Mosiah 11 - 17

Abinadi

How did Alma obtain knowledge of Christ? He heard the preaching of Abinadi, an itinerant prophet martyred by the wicked Noah. And Alma1 “did write all the words which Abinadi had spoken” (Mosiah 17:4). Where did Abinadi, who appears suddenly in the narrative with no background or introduction, get his knowledge? In chapters 13 and 14 of Mosiah, we see him reading the words of Moses and of Isaiah to Noah’s court, finding in them clear foreshadowing of a “God [who should] himself . . . come down among the children of men, and . . . redeem his people” (18:1). Where did Abinadi obtain those scriptures? He was a member of Zeniff’s colony, which was an offshoot of the major Nephite settlement, and apparently, they took copies of the Nephite records with them when they departed Zarahemla and resettled Lehi–Nephi.  

Givens, Terryl. 2nd Nephi (The Book of Mormon: Brief Theological Introductions). The Neal A Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. Kindle Edition. 

Abinadi is Jacob’s unquestionable doctrinal heir. Faced with Noah’s priests who seem, as will be seen, to have inherited (and likely distorted) only Nephi’s covenantal focus, Abinadi criticizes them by setting forth the soteriology that they apparently overlooked through their focus on a strictly covenantal theology. Moreover, Abinadi’s discourse borders on being a commentary on 2 Nephi 9 (as well as on 2 Nephi 2), revealing his familiarity with Jacob’s teachings. And Abinadi—through his influence on Alma—seems thereby to have launched a two-centuries-long Nephite focus on soteriology. Abinadi thus appears in Mosiah as the double heir of Jacob, as much doctrinally or theologically as narratively or historically. Joseph Spencer - https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=mi

. . . Abinadi is indeed a prophet’s prophet. He’s much more like a classic Old Testament prophet than Nephi or Benjamin. Rather than being a king, Abinadi is an outsider. He is . . . eccentric and incorrigible. He’s alien and fierce. He appears to blow in from nowhere, a nobody, without power or reputation, crying repentance and prophesying destruction. He’s hunted for two years until he reappears to seal his testimony. And where Nephi and Benjamin both report stunning revelations delivered by angels, Abinadi’s final message is shaped by an interpretive contest with Noah’s priests, a contest that turns on who, at the end of the day, can actually read and understand Isaiah.

Miller, Adam S.; Welch, Rosalynde F.. Seven Gospels: The Many Lives of Christ in the Book of Mormon (p. 56). Deseret Book Company. Kindle Edition. 

Q: What does the Lord mean when he says he is jealous? 

“According to Donna Nielsen, a knowledge of the biblical marriage imagery can greatly enrich our understanding of how God relates to us through covenants. In Mosiah 11:22 we find the Lord declaring to his covenant people that "they shall know that I am the Lord their God, and am a jealous God, visiting the iniquities of my people." Nielsen notes that the biblical definition of "jealous" (or "zealous") includes having a fiery concern and determination to protect the intimacy of the covenant relationship. It is not about being possessive in a selfish way or showing immature insecurity. It is an appropriate reaction to the intense preciousness of the relationship with the other partner.”

https://bookofmormon.online/home

Other Disguises in Biblical Narratives

Yet when this story is compared to biblical stories which also deal with prophetic messengers, kings, and disguises, it seems that there is likely more to Abinadi’s disguise than initially meets the eye.

This story has several parallels with biblical narratives that also deal with prophetic messengers, kings, and disguises. These include (1) King Saul disguising himself in order to receive guidance from the witch of Endor (1 Samuel 28), (2) a prophet disguising himself in order to condemn King Ahab for not executing a Syrian King (1 Kings 20), (3) an Israelite king disguising himself to avoid harm in battle, only to be slain by an archer (1 Kings 22), (4) Josiah disguising himself in order to meet with an Egyptian Pharaoh (2 Chronicles 35; 2 Kings 23), and (5) Jeroboam’s wife disguising herself to visit a blind prophet concerning her son’s illness (1 Kings 14).

Biblical scholar Richard Coggins has explained that in these types of biblical narratives, “one of the parties disguises himself (or in one case herself), but the disguise is penetrated, and God’s will is conveyed in a form which is liable to be quite unacceptable to the one seeking it.”

Coggins “also argued that the appearance of prophetic disguises in several Old Testament stories, all from the same historical period, is “surely not simply a matter of coincidence.” Rather, with the use of a prophetic disguise, “a theological point is being made.”

These stories typically depict a contest or conflict between God and an earthly king. As Alan Goff has noted, “All of the kings or their heirs in the biblical disguise stories meet with brutal deaths, and in each case the dynasty fails.” The same outcome befell King Noah, who was burned to death by his own people and whose dynasty ended after the reign of his son (Mosiah 19:20).

As for the disguise itself, it’s notable that right before it is mentioned in the text, the narrator reported that the “eyes of the people were blinded” (Mosiah 11:29). This suggests that the disguise typifies the inability of wicked people to discern between truth and error. King Noah himself arrogantly asked, “Who is Abinadi, that I and my people should be judged of him, or who is the Lord, that shall bring upon my people such great affliction?” (Mosiah 11:27). Although Noah’s question was surely meant to be rhetorical, it ironically demonstrates his personal lack of spiritual perception. He could discern neither the Lord nor his prophetic servant.

https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/why-did-abinadi-use-a-disguise

“Clearly, there is more to Abinadi’s disguise than meets the eye. Hiding beneath the surface, the text pursues its own thematic purposes by developing a complex network of allusions to biblical disguise stories that also feature kings and prophets. “Whoever wrote the Book of Mormon text,” Goff concluded, “seems to have had a sharp eye for detail and is far beyond any contemporary readers in subtlety and knowledge of the Bible.”

https://evidencecentral.org/recency/evidence/abinadis-disguise

Pentecost

Both of Abinadi’s speeches deal with the themes of Pentecost. He reversed the festival’s blessings and rejoicing, and turned them into curses and predictions of gloom. At the time when a bounteous grain season would have been at hand, Abinadi cursed the crops: he prophesied that hail, dry winds, and insects shall ruin “their grain” (Mosiah 12:6). While Israel’s deliverance from bondage was traditionally being celebrated, Abinadi called upon Exodus terminology to proclaim that bondage and burdens would return to the wicked people in the city of Nephi: “They shall be brought into bondage; . . . and none shall deliver them” (Mosiah 11:21, 23), “and I will cause that they shall have burdens lashed upon their backs” (Mosiah 12:2, 5; compare Exodus 1:11). Jack Welch, "Abinadi and Pentecost."

“Their eyes were surely opened, though, when Abinadi’s disguise (whatever its physical nature) was symbolically unveiled and “his face shone with exceeding luster, even as Moses’ did while in the mount of Sinai” (Mosiah 13:5). Whether or not they had already identified him as Abinadi the preacher, there would have been no question at this point that they were dealing with Abinadi the prophet.” KnoWhy. https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/why-did-abinadi-use-a-disguise

Just as Benjamin’s gospel depicts the life of Jesus Christ in terms that resonate with Benjamin’s own experience, Abinadi bears a resemblance to the Redeemer of his gospel. Christ, like Abinadi, comes in disguise. Jesus takes upon him a body of flesh with “no form nor comeliness . . . [nor] beauty that we should desire him,” which hinders the people from understanding his full identity as God himself (Mosiah 14:2). Like Abinadi, the unknown Christ manifests miraculous power with and in his human body. Both are bound, scourged, and led before a hostile tribunal. And both are delivered up to “suffer even until death” (Mosiah 17:10). One role of a prophet is to stand in for God as a surrogate before his people, and Abinadi seals his surrogacy with his own life.

Miller, Adam S.; Welch, Rosalynde F.. Seven Gospels: The Many Lives of Christ in the Book of Mormon (p. 51). Deseret Book Company. Kindle Edition. 

Just like the Jews in Jesus' day had a different idea of what they were expecting with the Messiah, it seems that the priests of King Noah's court also lack this understanding. To be fair, Peter lacked this understanding. This was hard for people to understand. The expectation was the Messiah is going to come in great power, and he's going to be this political leader who's going to free us from this oppression that we have so that when Jesus comes and now remember that scene where he's standing before Pilate, and he's bound, and the people are crying out, "Crucify him, crucify him," this can't be the Messiah, because our Messiah is going to break the bonds of oppression. Think of Peter in Matthew 16, "Thou art the Christ, the Messiah, the son of the living God," but it's the same exact chapter that Jesus is going to prophesy and say, "I'm going to be taken, and I'm going to be killed, and I'm going to rise again the third day."

Ryan Sharp - Follow Him Podcast

https://followhim.co/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/BM-20-Dr.-Ryan-Sharp-Mosiah-11-17-followHIM-Podcast-SHOW-NOTES.pdf

Abinadi in Court - Contrasts

Abinadi, on the other hand, appears to have no friends. When he shows up calling the people to repentance, he seems to come out of nowhere (Mosiah 11:20). When he disappears for two years, we have no idea where he goes (Mosiah 12:1). When he is arrested, nobody speaks on his behalf. When he is tried, he calls no witness to testify to his innocence, except the words of an ancient prophet (Mosiah 14:1). It’s only when Abinadi is condemned to death that the priest Alma speaks in his defense, though it’s not clear that Abinadi is aware of Alma’s advocacy and in any case Alma is soon expelled (Mosiah 17:2-3). In the end, Abinadi dies as he (apparently) ministered: an isolated figure without social or family attachments (Mosiah 17:20).

Noah, on the contrary, runs from his death--literally. First, he begs for his life from Gideon when cornered on his tower (see Mosiah 19:8). Later, he commands his men to abandon their wives and children to flee Lamanite forces (see Mosiah 19:11).

Rosalynde F. Welch

https://mi.byu.edu/news-blog-section/mosiah-11-17-a-lonely-prophet-and-a-lost-king

Abinadi’s Influence on Others

We see the great righteousness one very righteous man can cause to take place among the children of men." Not only Abinadi and his influence, but then in chapter 17, there was one among them, these priests, and he believed. And then what does Alma do? He hides out and he begins to write the words of Abinadi. And then what does he do in chapter 18? He begins to teach the words of Abinadi. And it's the words of Abinadi that lead to the conversion of 450 souls at the end of Mosiah 18. And then it's Alma and his son Alma. And then the story of Alma the Younger connected with the sons of Mosiah gets us into the missionary work of the sons of Mosiah and their conversion is going to impact King Lamoni and the Queen, his father and the entire anti-Nephi-Lehi's. And then you have Alma's son, Helaman, and his son Helaman, and then as we mentioned at the beginning of this, the Nephi's. Until finally we get to the end of 3rd and 4th Nephi, the culmination, the climax of the Book of Mormon. This moment and the impact of Abinadi is truly going to transform the rest of Nephite civilization all the way up through 3rd and 4th Nephi.

Ryan Sharp

https://followhim.co/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/BM-20-Dr.-Ryan-Sharp-Mosiah-11-17-followHIM-Podcast-SHOW-NOTES.pdf

Abinadi as the Angel Who Appeared to King Benjamin

Remember - Professor Andrew Skinner has considered the angel who directed King Benjamin as Gabriel because of similar language.

The cluster of parallels surrounding the voice of the angel prompts the question, did the same angel appear to Abinadi as appeared to King Benjamin? While we cannot know for certain, some have speculatively suggested another possibility—that Abinadi may have been the angel that appeared to King Benjamin.[41] While such an assertion must be extremely tentative, it is interesting to note that King Benjamin frequently refers to the angelic messenger (see Mosiah 3:2–3; 4:1, 11). In addition, those in King Benjamin’s audience specifically reference the words of the angel, further emphasizing the importance of the angel in King Benjamin’s discourse (see Mosiah 5:5). In contrast, there is no mention of angels anywhere in the pericope surrounding Abinadi and those who heard his message, suggesting that an angelic messenger may not have played an important role in Abinadi’s ministry. If Abinadi was the angel who appeared to Benjamin, his words have an additional influence in the Book of Mormon through King Benjamin’s important speech. This potential influence is not tangential in understanding Book of Mormon teachings. If Abinadi did teach King Benjamin (or another angel taught Abinadi’s words to King Benjamin), then Abinadi is the first prophetic witness found in Mormon’s abridgment of the large plates of Nephi, influencing all prophetic voices after him.

John Hilton III - “Abinadi’s Legacy,” Abinadi: He Came Among Them in Disguise

https://rsc.byu.edu/abinadi/abinadis-legacy

How will Abinadi influence us? 

“Comfort is the God of our generation” - Matt Chandler and Megan Fate Marshman

Comfortable, easy - Abinadi did not take the comfortable easy road for the Savior

Romans 8:28-29 - “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.”

Whatever the “thing is” God will use that to help us conform to the image of the Son.

Mosiah 7 - 10

The Journey:

Mosiah 1--------------------Benjamin-----------------------Mosiah 2

Zeniff-------------Noah-----------Limhi

Quote #1 – The geographical, temporal, and interpersonal dimensions of the book of Mosiah are often cited as one of the most complexly impressive sections in the entire Book of Mormon. This complexity and the satisfying resolution of each scenario into the overall story is rightly seen by many to be one of the strongest evidences of the divine authenticity and historicity of the Book of Mormon. Why would Joseph Smith choose to include a storyline where it is extremely difficult to follow the many characters, locations, twists, and turns – a narrative that requires a diagram for readers to follow to keep track of all the details? 
John W. Welch

Quote #2 – Why did Zeniff want to return to the land of Nephi?
Was Zarahemla oppressive like the Israelites in Egypt? Were they hoping to return
from an exile of sorts and to rebuild the temple that Nephi had constructed as Ezra had
done in Judea? Was it their intention to go somewhere that they could live a higher,
more integrated form of their religion? Note that they had taken priests with them –
priests who would later be replaced by Noah’s political allies.

Quote #3 – Limhi declared his lineage and identified its ultimate authority in
Zarahemla. Ammon is no king, but his lineage likewise links him to Zarahemla, both
the king (his ancestor) and the land (the current political regime). Ammon, a lineal
Zarahemlaite, was entrusted with the mission of finding a dynasty founded by a
lineal/cultural Nephite from the original city of Nephi. Such an assignment suggests
that the Zarahemlaites were thoroughly accepted as participants in Benjamin’s new
covenant. Had there been any continuing animosity between the descendants of Nephi
and the descendants of Zarahemla, then almost certainly, the mission would have
been given to a descendant of Nephi." 

Gardner, Second Witness, 204.

Quote #4 – The right words have been selected from the words of Limhi in order to
clearly communicate his main message that he and his people were in bondage
because they had sinned. Limhi was definitely aware of this. As king, he gathered his
people at the temple and reminded them that God had saved their ancestors,
reiterating the miracle of the Israelites crossing the Red Sea on dry ground. “That
same God has brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem, and has kept and
preserved his people even until now.” But, “it is because of our iniquities and
abominations that he has brought us into bondage.” In the context of the Exodus
theology, returning to bondage could mean nothing less than returning to slavery,
which the Israelites had known in Egypt before Moses delivered them. To Limhi’s
people, who had returned to the Land of Nephi in order to reclaim the traditional temple
in that city, nothing could have been more inspiring than Limhi’s impassioned temple
speech reminding his people – and us too – to keep our covenants.

John W. Welch

Quote #5 – Limhi identified 3 reasons why his people were in bondage to the
Lamanites. The first was that Zeniff was overzealous to inherit the land of his fathers.
To be overzealous means to go beyond what is necessary. The second cause was
transgression. As Joseph Smith taught: “The moment we revolt at anything which
comes from God, the devil takes power.” Limhi’s third cause of bondage was the
Nephites slaying of the prophet Abinadi. While other things may lead into bondage,
these three causes outlined by King Limhi are typical reasons for any time period.
Nyman, “Bondage and Deliverance,” 263-264.

Quote #6 – Interestingly, Ammon either had with him a copy of King Benjamin’s
speech or he knew it by memory, for he “rehearsed unto the people of Limhi the last
words which King Benjamin had taught them, and explained them.” Ammon and King
Limhi most likely believed that this people would benefit by knowing the revelations
that Benjamin had given his people, and also by following Benjamin’s public laws,
since these statutes and ordinances had already proven to be very beneficial to all the
people of Zarahemla. John W. Welch

Quote #7 – The 24 Jaredite plates were translated by Mosiah 2, and then abridged by
Moroni. Benjamin’s father Mosiah 1 had earlier translated a Jaredite stele through
supernatural means, presumably the interpreters. This translation did not make it into
the Book of Mormon. Presumably, the 24 Jaredite plates gave the same or a better
history.

MAP

Scholars estimate that the distance between the land of Nephi and Zarahemla was no
more than 200 miles. The inability to find Zarahemla is curious. While there might have 

been some issues in arriving at the appropriate pass through the mountains, the instructions 

should have been simple. Zarahemla lay along the Sidon, and the Sidon had its headwaters in the
higher elevation (typically mountains) to the south of Zarahemla. There must have
been either some alive who had made the journey, or it was in the stories of their
fathers. The instructions must have been to go to the mountains, find the river, and
follow it to Zarahemla. They must have done so, yet they missed Zarahemla. How
could that happen?

If we accept a Mesoamerican setting, there are two rivers which begin not too far
distant from each other in the Cuchamatanes Mountains. The difficult part of the
journey appears to have been between the headwaters of the river and the land of
Zarahemla. Even Ammon’s party had wandered for a while, which had to be after they
left the river.

The best explanation for Limhi’s party is that they wandered to the mountains, found
the headwaters of a river, and followed it. It was the wrong river. At the end of the river,
they found the remains of a civilization. Following the second river would have led
them to lands northward that had once been Jaredite lands. 

Book of Mormon Minute by Brant Gardner.

It is quite probable that those 43 men returned to King Limhi thinking they had failed
because they had not accomplished their intended mission, which was finding
Zarahemla. It is also quite possible; however, that the Lord had a very different mission
in mind, finding the Jaredite record, and in that they were very successful.

Quote #8 – Elder John A. Widtsoe described a seer as “one who sees with spiritual
eyes. He perceives the meaning of that which seems obscure to others; therefore he is
an interpreter and clarifier of eternal truth. He foresees the future from the past and the
present. This he does by the power of the Lord operating through him directly, or
indirectly with the aid of divine instruments such as the Urim and Thummim. In short,
he is one who sees, who walks in the Lord’s light with open eyes.”
He also taught: “A prophet is a teacher of known truth; a seer is a perceiver of hidden
truth; a revelator is a bearer of new truth. In the widest sense, the one most commonly
used, the title prophet includes the other titles and makes of the prophet, a teacher,
perceiver, and bearer of truth.” 

Evidences and Reconciliations, 258.

Quote #9 – One who used interpreters was called a seer, clearly because the user
saw something when they were being used. It was a term with which the Book of
Mormon’s 19 th century audience was familiar. The question many have asked about the
interpreters Mosiah used is: “Where did they come from?” The question is typically
asked because there is an assumption that there was only a single set of interpreters.
There is no reason to make that assumption. Mesoamerican shamans even to this day,
use items, sometimes stones, as a means of seeing what otherwise could not be seen.
The importance that will be emphasized concerns the seer, not the specific mechanism
the seer uses. Joseph Smith used various seer stones in addition to the interpreters
that were buried with the plates. There is no need to suppose any reason that the
ancient Nephites could not have had their own stones without waiting upon Jaredite
stones. 

Book of Mormon Minute by Brant Gardner.

Quote #10 – Who was Zeniff? He was the leader of a group of Nephites who left
Zarahemla in the hope of re-establishing themselves in their ancestral lands. Initially,
Zeniff had been part of a Nephite faction that intended to take back their former land by
force. Zeniff saw that there was good among the Lamanites, and desired that his
leader withdraw his military objectives. For advocating this alternative view, Zeniff was
condemned to death. His rescue came at a terrible price, leaving the greater part of the
group dead; a surviving few (fifty) returned to Zarahemla. Zeniff returned to Lamanite
territory with a new group of colonists and made a dubious covenant with the Lamanite
king. He was then made king over his people. 

Largey Book of Mormon Reference Companion, 802.

Quote #11 – A subtle warning is presented in verse 3. There is nothing wrong with
being zealous (which means energetic, dynamic, dedicated) in a cause, but over-
zealousness can be dangerous and an example of a strength becoming a weakness.
Apparently, Zeniff was obsessed with the idea of resettling the old homeland, and he
was blinded by the motives of the Lamanite king, who took advantage of him. Wisdom
suggests that we avoid becoming overzealous and instead keep things in balance.
Ogden and Skinner, Book of Mormon 1:332.

Quote #12 – While we question the wisdom of Zeniff, we could ask if the same kind of
zeal causes people today to make agreements or sign contracts that will ultimately
place them in political or financial bondage. Individuals can be over-zealous from
material possessions, or they can become so involved in a cause or in their work, or a
relationship that they begin to neglect the weightier matters that are most important,
such as God, family, church, and service to others. (Williams, “Deliverance from
Bondage 263)

Quote #13 – When Zeniff and his people went to return to the land of Nephi, they did
so without the guidance of their prophet. Years before, when Mosiah and his followers
had originally fled from the land of Nephi, they were guided in the wilderness by the
word of God; and led by the power of His arm. However, when Zeniff and his followers
ventured back, they experienced the opposite. They were smitten with famine and sore
afflictions; for they were slow to remember the Lord their God. They decided to retake
a land that the Lord had commanded them to flee from only years – likely not even a
generation – previously. In doing so, they stumbled, fell, and made many errors. Many
people died and even more suffered because Zeniff and his followers decided that they
knew the will of the Lord better than His appointed leaders did.

Quote #14 – One of the great errors made by Zeniff and those who followed him, as
well as by those on the first expedition, was their desire to act according to their own
timing and not the Lord’s. The Lord may have intended for the land of Nephi to be
reclaimed eventually, but the Zeniffites decided to advance that timeline.

Quote #15 – It is important to remember that overzealousness does not equate to
wickedness. Zeniff made unfortunate mistakes, but those mistakes did not make him
unrighteous. Latter-day Saint writer Val Larsen had this to say about Zeniff’s path:
“This doesn’t mean Zeniff was a wicked man. He wasn’t, and that is a key part of
Mormon’s message. The importance of following prophets is all the more apparent
because Zeniff was a good, not a bad man. And yet, by rejecting prophetic leadership,
he placed himself in circumstances that turned him into precisely the kind of person he
least wanted to be.”

Quote #16 – Mormon’s inclusion of Zeniff and his record is a warning to latter-day
readers to beware of overzealousness and rejecting prophetic counsel as a result.
Even in the Zeniffites’ mistakes, Mormon shows that the Lord still protected them and
similarly, the Lord will not forsake us. 

Scripture Central, KnowWhy #730; May 7, 2024

Quote #17 – Elder David A. Bednar taught how the Lord’s strength helps us: “In the
Bible Dictionary we learn that the word grace frequently is used in the scriptures to
connote a strengthening or enabling power. Thus, the enabling and strengthening
aspect of the Atonement helps us to see and to do and to become good in ways that
we could never recognize or accomplish with our limited mortal capacity. In the
strength of the Lord we can do and endure and overcome all things.” 

David A. Bednar – “In the Strength of the Lord." 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2004/11/in-the-strength-of-the-lord?lang=eng

Quote #18 – Impressive were King Zeniff’s heroics while defending his kingdom
against Lamanite invasion including guards placed “round about the land” and spies.
When the Lamanites finally attacked, Zeniff led virtually the entire male population into
battle. Thus, although Zeniff’s people went “up in the strength of the Lord to battle”,
victory was due in no small part to King Zeniff’s tactical prowess and battlefield valor.
(Kerr, “Ancient Aspects of Nephite Kingship,” 90)

Quote #19 – As I began to examine these narratives side by side – the Lamanites
calling the Nephites robbers, and the Nephites describing the Lamanites as
bloodthirsty savages who teach their children to hate – I couldn’t help but think more
deeply about the consequences of such stories. They ultimately fueled centuries of
conflict that cost countless lives. The stories we tell, whether they emphasize a
common enemy or common humanity, shape us. The stories take a toll.

Quote #20 – I’m impressed how Christ’s ministry changes the stories that Nephites
and Lamanites tell about each other. In fact, he erases the distinction between them. In
3 Nephi, we go nearly twenty chapters with no mention of the word “Nephite,” and with
only positive reference to the word “Lamanites.” The Savior saw Lehi’s descendants as
a unified body, rather than defining them by their differences. As soon as Christ was
among them, “there was not any manner of –ites.” 

Bryan Gentry, “Stories of War and Peace.”

Maxwell Institute - Mosiah 7-10: Redemption from the Regret of Overzealousness by J.B. Haws https://mi.byu.edu/news-blog-section/come-follow-me-may-6-12-mosiah-7-10

Mosiah 4-6

BOOK OF MOSIAH

King Benjamin’s sermon, which appears at the beginning of the book, happens after most of the events in the book. In particular, Abinadi’s sermon to King Noah, the other major sermons in the book, actually occurred many years earlier.

Immediately after King Benjamin’s sermon, we read about the end of King Limhi’s (Nephite descendant) story, as a search party led by Ammon (Zarahemla descendant) discovers them in chapters seven and eight.

We then rewind to understand the history (Zenniff leaves Zarahmela to find the land of Lehi-Nephi) which led to the captivity of Limhi and his people. After reading about Limhi’s captivity for the second time (chapters 19-22), we rewind briefly again, to learn about the parallel captivity of Alma and his people (in chapters 23-24).

Finally, everyone comes together again in chapter 25, which actually occurs only a few years after King Benjamin’s sermon.

SEEING THE THEMES OF THE BOOK OF MOSIAH

One of the most noticeable themes in Mosiah is deliverance, which takes several forms. There are instances of physical deliverance for entire communities, as when the peoples of Limhi and Alma were freed from Lamanite bondage and of spiritual deliverance for groups like Benjamin’s subjects who received a remission of their sins and peace of conscience and also for individuals such as Alma. Yet while the overall message of God’s tender mercies is clear, the book of Mosiah is not naively didactic. It includes accounts of wicked people who escape the consequence of their sins, at least for a while (King Noah and his priests), and innocent or good people who are not spared trial and suffering. These include Abiniadi, the daughters of the Lamanites and again, the people of Alma.

Grant Hardy, The Annotated Book of Mormon, pg. 228

HISTORY OF THE PEOPLE OF ZARAHEMLA

A pattern to notice is that Mormon streamlines Nephite history, apparently in an effort to shape reader responses. Specifically, he reduces the story of three peoples—Mulekites, Nephites and Lamanites—to just the latter two, thus avoiding any discussion of distinct Mulekite traditions, customs, or sensibilities. Amaleki reported that a few Nephite refugees, led by Mosiah, had discovered a city of Juahites who had come to the New World some 350 years earlier, shortly after the arrival of Lehi. They were ruled by Zarahemla and they no longer spoke Hebrew, having brought no written record. Zarahemla and his people were thrilled to learn of the Brass Plates, and indeed learned the language the Nephites and invited Mosiah to become their king. It is a strange turn of events that invites further explanation, which Mormon never provides.

Instead, there are brief references to the Nephites and the people of Zarahemla continuing to be separate but allied peoples for at least three generations, with the latter greatly outnumbering the former. In Mosiah 25, Zarahemla is identified as a descendent of Mulek, and then in Helaman 6 there is a stunning revelation noted only in passing: “the land north was called Mulek, which was after the son of Zedekiah [the last kind of Judah]; for the Lord did bring Mulek into the land north, and Lehi into the land south.” This means that Zarahemla belonged to the royal line of David, and thus would have had a legitimate claim to the throne of Juhah according to the Davidic covenant, as preserved in the Nephites’ Brass Plates.

It is reasonable to assume that a few priests would have accompanied Mulek, son of King Zedekiah when his party was led by God to the New World.

Grant Hardy, The Annotated Book of Mormon, pg. 222

GATHERING AT THE TEMPLE

The description of the event has families coming to the temple and surrounding the area while they stayed in their tents. Scholars have suggested that this is sufficiently similar to the Feast of Tabernacles, that it may have been that holy day that king Benjamin used as the springboard for his abdication.

The Feast of Tabernacles looked back to Yahweh’s protection while Israel wandered in the wilderness. The tents, or booths, represented temporary dwellings meant to invoke that time. The idea that families would be together in them fits with the nature of the festival.

An interesting possibility is that while the festival looked backward, it may have also signaled a looking forward to a future time of salvation by Yahweh, a time of a future Messiah. In the New Testament, John 7:37–38, Jesus uses the great feast day to preach of himself as the living water, declaring himself the Messiah.

If there was such a tangential understanding that the feast would look forward to the Messiah, it makes an even stronger platform for the subject of king Benjamin’s speech.

Grant Hardy, https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/mosiah-2

LESSONS FROM THE BEGGAR

The Book of Mormon establishes social equality as an ideal. This is not social equalness. There is no suggestion that all people are the same, only that we should not act as though we are superior to others. The damage is not in the difference, but in the attitude of separation. Therefore, Benjamin notes that if one does not share his or her substance because of selfishness, their “substance shall perish with [them].” Of course, that is true of all, but the point is that when one thinks of oneself as valuable because of their possessions, when they leave those possessions behind in death, there is nothing left of value because of the poverty of character.

Grant Hardy, https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/mosiah-4 

Mosiah 1 - 3

Mosiah

What does it mean to read the book of Mosiah with an eye to its message of comfort and redemption? It means to read theologically. To that end, this volume will be devoted to reflection on the theology of the book of Mosiah, fully aware that theology (reflection on what is taught) is not doctrine (what is taught with authority) and that my particular theological reflections are not the only ones possible. Theological reflection means thoughtful, imaginative response to scripture. But there is not one and only one possible result of that work, nor is any theological reflection doctrinally binding. James E. Faulconer, Mosiah.

Side note: I share this above quote because this theological reflection is what we do in Institute. It’s a thoughtful and imaginative response to scripture—not doctrinally binding—and wow, it does make us think.

King Benjamin

Benjamin delivered his long-awaited message in a series of three orations on different topics. The first is contained in Mosiah 2:9–41, the second in Mosiah 3:1–27, and the third in Mosiah 4:4–30. These three topics were separate and distinct from each other and echoed the three areas of service that King Benjamin had performed in his reign. In the first section, Benjamin spoke as a king reporting his royal stewardship, recalling how he had provided them temporal and spiritual peace. For his second topic he spoke as a prophet, once again teaching his people how to avoid spiritual chaos and unrest. In this phase of his speech he spoke the words of an angel, words that emphasized Christ’s service to others, including a portrayal of Christ’s atoning sacrifice. For his third and final topic, the prophet Benjamin spoke of how service can extend the knowledge of the glory, truth, and justice of God beyond a spiritual awakening. Thus Benjamin fulfilled his final act of service by bringing his people spiritual salvation. Susan Easton Black - “Benjamin’s Speech Combines Mysteries of God with Service to Humanity.” https://rsc.byu.edu/book-mormon-treasury/king-benjamin

Mosiah 1:1-2

But one thing remains the same: whether a gospel looks forward or backward to Christ, the truth of his life is given in the language of those who will speak and hear it. This language isn’t merely the particular dialect of a people, but it also encompasses the images, ideas, and relationships that they understand. Adam S. Miller, Rosalynde F. Welch. 

Seven Gospels: The Many Lives of Christ in the Book of Mormon.

Mosiah 2:3-4

Q: It has been more than four hundred years since Lehi left Jerusalem. That is like going to the temple to offer thanks now for something that happened in 1600. Why do the people come to the temple to offer thanks for something four hundred years ago?

Covenant Treaty Pattern

In Mosiah 1–6 and 25, Benjamin and Mosiah each direct a ceremony of spiritual renewal among the Nephite population. These ceremonies are similar to many other formal covenant-making ceremonies found in the Old Testament, beginning with the ceremony at Sinai (see Exodus 24) and including the ceremonies at Shechem (see Joshua 24) and Mizpeh (see 1 Samuel 10). In each of these, the king or religious leader of the people directs the ceremony, for ancient Hebrew kings were seen as mediators between God and the people. Other similar elements include gathering an assembly of the people by royal decree to make covenants, publicly reading the law or basis of the covenant, establishing or expounding upon a legal document, writing the speech down, and participating in cultic acts (ranging from building an altar to being baptized) to physically demonstrate acceptance of the covenant made. These similarities are further evidence of the Book of Mormon's Old Testament roots and strongly suggest that the Nephites conscientiously followed established laws and customs brought with them from Jerusalem. https://byustudies.byu.edu/further-study-chart/101-benjamins-and-mosiahs-covenant-ceremonies-compared-with-old-testament-rituals/

The phrases to rejoice and be filled with love and to be filled with joy seem to have a technical meaning in scripture. They appear to be alternative ways of describing being born again. Scripture abounds with references to being filled with this transforming joy and love under the influence of the Holy Ghost. M. Catherine Thomas. 

https://archive.dev-bookofmormoncentral.org/content/benjamin-and-mysteries-god

Mysteries of God - Mosiah 2:9

The scriptures repeatedly invite the reader to inquire about and receive an understanding of the mysteries of God (see Alma 26:22; D&C 6:11; 42:61). Mysteries are spiritual realities that can be known and understood only by revelation because they exist outside man’s sensory perception; but our scriptures record them, our prophets teach them, and the Holy Ghost reveals them to the diligent seeker. In fact, the whole gospel is a collection of mysteries—truths pertaining to salvation that would not be known by men in the mortal probation if God did not reveal them. Benjamin’s address begins with an invitation to prepare to view the mysteries of God. M. Catherine Thomas. 

https://archive.dev-bookofmormoncentral.org/content/benjamin-and-mysteries-god

Mosiah 2:30

I think this is also the fundamental message of the angel’s message to Benjamin: You will know you have found the true king when you discover him in the most unexpected place. Benjamin’s angel does not mention the swaddling clothes or the manger, but he points toward a place that, from some perspectives, is almost as unexpected. The Lord Omnipotent will dwell in a tabernacle of clay. He will be found in a human body that, fragile as clay, is subject to decay and damage. The manger and the swaddling clothes protect a body of flesh subject to the same fatigue and pain that Benjamin himself knows. One can imagine that Benjamin wants to ask: “How can a perishable body like mine be the place of divine omnipotence?” That tender body is both the disguise and the confirmation of Christ’s divine power. And this shall be a sign unto you; ye shall find the Lord wrapped in flesh, pulsing with blood and breath.

Christ’s power is an important theme in Benjamin’s gospel, in hand with the vulnerability of his body. I think this power, too, would have been displayed to the people in the condition of Benjamin’s aged body. After all, Benjamin once wielded the sword of Laban with the strength of his arm and established peace among his people with the force of his frame (Words of Mormon 1:13). Adam S. Miller, Rosalynde F. Welch. Seven Gospels: The Many Lives of Christ in the Book of Mormon.

They assumed that suffering is incompatible with divinity. 

In fact, the message of Benjamin’s gospel seems to be just the opposite: the power of the Lord Omnipotent, the Father and Creator of heaven and earth, is linked with the extremity of his suffering.

The reality of his human suffering becomes a kind of disguise, the manger and swaddling clothes hiding the truth of his power and the wonder of his miraculous works. Where do we find Christ? And this shall be a sign unto you.

We see how Christ’s misery is wrongly used to deny his divinity, just as the beggar’s misery is wrongly used to deny his claim on us (Mosiah 3:7–9; compare Mosiah 4:17).

This is his sign to us: we find him wherever our fellow beings are cloaked in suffering, wherever they mourn and stand in need of comfort. He walks among us in a body of flesh. His heart beats and ceases beating at a terrible cost. And our salvation was, and is, and is to come, in the flux of that rushing blood. 

Adam S. Miller, Rosalynde F. Welch. 

Seven Gospels: The Many Lives of Christ in the Book of Mormon.

Mosiah 2:32-33

He warns that anyone who is inclined (“listeth”) to obey the spirit of contention risks damnation, for such a person has “transgressed the law of God” (Mosiah 2:32–33). Benjamin’s sermons are a response to his fear that contention will ultimately divide his people. Apparently, Benjamin sees contention—or, perhaps better, contention that leads to the fragmentation of God’s people—as the root of the Nephites’ problems. James E. Faulconer, Mosiah.

Mosiah: 2:36-38 

Q: Does the spirit withdraw from us or do we withdraw from the spirit?

Mosiah 3:19 - What is the natural man?

But where it’s easy to imagine a young Nephi staying up all night, unable to sleep as he “sat pondering” on his father’s words, Benjamin himself tells us that he was woken from sleep by the angel’s repeated command, “Awake . . . . Awake, and hear the words which I shall tell thee” (1 Nephi 11:1; Mosiah 3:2, 3). And where Nephi is carried off “into an exceedingly high mountain” and granted a sweeping vision of global salvation history, Benjamin is only asked to sit on the edge of his bed and hear—not see—the angel’s much more local message about how a “natural man,” despite being an enemy to God, can still be saved.

What is a “natural” body? It’s a body sown in corruption. It’s the human body subject to a natural, inevitable corruption and dissolution. The natural body is the mortal body, the body that depends on blood, the body that’s naturally going to die and that will need to be resurrected. 

Or, simply: the natural man is the dying man. 

This is why “the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam” (Mosiah 3:19). The natural man is an enemy to God because the Fall introduced death and the natural man doesn’t want to die. The natural body is afraid to die. The fundamental problem is fear.

This is what it means to be a sinner. Sinners live as if their life’s blood belonged to them. They live life on the run from God, terrified to yield to his will. Running from God, the natural body “doth . . . shrink from the presence of the Lord into a state of misery,” and in this way, they all “have drunk damnation to their own souls” (Mosiah 3:25).

We can yield our lives to God and be filled with his life. Or we can claim our lives as our own and be cut off from his life. But there’s no third path. Adam S. Miller, Rosalynde F. Welch. 

Seven Gospels: The Many Lives of Christ in the Book of Mormon.

Conclusion

The atoning sacrifice had been symbolically declared by earlier prophets (see Isaiah 53:6; Moses 5:7). Yet only when the prophet Benjamin spoke of Mary and the Atonement, death, and the Resurrection of Christ did an entire nation hear the glorious good news in fulness and in power. Previous prophets alluded to the same message, but their people were “stiffnecked” (Mosiah 3:14; see also Exodus 32:9; Isaiah 48:4). Of necessity, types and shadows replaced clear revealed light, and the law of Moses replaced the fulness of the joyous news of the Redemption. But for the people gathered to hear Benjamin the prophet, there was no symbolic replacement, no delaying substitution, no alternative name. There was “no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation [could] come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent” (Mosiah 3:17).

King Benjamin delivered his message in plainness because those gathered had come prepared to learn of Christ. They had before them a benevolent prophet whose example had taught them preparatory to their receiving these angelic words. They had listened and had already begun to put off the natural man and become Saints. They had learned from his actions and words the need to demonstrate in their sacrificial offerings a spirit of rejoicing and thanksgiving to God. They were becoming like children, “submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord [saw] fit to inflict upon [them]” (Mosiah 3:19).

Susan Easton Black. “Benjamin’s Speech Combines Mysteries of God with Service to Humanity.” https://rsc.byu.edu/book-mormon-treasury/king-benjamin

Mentioned in class: Book of Mormon app https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/feature/book-of-mormon-app?lang=eng

Enos through Words of Mormon

All quotes come from: “Enos, Jarom, Omni: A Brief Theological Introduction” by
Sharon J. Harris

Purpose of these books: The Book of Mormon’s title page says the covenant is the purpose

of the book. And it lists Israel’s remnant as its first intended recipients: “Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel,” and, farther down, “to show unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers, and that they may know the covenants of the lord, that they are not cast off forever”. To fulfill this covenant, then, two things must happen. First, a Lamanite remnant of Lehi and Sariah’s family must survive on this land. Second, the record of the Nephite prophets must also survive until it reaches its intended audience in the latter days. Once we recognize this covenant, we see it everywhere in these small books.

One way that the burden and awareness of the covenant come up in these books is through

inheritance. The plates are an inheritance that travels through time from author to author, usually from one generation to the next. In this inheritance, they feel obligated to the covenant, and this obligation is weighty enough to sustain the plates’ transfer, even to or through some unlikely contributors. Some of them don’t say much, but honoring their receipt of the plates, they perpetuate the record’s progress through time.

ENOS

Enos feels like a friend. He chats directly with the reader, writing as though he is

looking right at you: “I will tell you of the wrestle which I had before God”. We might say

that Enos is someone you could have a root beer with. He is also of course, a prophet

and a Book of Mormon author. About two-thirds of his short book describes a prayer or

a series of prayers, and the balance tells what he did in consequence of the answers

he received. His words don’t sound like a one-time, one-day-only event. Rather, Enos

presents a process that unfolded over time – maybe days, weeks, or even years. I

propose that Enos’s wrestle and its consequences filled his whole life and whole book.

Enos 1-8

This is possibly the end of the first prayer.

Enos 11-15

Does this feel like it could be another or several prayers?

Let’s think about the present. Who feels like your enemy? The person who

makes fun of your child? The unreasonable neighbor? An ex? A co-worker out to get

you? The one who lies and still gets prominent church callings? Or, who as a group

seems to be against everything you stand for? Socialists? Democrats? Republicans?

Libertarians? Pro-choice advocates? Pro-lifers? Environmentalists? Feminists?

Preppers? Neo-Nazis? Globalists? Pornographers? Suburban racists? To put it in

Mormons’ terms, which manner of –ites? Whoever they are and in whatever ways they

are dangerous or destructive, would you engage in a spiritual wrestle over a long

period of time to secure blessings for them and their descendants? Enos’s

experience suggests that the same people we view as antithetical to our ideals could

ultimately play a key role in our salvation, to say nothing of the commandments to love

our neighbor, judge not, and pray for our enemies.

Kenosis - a concept in theology that means emptying out one’s self. The word is derived

from the Greek text of Philippians 2:5-11

The Greek verb kenoo is “to empty,” and this verb is translated in verse 7 as “to make of no

reputation.” Other translations of the Bible present the phrase as “made himself nothing,” “emptied himself," and “humbled himself.” The key detail this passage shows, however, is that the outcome of this self-emptying is power. Although it may be counterintuitive, the radical self-emptying described in the first half of the passage causes what is found in the second half. Christ emptied himself, or made himself of no reputation, and, “as a result” or “wherefore” “God also hath highly exalted him.” Self-emptying leads to power in God’s economy. Theologians, therefore, use the word kenosis to describe this emptying of power that increases power.

What does all this self-emptying have to do with Enos? Once we are familiar with kenosis,

we can see that his prayer takes a similar shape. Enos pours out his whole soul unto God on behalf of others. And as a result, God covenants with him, securing blessings for many people in the future. The realization that giving up power increases power prompts us to ask, like Enos, “Lord, how is it done?”

Enos is made whole, and in the next verse he pours out his “whole soul unto God for the

Nephites”. Enos had to be made whole before he could self-empty because self-emptying succeeds from wholeness. This happens in two ways, both because only those who are whole can fully see beyond themselves and their own needs, and because only those who are whole can go through the process of completely emptying. In what sounds like a tongue-twister, Enos could not pour out his whole soul until his soul was whole. This is the revelation and power of self-emptying or kenosis. Loving people, even those unseen or far away – even our enemies – becomes real and essential.

Enos pours out his whole soul, struggles in the spirit, prays with many long strugglings,

labors with all diligence, and cries unto God continually. Self-emptying is beautiful and redemptive. It reveals others to us as whole people and fellow members of the body of Christ. And self-emptying is also an enormous amount of work. It’s more like mining than like knocking over a pitcher of water. Self-emptying reveals others to us as real and worthy people – their wonderfulness, their warts, their wisdom, their what-on-earth-were-they-thinking, and everything else.

It’s worth reflecting further on what our work of loving looks like. Much of Enos’s struggle may have been the internal work of shifting his view of the Lamanites, no longer seeing them as metaphoric swine, because he could see them as heirs and heralds of salvation.

We have to assume that Enos really had come to see his own dependence on the

Lamanites for the survival of their entire family and that his dogged praying and struggling grew out of having come to truly want those blessings for the Lamanites. We find ourselves in a similar position today. We need others, including those who, considering the regular orbits of our daily lives, seem unrelated to us. And so we, too, have work to do. Are we ready to pour out our whole souls? Are we ready for kenosis? Are we ready for the revelation of God’s children to us and the work that will undoubtedly accompany it?

Self-emptying isn’t usually a team sport, but what would a whole community of

such individuals look like? Perhaps the Anti-Nephi-Lehies who buried their weapons,

the early saints who lived the United Order, the Ghanian disciples in the early 1960s

and 1970s who organized themselves into branches without priesthood or baptism,

awaiting the arrival of authorized missionaries. A self-emptying people looks like Zion,

where the people are of one heart and one mind, with no poor among them.

ENOS

Why bring up Enos’s weaknesses? What does it help? At a minimum, it shows

at least two things: first, people are complicated, and second, God can handle it. Yet

his example – the good and the not-so-good – means that we, too, can do tremendous

good in spite of our blind spots. We can receive binding, saving covenants. Our sins

can be remitted, even while we are weak in ways that aren’t completely apparent to us.

We can still do a lot of good and exercise a lot of love. Enos wrestled, struggled,

labored, emptied himself, and ultimately blessed the Lamanites over the course of his

life, but he wasn’t perfect.

Jacob said he inherited the plates from Nephi 55 years after Lehi left Jerusalem. Enos

said he finished his record 179 years after that journey. That is 124 years!

We get a sense from these scriptures that Enos could pivot from heartfelt prayers on behalf

of the Lamanites to impassioned contempt for them when he can’t save them. But if these textual subtleties are real, I want to give Enos credit for putting them there. He is the one who juxtaposes his prayers for a covenant to bless the Lamanites with his tirade about their depravity. He is the one who, in his final verses, puts away his obsession with Lamanite wickedness and finishes his record and life doing what he can serving the Nephites. Maybe this is why Enos’s account is so compelling: in a soup of his own noble and selfish consequences of others’ agency, he models the lifelong wrestle to understand and keep covenants.

JAROM

Jarom can be easy to overlook. He kept the plates for 59 years, so it wasn’t for

lack of time or experience that he didn’t write much. He excuses his brevity at both the

beginning and the end of his account, saying that the “plates were small.” Perhaps

Jarom’s inconspicuousness is part of his total commitment to the larger purpose of the

covenant. I invite us to rethink our perceptions of Jarom and understand the

significance of what is NOT in his book.

And yet a robust community of faithful Nephites is not how we often think of Jarom and

his contemporaries. Growing up in the church, I remember fellow Latter-day saints

inferring that these small books, especially the books of Jarom and Omni, indicate how

the Nephites had slipped spiritually. A closer look at what the book of Jarom (and of

Omni) relates, however, shows that on the whole, they maintained covenants,

prophecies, revelation, keeping the commandments, and communion with the Holy

Ghost as high priorities, both individually and in communities. The authors and

societies behind these small books may seem to be not as spiritual, dominant, or

inspiring as other authors of the small plates, but we could look at them another way.

The description of Jesus’s self-emptying as found in the King James Version of the

New Testament could be applied to these writers and their contemporaries: they “made

themselves of no reputation.” We should probably give the authors of the Jarom and

Omni books more credit. The writers of these small books kept their focus on the

greater need for the plates rather than on themselves, and they managed to do so for a

long time.

Jarom 1-3

Reading between the lines, Jarom reveals himself as deeply devoted to the

covenant that his father secured, and his deference to the needs of the covenant

means that he deflects attention away from his own position, revelations, and interests.

Consequently, we can find Jarom’s commitment in his omissions. Jarom informs the

reader, “I shall not write the things of my prophesying nor of my revelations…For have

not my fathers revealed the plan of salvation?...Yea; and this sufficeth me”. Keeping

his eye on what is needed for the record, Jarom is content to leave his spiritual

accomplishments unrecorded.

Although Jarom worries over the stiffneckedness and hard-heartedness of his people,

he also confirms that “there are many among us who have many revelations, for they

are not all stiffnecked. And as many as are not stiffnecked and have faith, have

communion with the Holy Spirit.

Jarom has prophecies and revelations, and if we read between the lines, prophecies and

revelations that are similar to those of his fathers. We have already seen the magnitude and import of Lehi, Nephi, Jacob, and Enos’s prophecies. If Jarom is metaphorically batting with them, he, too, is in the spiritual big leagues. Jarom, however, does not feel that his ministry requires that he disclose the scope or impressiveness of his revelations. In the face of limited space on the plates, Jarom deemphasizes his own spiritual experiences. To prioritize keeping a record that will benefit the Lamanites, Jarom minimizes our view of his spirituality. In other words, he empties himself in the service of the Lamanite descendants. This is kenosis again. And as we have already seen, Jarom is not the only one in his time who empties himself this way. Many others also keep an eye toward prophesied events instead of a limited and myopic view of their current situation only. Jarom refers to multiple prophets, priests, teachers, kings and leaders who were “mighty men of faith,” and to the many who had “many revelations” and “communion with the Holy Spirit”. They were part of a community of spiritually-minded, covenant Nephites.

Jarom is the first writer on the small plates to NOT use the word filthiness. Nephi, Jacob,

and Enos each apply “filthiness” to the Lamanites, but not Jarom. He leaves it out. His descriptions are more dispassionate, showing simply that the Lamanites do not observe the Nephites’ religion. The two reports Jarom makes – that the Lamanites “loved murder and would drink the blood of beasts” – may simply refer to local religious rituals and explicitly signal that the Lamanites did not follow the Law of Moses, which forbids drinking the blood of animals killed for their meat. Even though by this point the Nephites and Lamanites are established enemies, Jarom stops at this description and avoids adding judgmental commentary.

The bulk of Jarom’s account, as it turns out, details efforts to keep the Nephites from being

destroyed because of wickedness. These priorities came from the top because, according to Jarom, “our kings and leaders were mighty men in the faith of the Lord; and they taught the people the ways of the Lord.” Jarom maintains that this ministry of pricking their hearts with the word, continually stirring them up to repentance, is what kept the Nephites from being destroyed upon the face of the land. During this period, Jarom portrays Nephite leadership as concentrated on prolonging the Nephites’ survival partially because of the prophecies of their fathers and partially despite the prophecies that said they would not survive. The prophecies said that if (or, really, when) the Nephites failed to live in righteousness, they would be wiped off the land. Jarom writes in earnest, and it seems that he and his associates sincerely believe that their lives depend on how well they heed these visions and warnings from their founding fathers.

Some take a kind of satisfaction or even pleasure in observing what they deem to be

worldliness or wickedness in others since, to them, it confirms their religious views. They see troubles– fatherless families, teen pregnancies, convicted criminals, drug addicts, and so on – and their hearts fail them: they see signs of the times rather than children of God in need. Like the Nephites, all too often we judge others and look forward more to the prophesied apocalypse than to helping. It is so easy to respond this way while feeling confident in our status as chosen.

It’s important to remember that both kinds of signs are, in fact, prophetic. Whether we

embrace the comforting images while denying the negative ones or obsess over the scary parts while downplaying the affirming events, we are wresting or distorting scripture by “cherry-picking” either way. With such an approach, we find only what we have already decided to see instead of being sincerely open to what the scriptures can teach us. So, acknowledging that both kinds of prophecies are there, we must judge wisely. If the question is simply whether we recognize the signs, we can turn on the news and wring our hands until we inevitably throw them up in despair. Just look at this world, going to the telestial kingdom in a handbasket?

Adam Miller

Speaking about this, Adam Miller stated: “The Nephite prophets were

teaching the people to live and walk with Christ in the present. Believe Him, follow Him,

walk with Him, live with Him, ‘as though He already was.’ The Nephite prophets

challenge was to teach people not to think of Jesus as something in the future that

applied to them at some later point in time. He was something for them in the here and

now. We think of Christ as living a long time ago. Or that we will live with Him

sometime in the distant future. But the present is all we have. The present is where He

wants to come to us and be with us. The present is where He wants us to be.”

Jarom

The plates have been passed to successive generations, and these custodians

of the record find themselves squarely in the middle of the dispensation, not during any

particularly exciting time, at least from a religious history perspective. What does it look

like to live and keep faith in the middle of a dispensation? The book of Jarom is

particularly instructive in this regard. These Nephites really had nothing to worry about

because all the prophecies indicated that they would not be destroyed until after the

Savior had visited their land. Before that critical ingredient in the timeline, the Nephites

could sit pretty.

But Jarom tells us that the prophets, priests, and teachers of his generation didn’t see

it that way. Instead, they taught the people to “look forward unto the Messiah, and

believe in him to come as though he already was”. This changes everything. What

does it mean to look forward and believe in something to come as though it already

was? This statement shows us a God who operates outside of human time. He and his

atonement can stretch back to those who preceded him on earth and also reach

forward into our future destiny. If we anticipate Christ in this way, we’re free from the

temporal confines in which everything that came before must influence what comes

next, and where we can only act in one direction reaching toward the future. We can

have Christ in our lives now even though, on a calendar, we are between his comings

to earth. We can find Christ not just at the beginning and the end but also in the

middle.

From our vantage point now we can see that Jarom and his people weren’t at the end of

their dispensation. It turns out that they were deep in the middle. They looked forward and lived as though the Messiah to come already was, and yet it was centuries before he arrived. Are we in a similar position? Are we smack in the middle of the latter days? We know that our current dispensation will usher in the second coming of the Lord, but a dispensation can last a very long time and no one knows the hour or the year, or the decade, or the century that he will come. But what about the middle? How do we live out the covenant between such defining moments?

Jarom’s account shows people who see in a messianic way and those who do not. Weary

in the middle, some of the people of Jarom’s time need constant coaxing into righteousness “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 writes that many others, however, “have many revelations, for they are not all stiffnecked.” Some need threats from the prophets, and others manage to endure well, “laboring diligently exhorting with all longsuffering…., persuading them to look forward unto the Messiah."

Strength in the middle comes from the Messiah. In our relationship with the Messiah, like

Jarom, we let go of that which simply isn’t needed. We find the peace to leave out some things. What Jarom elects to maintain, namely, the purpose of the plates and their role in the covenant, shapes what he chooses to let go – his own reputation and others’ attention to his spirituality. Jarom suggests that living in the messy middle means holding fast to covenants and holding lightly to judgments, prejudices, and conclusions that are not guaranteed to stand the test of time. Jarom teaches us how to refrain and let go, how to maintain and remain in the covenant. He shows us how to live in the messy middle.

OMNI

The book of Omni has more authors than any other book in the Book of Mormon. The text

moves through them quickly, but without each of their contributions to the record, we may not have ended up with the small plates. Keeping genealogy doesn’t just preserve scripture; it also creates it. In the small plates, the descendants of Jacob understand that each generation has a responsibility to write, no matter how minor the engraved contribution and that no one can be a missing link. The caretakers of the plates verify, by their lifelong stewardship over the records, that the accounts are still what they claim to be and that they have remained with those who have an interest in their survival and integrity. The genealogy of this family becomes a genealogy of the plates themselves. It covers about 150 years.

By the time of Omni, the designation “Nephite” seems to be a political and cultural

descriptor rather than a spiritual one. We can perhaps see a hint of Omni’s dedication in that he engraves on the plates at two different times, six years apart, giving the date both times. As one commentator has conjectured, perhaps this battle-wise warrior thought he was about to die and made his first entry to ensure that he did his duty, but then he survived long enough to make another entry before transferring the plates to his son Amaron.

Amaron tells us he is among those Nephites who survived when “the more wicked part of

the Nephites were destroyed.” Curiously, he does not specify that the Lamanites killed them, only that “the Lord did visit them in great judgment” and that the righteous were spared from “their enemies,” leaving open the possibility that there was a civil war of some sort.

Despite this simplicity and even in his terseness, Chemish acknowledges his duty

“according to the commandments of our fathers,” using the same idea of a “command” or

“commandment” that Jacob, Jarom, Omni, and, later, Alma, use. Like his brother, Chemish was among the righteous who were spared when the “more wicked part of the Nephites was destroyed.” Moreover, Chemish fathered a son who was open enough to revelation to flee with Mosiah to the land of Zarahemla.

Abinadom is aware of other Nephite plates, identifying the record “had by the kings” as “the

record of this people.” He knows the sacred purpose of the small plates and so refrains from writing at length because, like Jarom, he “knows of no revelation save that which has been written, neither prophecy." This care on Abinadom’s part suggests that he may have been more attuned to the records and their purposes than the preceding authors, and this perhaps because he was a steward of the small plates during an exodus. He also seems to have known the records well enough to state that all the revelations that needed to be written had been.

WORDS OF MORMON

Joseph Spencer said that he theorizes that Mormon had begun his editing process

when he, most likely came upon a mention of Amaleki in the large plates and was

curious about the small plates mentioned, so he went looking for them. When he

found them, he realized that this was the way he should abridge the record, with a

focus on preserving a record for the Lamanite posterity and a focus on Christ.

Mormon was at a place in history where he could see that the Nephites were

basically destroyed. Joseph Spencer said that, perhaps, the lost 116 pages weren’t

a great loss because the small plates were a better record, and he followed that

pattern going forward.