrote:

Mrs. Wells, Editor of the Exponent, saying the women of Utah as a body MUST fight for the maintenance of the right to vote, and also to get national guarantee for all women in the nation. President Smith the Prophet said women should ask us for advice, and the time should come when the women of this Church should lead in such matters.[4]

Women like Emmeline B. Wells, Sarah M. Kimball, Emily Hill Woodmansee, Zina Young Williams, and others joined with national suffragettes, attended national conferences, wrote persuasive prose and poetry, and encouraged the nation to extend suffrage to women, echoing what the prophet Joseph Smith said should happen. The salient words of Woodmansee ring true: “If we stand but still, nor progressive be,/We may wear these chains to Eternity;/ And like many a woman, never know,/That gallantry often, is outside show.”[5] McBaine’s book Pioneering the Vote[6] pays special attention to Latter-day Saint women’s impact on advancing suffrage while also speaking broadly about how suffrage moved from the West to the East until all women were guaranteed this right. In this review, I will summarize the contents of her book while providing commentary on points of particular interest and advance the conversation.

McBaine intermingles historical documentation with narrative to chronicle how the radical women’s suffrage movement first experienced success in the frontier West before transitioning into the East. This work acts as an homage to the Nineteenth Amendment as 2020 marks its centennial and as one of the only works that discusses how women in the West participated in the suffrage movement. In her introduction, McBaine emphasizes that “we have to work harder to excavate the words and deeds of nineteenth-century women” as a way of amplifying these women to avoid falling “into the anti-feminist trap of silencing women’s voices” (ix). By intermingling direct quotations from the women whose work she cites and constructing an accurate historical narrative around this evidence, McBaine gives these women a chance to tell their story.

The narrative focuses on Emmeline B. Wells, who becomes humanized through this method. While many historians have neglected women like Wells because of their polygamous relationships (and endorsement thereof), McBaine highlights how Wells’ advocacy, spanning forty articles advocating for the ability for women to vote and run for office,[7] led her to Susan B. Anthony and other important figures.

Chapter one chronicles Emmeline’s liveliness at the age of sixty. She prepared to speak at the Rocky Mountain Suffrage Convention in 1895 and mulled over the challenging work of convincing certain states to provide a suffrage clause within their constitutions. Much of this chapter focuses on Susan B. Anthony, who mentored Emmeline and planned the Rocky Mountain Suffrage Convention. McBaine highlights the connection between autonomy and voting. She flashes back to the Seneca Falls Convention, which occurred in 1848, and points out, “Dedication to temperance, educational reform, labor reform, and other areas of civic and social influence were the main takeaways from the convention. It was only later that a woman’s right to vote became a symbol of her ability to control her position in society and claim her independent agency” (9). The connection drawn here between voting and claiming agency subtly but surely points to the Latter-day Saint involvement within the suffrage movement. As voting grants individuals autonomy to contribute to the choice of society they want to live in, it seems natural that Latter-day Saints would support movements to reasonably expand the freedom of individuals. This salient point that McBaine refers to throughout the book merits attention.

Proceeding to chapter two, McBaine opens with an interaction between Emmeline and Elizabeth Taylor. This interaction expanded into a larger discussion of the role of African American women in the suffrage movement as well as a note about how Emmeline fought for civil rights for all. This moment illustrates the suffrage movement largely focused on white women, and the battle for African American women continued on afterward. In this chapter McBaine also begins to draw out the connection between polygamy and suffrage — one of the book’s most interesting discussions. She highlights Emmeline’s own marital struggles and cites how Latter-day Saints typically practiced plural marriage because they viewed it as a commandment of God, but women especially saw marriage as a way to garner influence and be protected (19). McBaine frames the discussion of plural marriage by describing how people outside of the Latter-day Saint community disliked plural marriage and saw it as a contradiction to women’s rights. I understand why McBaine would choose to frame this discussion as such, but I diverge from her here in methodology. Naturally, one would have to point out the ways those on the outside saw plural marriage, but I think a more effective framing could be to show the parallels between women’s reasoning for entering marriage and women’s reasoning for wanting suffrage. Both come down to agency. McBaine certainly does this thematically throughout her book, but I could see value in this framing.

In chapter three, McBaine discusses the refugee status of women. Latter-day Saint women faced persecution for practicing plural marriage, and this led to the denial of statehood as well as polygamy becoming illegal in the United States, as it was seen as a non-Christian practice. This led to the tie between polygamy and suffrage, as many of the discussions around suffrage centered on how Latter-day Saint women would use their vote to uphold polygamy if possible. Race played a role in the discussion around suffrage as well because of the Fifteenth Amendment. When the Fifteenth Amendment passed, some believed that to balance out giving former slaves the right to vote, women should also have the right to vote. This chapter provides critical background information and discusses the intersection between suffrage and race.

Chapter four discusses how many in the East disapproved of polygamy and could not fathom why Latter-day Saint women would willingly enter into plural marriage and still advocate for suffrage. The chapter centers on the story of Seraph Young, grandniece of Brigham Young, who cast the first vote within Utah. McBaine’s narrative prowess here truly shines as she provides a beautiful retelling of this particular story. She portrays Seraph Young’s emotions and timid courage eloquently, causing the reader to pause at this particular moment. While I largely like the narrative here, I do wish more attention was given to the philosophical motivations behind enfranchisement of women. McBaine hints at the connection between women finding autonomy in plural marriages and women being able to vote but does not go into the various ways that plural marriage benefitted women. The comparison between the benefits that plural marriage gave these women and how these benefits could have and perhaps did motivate women to want further autonomy from receiving suffrage seems like an apt point the book could make more explicitly. As women shared the responsibility of raising children together instead of living in a nuclear family situation, they had more autonomy to participate in other activities. This autonomy seems connected to agency, which I mentioned earlier, and could contribute quite well to McBaine’s discussion.

McBaine continues on in chapter five to provide another instance of women exercising their right to vote. She notes that while many outside of Utah focused on why women in polygamous relationships would want to vote, Susan B. Anthony chose to focus on the fact that women were voting. Anthony saw voting as a right inherent to being a citizen. While she did not approve of any kind of marriage, she joined with Elizabeth Cady Stanton in supporting female polygamists’ right to vote. When Anthony and Stanton came to Utah and spoke, they both emphasized principles of self-reliance for women. Anthony met Emmeline Wells, and they began working together later on. Anthony’s visit inspired the creation of the Woman’s Exponent, and Wells’ career as a writer and activist launched. McBaine mentions the tension between the Woman’s Exponent and the Anti-Polygamy Standard, but I think it would have been effective to briefly discuss whether supporting a woman’s right to vote was in contradiction with wanting to ban polygamy. This discussion seems critical as the relationship between plural marriage and suffrage is made clear throughout the book.

Moving forward to chapter six, McBaine opens with a quote from Wells on a man not being the point of existence, but she says happiness comes from self-reliance. This quote frames McBaine’s narrative of Wells’ quest to court religious leaders, politicians, and suffragists to try to convince them to come to the Rocky Mountain Suffrage Convention in May 1895. McBaine dedicates a section in this chapter to Charlotte Cobb Young, who rejected polygamy after living in the Lion House as a daughter of polygamy and who fought fiercely with Wells. McBaine cites the reasons for Charlotte Young’s being rejected by Latter- day Saint mainstream leaders: “her rhetoric was too highbrow for the self-preserving Mormons, too philosophical and distant from the practical needs they wrestled with daily in their frontier existences” (70). While this rings true, McBaine seems to neglect that Young tried to undermine a major tenet of Latter-day Saint religion, and this might have contributed more to their rejection of her than anything else. I largely agree with McBaine’s portrayal of the situation, but more space should have been dedicated to showing the religious conflict that spurred the Latter-day Saint rejection of Young. While one could read into McBaine’s statement about self-preservation and assume she refers to the desire of Latter-day Saints to maintain polygamous relationships, this link is not explicitly made, and I find it one of the central factors behind the rejection, based on the evidence McBaine presents.

In chapters seven and eight, we read about how Anthony was welcomed at the Templeton Hotel. At the Rocky Mountain Suffrage Convention, Idaho did not have a delegate, in large part because of the anti-Latter-day Saint bias. The Anti-Mormon Test Oath was a part of the test in Idaho to become engaged civically. This test was essentially that if you identified as a “Mormon,” you should not hold political office. Reynolds v. United States reinforced that the United States would restrict the rights of Latter-day Saints provided they were in polygamous relationships. The Anti-Mormon Test Oath affected many of the suffragists along with the Reynolds case. McBaine includes a discussion about the Woman’s Exponent and Emmeline’s work there as a writer. The rest of the chapter goes over how women lost their suffrage within Utah. This occurred with the Edmunds-Tucker Act, which disenfranchised all those in Utah except monogamous Utah men. Polygamy became a crime that could result in imprisonment, and Utah still had to gain statehood in addition to gaining civic rights for women. Here McBaine cites polygamy as the reason for losing statehood and mentions that the government considered it a “moral cancer.” While polygamy is perhaps the most important issue contributing to this, it seems that general anti- Mormon bias as mentioned earlier in chapter seven contributed as well, so I wish McBaine would nuance this discussion and include more about this element of the persecution, but overall she does a decent job of summarizing the events.

In chapter nine, she describes how the Anti-Polygamy Standard came to be, including a conversation about how the society and newspaper believed women were enslaved within the home because of their sex as a result of polygamy. Froiseth, a woman involved in this effort, took a stance against Latter-day Saint women and opposed suffrage for them. Froiseth eventually realized that Emmeline would take center stage and that she should not try to stunt her efforts. McBaine again provides a smooth narrative, but I wish she spoke more to how the Relief Society created a network of women, which she touches on. When she brings up the detail about how Brigham Young brings in mulberry trees and discovers the impact that has upon the ladies’ ability to create silk, it seems like a perfect foray to draw out the connection between the Relief Society and women’s suffrage, but McBaine does not do so. While the narrative is cohesive, I think McBaine could generally, but especially in this instance, create stronger connections between Latter-day Saint culture and theology to women’s suffrage because these elements clearly contributed to why Emmeline and others fought so fiercely for suffrage.

As the last five chapters describe the convention as it occurred and details afterwards, I felt it best to summarize them briefly, but discuss a theme that occurs throughout them. Emmeline’s work with the Woman’s Exponent and other suffrage work led to Utah’s statehood and civic rights for women. She continued on to do work internationally and ended up running for office. There are two important moments to focus on within these chapters before concluding with a discussion about the book generally. McBaine dwells on a particular lyric from “O My Father”, which reads, “In the heavens are parents single? No, the thought makes reason stare!/Truth is reason, truth eternal Tells me I’ve a mother there.”[8] She follows this by saying, “[T]his radical doctrine made the hymn a favorite of Latter-day Saint women, and they pointed to it as an example to the outside world of how their faith supported and enabled women, rather than oppressing them, as the practice of polygamy suggested” (121). She even provides a potential reason for focusing more on the work of mankind rather than the connection to Latter-day Saint theology by saying, “More than once, Emmeline had been warned and censured by Snow for her devotion to the causes of mankind rather than exclusively focusing on those of God” (121). Here McBaine provides the first serious discussion of elements of feminism impacting the suffrage movement, but does not flesh them out. As this unique Latter-day Saint doctrine was taught but perhaps not completely understood, it feels important to the rest of the book. Heavenly Mother provides a concrete foundation for understanding Latter-day Saint feminism and proves itself as one of the necessary elements to have interwoven throughout the narrative rather than in one solitary place. While not much is known about Heavenly Mother, the existence of a co-deity with Heavenly Father clearly illustrates a reason Latter-day Saint women in particular, who focus so much on agency, would see themselves as deserving of autonomy. This hinge point within the narrative takes a special place, as it is one of the few moments of authentic spirituality that we see Emmeline experience. With that said, it seems this particular doctrine guides Latter-day Saint belief throughout the rest of the book.

The final moment I will focus on before concluding is the last moment within the narrative. I have reproduced it here in full:

On March 13, 1906, Susan B. Anthony died in her home in Rochester, New York. The adoption of the “Susan B. Anthony Amendment” into the U.S. Constitution was still fourteen years away. Although unfulfilled in her lifelong dream of seeing all American women enfranchised, she didn’t forget her friends in the West. Hours from death, Anthony slipped the gold ring — the same gold ring she had offered to Emmeline years before — off of her finger and instructed those around her to send it to Emmeline. This ring was sent to Utah with a note that reads, “In recognition of her esteem and love for Mrs. Emmeline B. Wells, Miss Anthony sent one of her gold rings on the day of her death to Mrs. Wells in Utah. The bond between these two women was very strong and the friendship had continued for nearly thirty years.” Emmeline accepted the ring publicly at a memorial service for Susan B. Anthony held in Salt Lake City on March 17, 1906. Fourteen years later, on October 3, 1919, Emmeline likely wore the ring on the steps of the Utah State Capital building, her tiny, hunched, ninety- one-year-old frame draped in ghostly white, to witness the governor of the State of Utah, Simon Bamberger, announce Utah’s ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. (196–97)

One must appreciate McBaine’s literary prowess here. This passage perfectly ends the book. I particularly enjoy how descriptive the ending is and the sentiment that has been attached to it. While Emmeline and Susan completely differ on their moral and religious views, they were united by their desire for women’s suffrage, and this helped them develop a close bond and friendship. McBaine makes this clear here, and her writing is beautiful. Beyond drawing attention to McBaine’s writing style, this passage illustrates one critical theme throughout the book, which is that Latter-day Saint and non-member women would sometimes struggle to work together because of polygamy but could overcome it. By connecting Emmeline to a household name such as Susan B. Anthony, McBaine underscores her importance in the suffrage movement.

Overall, Pioneering the Vote is a well-done start to documenting Latter-day Saint women’s involvement with the suffrage movement. The fictionalized narrative format makes the book accessible to many, and the interspersed factoids provide the reader with intersections to do further research. On the whole, I found myself impressed with the work and enjoyed reading it. I would push again on the necessity to speak more to the uniquely Latter-day Saint elements that inspire women to enter into the suffrage movement. While McBaine adequately discusses the suffrage movement as a whole, the parts where she brings up what is idiosyncratic to Latter-day Saints merit a larger discussion to completely contextualize the work. The focus on polygamy resolves some of the issues I currently speak about, but I felt like plural marriage necessitated further conversation. She does not write much about what opportunities women were afforded through plural marriage and how that connects to the suffrage movement, and this seemed like an aspect of Latter-day Saint religion that would particularly apply. Regardless of my criticisms with it that certainly can be resolved through later works, McBaine’s pioneering efforts to document Latter-day Saint women pioneering the vote prove successful.

Hanna Seariac is an MA student at Brigham Young University in Comparative Studies with interests in early Christianity. She works as a research assistant looking at early Church history and fundamentalist Latter-day Saint movements and as a research assistant for a New Testament commentary.

1 . “The Women to Vote in Utah,” Elmira Daily Advertiser, 1870.

2 . See Maureen Ursenbach Beecher, Carol Cornwall Madsen, and Jill Mulvay Derr, “The Latter-day Saints and Women’s Rights, 1870-1920: A Brief Survey,” in Battle for the Ballot, ed. Carol Cornwall Madsen (Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 1997), 102. For more on the convention debate on woman suffrage, see Jean Bickmore White, “Woman’s Place Is in the Constitution: The Struggle for Equal Rights in Utah in 1895,” in Battle for the Ballot, 221-44.

3 . See Kathleen R. Arnold, ed., Anti-Immigration in the United States: A Historical Encyclopedia (Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood, 2011), 1:413-15.

4 . Sarah M. Kimball, “Third Quarterly Conference,” Woman’s Exponent 7, no. 3 (July 1, 1878), 18, https://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/digital/collection/WomansExp/id/6626.

5 . Emily Hill Woodmansee, “Simple Justice – Woman’s Right,” Woman’s Exponent 8, no. 17 (February 1, 1880), 129, https://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/digital/collection/WomansExp/id/26017/rec/187.

6 . Neylan McBaine, Pioneering the Vote: The Untold Story of Suffragists in Utah and the West (Salt Lake City: Shadow Mountain, 2020); throughout the course of this article, I will cite this work using parentheticals.

7 . Carol Cornwall Madsen, An Advocate for Women: The Public Life of Emmeline B. Wells, 1870-1920 (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 2006), 51–52.

8 . “O My Father,” Hymns, no. 292.

THE HANDCLASP, THE TEMPLE, AND THE KING

Matthew B. Brown

Abstract: In this article Matthew Brown examines the possible meaning behind the imagery of the handclasp between God in heaven and the earthly king. He focuses on this imagery as it is articulated in Psalms 27, 41, 63, 73, and 89. He argues that Psalms 41 and 73 feasibly indicate that when the king of Israel was initiated within the precincts of the temple into the office of kingship he passed through the veil of the Holy of Holies (see Exodus 26:33) and symbolically entered into God’s presence.

[Editor’s Note: Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article is reprinted here as a service to the LDS community. Original pagination and page numbers have necessarily changed, otherwise the reprint has the same content as the original.

See Matthew B. Brown, “The Handclasp, the Temple, and the King,” in Temple Insights: Proceedings of the Interpreter Matthew B. Brown Memorial Conference, “The Temple on Mount Zion,” 22 September 2012, ed. William J. Hamblin and David Rolph Seely (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation; Salt Lake City: Eborn Books, 2014), 5–10. Further information at https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/temple-insights/.]

Psalm 89 contains multiple verses that are unquestionably linked to the temple ceremonies utilized in establishing the king of Israel in his office. In one portion of this psalm, the Lord is represented as referring to the most recognized induction rite for the Hebrew ruler; He immediately thereafter uses the imagery of a handclasp between Himself and His earthly counterpart. God says: “my servant [the king]; with my holy oil have I anointed him: With whom my hand shall be established (kun, fastened or attached)” (Psalms 89:20–21).1 This combination of ideas seems to be a deliberate pattern, since the Lord repeats the exact same sequence of themes at a later time in the book of Isaiah: “Thus saith the Lord to his anointed [the king], whose right hand I have holden [chazaq, seized or grasped]” (Isaiah 45:1).

Figure 1. Handclasp on the Exterior of the Salt Lake Temple.

The juxtaposition of the handclasp with the anointing points to the possibility that the joining of hands was also part of the accession ceremonies. The Lord says in Psalm 89 that it is He who anoints the king, though it is clear in other texts that this was actually carried out by a priestly proxy (see 1 Samuel 16:1; 1 Kings 1:39). A ceremonial handclasp, therefore, could conceivably have been accomplished in the same manner.

One biblical commentator offers an explanation for the significance of the regal handclasp by stating that “the formula, ‘God grasps one by the hand,’ when the king ascends the throne and is inducted into the royal office, denotes the conferring of privilege and charisma on the king.”2 Another scholar is convinced that the expression “hold my right hand,” which is found in several places throughout the Psalms, is “derived from the royal ritual” of ascending the throne.3 It is interesting to note that in at least one other ancient Near Eastern culture, the enthronement of the king was known as “taking [the god] by the hand.”4

Another reference to a handclasp between the earthly king and the heavenly King is alluded to in Psalm 41, which some biblical scholars believe should be viewed in a temple context.5 The King James Version of verse 12 reads: “as for me, thou upholdest [tamak, grasp or seize or take hold of] me in mine integrity, and settest [natsab, to be stationed] me before thy face forever.” Mitchell Dahood retranslates this passage as a request. It is rendered as follows: “grasp me. And set me before you forever.”6 In the case of either reading, to be before the Lord is to be in His presence. And the presence of the Lord was understood by the ancient Israelites to be symbolized by His throne (the ark of the covenant) in the Holy of Holies of the temple.

A psalm that could be attributed to the king of Israel^7 may also be helpful in interpreting the Psalm 41 passage. In the King James Bible, Psalm 73:23–24 reads, “I am continually with thee: thou hast holden [ahaz, grasp or seize or be fastened] me by my right hand. Thou shalt guide [nahah, lead] me with thy counsel, and afterward receive me to glory.” Again, a retranslation of this portion of the psalm forms a request: “take hold of my right hand. Into your council lead me, and with glory take me to yourself.”8 This, according to Dahood, is a reference to God’s “heavenly council.”9 It is recognized by scholars such as Moshe Weinfeld that the sixth chapter of the book of Isaiah describes a meeting of the heavenly council.10 But the important thing to notice in that passage of scripture is that the assembly is convened before the throne of the heavenly King, which is located inside the Holy of Holies of the temple. Some Bible commentators are willing to grant that it is “possible that the [Israelite] king’s coronation involved a visit to the ark” of the covenant or divine throne in the Holy of Holies, “to stand symbolically at God’s right hand.”11 Taken altogether, Psalms 41 and 73 point to the possibility that when the king of Israel was initiated into his office in the temple precincts, he passed through the veil of the Holy of Holies (see Exodus 26:33) and into God’s symbolic presence. Perhaps a proxy and a handclasp played a role in such a situation.

Psalm 63 contains themes that are firmly connected with all that has been discussed above. In this text the king of Israel speaks of God’s “sanctuary” or temple (v. 2) and how he will “lift up [his] hands” or pray^12 therein (v. 4). This information logically locates the king at the altar of incense/prayer (see Revelation 8:3–4), which was situated before the veil that concealed the throne room or Holy of Holies (see Exodus 40:26). Another reference to the temple’s throne room may be detected in verse 7, where mention is made of “the shadow of [the Lord’s] wings.” Some writers have identified this as the wings of the cherubim that overshadowed the ark or divine throne inside the Holy of Holies.13 It may be significant that directly after this location designator is given by the king, he says to the heavenly Sovereign, “My soul followeth hard [dabaq, cleaves to or is united with or is joined fast to] after thee: thy right hand upholdeth [tamak, take hold of or grasp or seize] me” (v. 8). Thus, a proposed right-hand clasp between God and the king in Psalm 63 is adjacent to imagery that suggests an embrace, and these, in turn, seem to be connected with the veil-concealed Holy of Holies.

There is one final psalm that is relevant to this study. Psalm 27 represents the king as saying that he seeks to “behold” or chazah the face of the Lord in His temple. Dahood indicates that the word chazah as found in Psalms 11:7, 17:15, and 63:2 “is the verb used to describe the act of beholding God face to face.”14 In an illustration of Psalm 27 found in the Utrecht Psalter^15 ― which was created about 820 AD in a Benedictine abbey near Epernay, France ― the king of Israel is shown meeting face to face with the heavenly King (and what may also be the divine council) at the parted veil of the temple. In Psalm 27:10, the king of Israel says that “the Lord will take [acaph, take in or receive into] [him] up”; in the Utrecht Psalter, the Lord is shown reaching down a stairway and grasping the king by the right hand, possibly to induct him into the heavenly assembly.

Notes

1. Another translation of Psalm 89:21 reinforces the idea that the underlying Hebrew text is talking about a handclasp. It reads: “My [i.e., the Lord’s] hand shall hold him [i.e., the king] fast” (John H. Eaton, The Psalms: A Historical and Spiritual Commentary with an Introduction and New Translation [London, England: T&T Clark, 2003], 317).

2. Hans-Joachim Kraus, Theology of the Psalms (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing, 1986), 173.

3. A. A. Anderson, The Book of Psalms: Volume 2, Psalms 73–150 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1981), 535.

4. Jeremy Black, “The New Year Ceremonies in Ancient Babylon: ‘Taking Bel by the Hand’ and a Cultic Picnic,” Religion, vol. 11, 1981, 39–59.

5. “The variety in forms of language [in Psalm 41] is to be explained in a liturgical context; the text must be interpreted as a liturgy (or a part of a liturgy) for use within a ritual in which a … person comes to the temple.” Peter C. Craigie, Psalms 1–50 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1983), 319. The Hebrew phrase “to your face” (lepaneka) in Psalm 41:12 “may indicate a liturgical setting in the temple [see also Psalms 11:7; 17:15; 24:6; 27:8–9].” Leander E. Keck, ed., The New Interpreter’s Bible (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 4:848.

6. Mitchell Dahood, Psalms I: 1–50 (New York: Doubleday, 1965), 249.

7. Psalm 73 is labeled in the King James Version as “A Psalm of Asaph.” But 1 Chronicles 16:4–7 makes it clear that Asaph was the man in charge of the Levitical temple musicians and King David would deliver his psalms to Asaph in order for them to be performed in the liturgy.

8. Dahood, Psalms II: 51–100, 187. Dahood notes that the Hebrew word translated as “lead me” in Psalm 73 (nahah) is the technical term for “to lead into Paradise.” Dahood, Psalms II, 195. Or, as he phrases it in another instance, “the celestial abode of the just.” Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 326.

9. Dahood, Psalms II: 51–100, 194.

10. Moshe Weinfeld, “Ancient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literature,” Vetus Testamentum, vol. 27, no. 2, 1977, 180–81.

11. Keck, ed., The New Interpreter’s Bible, 4:1130.

12. Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1991), 5:427.

13. Adam Clarke, Clarke’s Commentary, s.v., Psalm 63.

14. Dahood, Psalms I: 1–50, 167.

15. Psalm 26 (KJV 27), folio 15r, written in Latin.

Matthew B. Brown (1964–2011), earned a bachelor of arts degree in history from Brigham Young University, was an author and historian whose emphasis was on the history and doctrine of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, and wrote several nonfiction books and research-based articles for the Neal A. Maxwell Institute of Religsious Scholarship at BYU. He worked as compiler and editor of the Journal for the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR; now FairMormon). He is survived by his wife Jamie.

Figure 2. Illustration of Psalm 27, Utrecht Psalter, 9th century

Table of Contents

Title Page

“All Can Partake, Freely”

Working out Salvation History in the Book of Mormon Politeia with Fear and Trembling

The Pleading Bar of God

Subtle Hebraic Features in the Book of Mormon

Poesy and Prosody in the Book of Mormon

Prolegomena to a Study of the Egyptian Alphabet Documents in the Joseph Smith Papers

Record-Keeping Technology among God’s People in Ancient and Modern Times

Fantasy and Reality in the Translation of the Book of Abraham

Tree of Life, Tree of Healing

The Inclusive, Anti-Discrimination Message of the Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon as a Resurrected Book and a Type of Christ

Coming Down and Bringing Down: Pejorative Onomastic Allusions to the Jaredites in Helaman 6:25, 6:38, and Ether 2:11

Polygamists and Political Activists: The Unlikely Marriage in Pioneering the Vote

The Handclasp, the Temple, and the King