Alma 56-63

NO CLASS FOR TWO WEEKS

We will resume on January 7, 2020 
Reading for January 7—Helaman 1-5
 
BOOK OF ALMA

“The book of Alma is a sprawling book, but it is not without its principle of organization. It divides naturally into halves (Alma 1-29 and Alma 30-63) that tell parallel stories.
Mormon’s overarching aim in the book of Alma thus seems to be to spur his readers to reflect on (1) the similarities between two distinct periods of Alma’s ministry (Alma 1-16, Alma 30-42) and (2) the differences between the peaceful missionizing of the sons of Mosiah and the warmongering interests of the usurping family of Amalickiah (Alma 17-29, Alma 43-63).”

Joseph M. Spencer,Women and Nephites Men

THE SECOND AMALICKIAHITE WAR (SEVEN YEARS’ WAR)

Source:Alma 51-62.
Dates: 25-31 R.J. (67-61 B.C.).
Location:Throughout the land of Zarahemla.
Causes: Return of Amalickiah, coinciding with the armed revolt of the king-men and his brother Ammoron’s assumption of Lamanite kingship. Initial Lamanite successes in the east and west were partly attributable to the king-men issue at home. Tactics:Protracted warfare; full-scale attempts to conquer cities and occupy lands surrounding Zarahemla on the west, south, and north; concurrent campaigns on several fronts, including Nephite efforts to control internal insurrection.This time, commanders who personally knew the Nephite lands and cities led the Lamanite forces.
Results:A very costly Nephite victory.These wars were evidently hard on the Nephite rulers, for Helaman, Moroni, Pahoran, Shiblon, Corianton, and others were all dead or gone by Alma 63.

 2000 STRIPLING WARRIORS

“The same God who gave Mosiah a promise of safety gave the mothers of this untested army the similar promise, on the condition that they would not doubt (Alma 56:47). Even the most caring mothers would not make a promise like that without the confirmation of the Lord.A promise of deliverance such as this, spoken without the inspiration and confirmation of the Spirit, is (at best) a good intention left dangling. But, the sure word spoken through inspiration gave comfort and hope to the mothers and strength to their sons.At this point the Lamanites were not the enemy, they were the test of obedience—the fire in which these young men would be refined.The only possible enemy to these young warriors would be to waver in their faith in the power of God to deliver them.
Wendell Philips once said, “One on God’s side is a majority” (Burns, Burns, and Ward 399). Mormon is making the same point by including the story of the sons of Helaman in his record that he did with the story of the sons of Mosiah.When the Lord is on your side, the size and strength of the opposition makes no difference.”

K. Douglas Bassett, “Nephi’s Freedom Thesis and the Sons of Helaman,” in The Book of Mormon: Alma, the Testimony of the Word, ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D.Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1992), 291–303, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/ book-mormon-alma-testimony-word/18-nephis-freedom-thesis-18-and-sons-helaman


“More striking still, however, is the way that each of these contrasting stories of preaching peace and promoting war centers on a turning point that concerns women. The unmistakable turning point in the Nephite-Lamanite mission comes when Abish, the Lamanite servant woman, takes the necessary initiative to gather her people to the site of the royal household’s conversion. She is in the right place at the right time, the text says,‘on account of a remarkable vision of her father.'The turning point of the parallel story of the Nephite-Lamanite wars occurs when the so-called stripling warriors turn out to fight in defense of the Nephite nation.They are, of course, Lamanite boys, young men who are in the right place at the right time, according to the text, because ‘they had been taught by their mothers that if they did not doubt, God would deliver them.’ Successful Nephite preaching among the Lamanites, like successful Nephite military defense against invading Lamanites (used, really, as pawns in a war launched by dissenting Nephites), depends immensely on Lamanite domestic relations: daughters taught by fathers, and sons taught by mothers.”

Joseph M. Spencer,Women and Nephites Men

 MORONI AND PAHORAN

“The correspondence between Moroni and Pahoran also provides important glimpses into the personalities of these men. Although a man of great faith, it is clear that Moroni was also susceptible to anger, frustration, doubt, and misplaced outrage at those whom he assumed had slighted him.At the same time Pahoran is revealed in his letter to be a man of patience in the face of being wrongfully accused. His reply is a remarkable example of emotional restraint. By choosing not to take offense, he was able to communicate clearly and work toward resolving the problem.
Readers can learn an important lesson from Moroni’s shortcoming. Moroni’s anxieties
and frustrations were undoubtedly real. He and his army were facing serious Lamanite
threats, and no assistance from the government was forthcoming. Nevertheless, he
might have benefited from giving Pahoran the benefit of the doubt and being careful
not to jump to hasty conclusions or pass unwarranted judgment. His example cautions
readers to be careful not to allow anger, doubt, or uncertainties to create a negative
influence.”

https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/why-was-moronis-correspondence-with-pahoran- significant

“The question arises why Mormon made the editorial decisions he did.Why did he include the letters to and from Pahoran? Were they to support his assertion that Moroni was a man of God, or were they to show, as many in our dispensation have stated, that even great men make mistakes? There is nothing in Mormon’s narrative to support the latter.There is no apology from Captain Moroni, nor even any hint of chagrin, only rejoicing to find out that Pahoran is not a traitor.Also, it seems unusual for Mormon to set up Moroni in such superlative terms, then include his letter to Pahoran, if his intent were to show what we view as Captain Moroni’s pique. Another problem with this ‘fallible Moroni’ view is that it is inconsistent with the character that Moroni has displayed thus far. Moroni was always guided by principle.”

OraLyn Moran, Moroni and Pahoran, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/re-15-no-3-2014/moroni-and-pahoran-0


“In his response to Moroni, Pahoran states, ‘I was somewhat worried concerning what we should do, whether it should be just in us to go against our brethren’ (Alma 61:19). Two millennia later we can read this verse and admire Pahoran’s desire to make the right decision. However, his contemporaries surely must have wondered about it. About ten years earlier, during the judgeship of Nephihah, Pahoran’s father, Captain Moroni had to order the execution of ‘whomsoever of the Amalickiahites that would not enter into a covenant to support the cause of freedom’ (Alma 46:35).Then, five years before, the kingmen rose up against the newly elected Pahoran. Once again, ‘Moroni commanded that his army should go against those king-men, to pull down their pride and their nobility and level them with the earth, or they should take up arms and support the cause of liberty’ (Alma 51:17). Surely Pahoran did not wonder at the justifiability of going against their brethren in these former occasions.Why would he wonder about it in this new but familiar situation? In addition, we are left to wonder if Pahoran turned to God for guidance in this decision as Moroni did.”

OraLyn Moran, Moroni and Pahoran, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/re-15-no-3-2014/moroni-and-pahoran-0


“With these things in mind, Pahoran becomes a much more puzzling person.Why would he debate the justifiability of going against his brethren when it had already been done twice? Why did the kingmen rebel, once immediately after Pahoran was installed as chief judge, and then again when Moroni was no longer there to back him up? Was this a reflection on Pahoran? Why would he not inform the entire Nephite nation of the rebellion instead of limiting his proclamation to “this part of the
land” (Alma 61:6)? Why wouldn’t he immediately inform his armies of the coup so they would understand why more reinforcements weren’t coming instead of allowing them to languish in a starved state? Why did it take the deaths of many of his citizens, whom he had sworn to protect, and the consequent threatening letter from Captain Moroni before he shared the problem with his chief captain?”

OraLyn Moran, Moroni and Pahoran, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/re-15-no-3-2014/moroni-and-pahoran-0

“The answers to these questions may reveal in Pahoran what many of us find in ourselves.We correctly honor him for his ‘long-suffering’ in not reviling against Moroni’s accusations and threats. Given the anger and contention that we so often see in our day, we value his example. But what if his greatest strength (long-suffering) was also his greatest weakness (passivity)? If his enemies knew him to be even a little passive, they would be very anxious to take advantage of it, once when he became chief judge and then again when his chief captain was busy elsewhere. If he knew the armies needed support, but he didn’t know how to get it for them, he might send smatterings of supplies and troops (‘the best he could’) without explaining why. He might try to fix the problem himself ‘in this part of the land,’ not wanting to distract Captain Moroni and the other armies. If he loved peace but felt unsure about enforcing it, he would worry about the justifiability of going against his brethren.And once his chief captain laid out a strong plan for correcting the situation, he would embrace it and encourage it. Besides being a sterling example of long-suffering, perhaps Pahoran also serves as a cautionary example of what Elder Dallin H. Oaks described as the dangers of our strengths becoming our downfall. But Pahoran also illustrates Elder Richard G. Scott’s statement that ‘the Lord sees weaknesses differently than He does rebellion.’"

OraLyn Moran, Moroni and Pahoran, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/re-15-no-3-2014/moroni-and-pahoran-0

“In many scriptural instances, including with Moroni and Pahoran, the Lord shows us that we should be willing to help all those who are willing to try. Pahoran expressed the desire to fight against the kingmen, though he had not yet mustered sufficient force to do so. Captain Moroni turned his attention to gathering people to reinforce Pahoran, and they successfully defeated the kingmen.
We often think we must accept excuses in order to show love.When we do so, we tend to follow the same pattern of sympathy and recrimination many have done with Pahoran and Moroni, respectively.We see through Moroni that if the excuse allows undesirable behavior to continue, we should not indulge it. Just as mercy cannot rob justice, accountability must accompany compassion.
Pahoran also serves as a cautionary tale of how an uncontrolled strength can also be a weakness. His slowness to anger is definitely a lesson worthy of emulation for our day. On the other hand, his apparent passivity likewise becomes a warning to us against seeking peace at any price.
Men such as Pahoran can offer us encouragement.When our strengths are still our weaknesses, we can know that as we strive to do our duty, the Lord will accept our offerings even though we don’t yet have the strength of Captain Moroni. Most of us are not born with that kind of strength and will. But with patience, work, and the grace of God, the good in us can become great.”

OraLyn Moran, Moroni and Pahoran, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/re-15-no-3-2014/moroni-and-pahoran-0


 

Alma 50-55

READING FOR NEXT WEEK

Alma 56-63

CHRISTMAS BREAK DECEMBER 24 AND 31. CLASS WILL RESUME ON JANUARY 7
 
 AMALICKIAH

• Descendant of Zoram
• Nephite traitor who through deception became the commander of the Lamanite army and their king
• Lower judges of the land and other Nephites were deceived by his flattery
• His rebellion led Moroni to rally faithful Nephites in defense of liberty and •religious freedom
• He incited the Lamanites’ anger against the Nephites
• He waged war against the Nephites and was able to take possession of many of •their cities
• Teancum, following a particularly difficult battle, crept by night into the camp of the Lamanites and put a javelin through his heart

“One can understand why Mormon wrote, ’We . . . can see the great wickedness one very wicked man can cause to take place among the children of men.’ Amalickiah’s life followed the pattern one would expect of Satan were he given a mortal probation. Like Lucifer, Amalickiah rebelled against the gospel plan in his thirst for glory and power, and he led others away from the truth. It was Amalickiah’s intent, as it was Lucifer’s, to destroy the liberty of men.They both sought to make war against the righteous, and in the end both rewarded their followers with sorrow, misery, and suffering. The life of Amalickiah exposes the pattern followed by many who are the enemies of Christ.”

Clyde Williams, Book of Mormon Reference Companion

https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/ why-did-teancum-slay-amalickiah-on-new-year’s-eve
 
“Notice that it is the first day of the first month — NewYear’s Day.Why does Mormon occupy any space on the plates with dates? And why should we care? In the ancient Near Eastern culture, which likely influenced Book of Mormon culture, New Year’s Day was the time when the king of the land would sally forth to demonstrate his vitality and liveliness to successfully rule as a king for another year.The rising forth of the king on this day was like a divine foreshadowing of a prosperous year.A dead king was a sure sign of a disastrous future.

Hence, no act could be more psychologically demoralizing to an opposing army than to find their king dead on NewYear’s Day.Teancum chose NewYear’s Eve to assassinate Amalickiah. He sought to win a massive psychological victory against the Lamanites by sending a message of disaster, despair and fear.

The seemingly small details in the text of the Book of Mormon matter. In narrative context, they signify the authenticity of the Book of Mormon as an ancient text.”

Taylor Halverson, https://www.deseret.com/2015/1/1/20555708/taylor-halverson-evidences-for-the-book-of-mormon-in- cover-of-darkness-and-the-turning-of-the-new-year

 DESSENSION

“Moroni’s views concerning dissension and disunity can be best understood within his covenantal perspective. He coupled a love of freedom and liberty with the knowledge that these could only be secured by faithfulness and obedience to covenants. Dissidents, in his view, were covenant-breakers.Their lack of trust in God or concern for the community of the saints put the whole people in jeopardy.Their alliances with Nephite enemies only compounded the problem. Both Moroni and Mormon saw dissension as a root cause of Nephite problems.

One cannot blame Moroni for his sensitivity to dissension.Without exception, every enemy specifically identified by Mormon in Alma 43–63 is a body of Nephite dissenters or a group led by a Nephite dissenter.”


Thomas R.Valletta, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/book-mormon-alma-testimony-word/14-captain-and-covenant-0

 ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW

“If we assume that the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be, and that Captain Moroni and Amalickiah were real people, then we really have to push back against Mormon’s simplistic account of their motives.As Mormon presents it, the contrast could not be clearer: Moroni wants only to preserve freedom and Amalickiah has no other objective than to destroy it. But human beings don’t work that way. Nobody ever does anything for just one reason. Life is messy that way.

Here is how the story might the story look from the perspective of Amalickiah’s supporters.This perspective is just as limited and just as one-dimensional as the one in the text, but it oversimplifies in a different direction, which may help us get closer to the messy and complicated truth.”

We have already seen that the major divide in the Nephite world is both religious and political.The Christians are essentially a permanent majority party.They control the chief judgeship, which has become a lifetime appointment passed down from father to son.To the majority, this looks like democracy, since it is ratified by “the voice of the people.” To the minority, it looks a lot like a monarchy, since their side always loses.

Amalickiah comes from the minority, non-Christian faction that also produced Nehor, Amilici, and Korihor—all of whose lives ended badly at the hands of the majority. For people on this side of the divide, the Reign of the Judges is fundamentally oppressive, as it aligns itself unapologetically with the established church and, while claiming to support religious freedom, has frequently enforced religious orthodoxy with the coercive power of the state. Amalickiah is a charismatic enough leader to make inroads with regional officials (46:4) and moderate Christians (46:7). He forges a coalition with a real chance of winning political power.

With this coalition behind him,Amalickiah agitates to change the system of government to something more sensitive to the beliefs of non-Christians. He initially gains some traction with the people, but then the military steps in to defend the government and the Church. Captain Moroni rallies the people around the flag, and both Church and State tell Christians that they cannot support Amalickiah without rejecting God. Moroni solidifies the Christian majority behind him and goes on the offensive. In the name of “freedom,” he executes anyone who will not swear allegiance to the political-religious status quo. Amazingly (not!) almost all of the Amalickiahites take the oath.

As I acknowledged earlier, this version of events is just as hostile to Captain Moroni as Mormon’s narrative is to Amalickiah. Both narratives reduce their opposition to a single set of clear and easy-to- understand motives—which is a pretty clear indication that neither one gets to what actually happened with the messy and inconsistent human beings involved in the story.

And, perhaps most importantly of all, the two narratives are built around two very different definitions of “freedom.” And they are two definitions that remain with us today.”

Michael Austin, Captain Moroni’s “Religious Freedom” Problem–and Ours #BOM2016, https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/08/20/captain- moronis-religious-freedom-problem-and-ours-bom-2016/

 DISAGREE VS. DISSENT

“Not all disagreement leads to dissent. In fact, the clear expression of conflicting views, especially in council settings, frequently serves as preparation for revelation. For example, members of the Council of Fifty, a deliberative body organized by Joseph Smith in Nauvoo, were under obligation both to disclose concerns when a proposal was put forward and to work toward unanimity in the process of reaching a decision. One reason groups sometimes failed to succeed, Joseph Smith taught the council members, was ‘because in their organization they never could agree to disagree long enough to separate the pure gold from the dross by the process of investigation.’"

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/dissent-in-the-church?lang=eng

“Disagreements and dissent differ because the latter one is from the latin dis and sentire, which literally means to feel apart from others. In contrast, disagreement means having a lack of consensus or having a different or contradicting opinion about a subject.

People who dissent are more likely to end up broken physically, emotionally, or spatially.”

https://gradesfixer.com/free-essay-examples/comparison-of-disagreement-vs-dissent/

 BEING FED SPIRITUALLY

“These are just morsels–a few samples of the different kinds of food that adults might require as they continue to grow.There is much more to say regarding how adults go about finding nourishment at each of these very unique stages, but you can start to see the progression at play. For so long, we’ve just assumed that adults uniformly need the same spiritual nutrition to grow and fulfill their potential.We know better now.

For some adults, belonging to the collective and focusing on strict obedience is their lifeblood. For others, excessive focus on the letter of the law leads to spiritual atrophy. Not that those adults stop being obedient to principles and deep spiritual truths, but there is a new need to source wisdom from within, to follow one’s inner authority, while still aligning with the wisdom that comes from our leaders.

Certainty and knowing without a doubt are other kinds of nutrition that can feed some members, helping them stabilize in their own autonomy, while that same certainty can feel like spiritual junk food to others. At certain stages of adult development, we start to develop intense cravings for ambiguity, uncertainty, even doubt.

The trouble we get into as a community is when one person insists that the nutrition they derive from one stage of development is adequate to nourish everybody everywhere. It is natural to believe that what feeds us will feed others, but the science tells us something very different.What nourishes us in one phase of growth can quickly become toxic at the next stage’s unfolding.”

“What we’ve been taught to eat our whole lives does not always square with our deeper nutritional needs.What we try to feed others does not always nourish them. In the words of Mary Oliver, we can trust our soft animal body to love what it loves.We can trust others as they find sustenance, too.When we do this, we find food in unexpected places, springing up from the unimaginable generosity of the Divine, and filling our storehouse so full that there is not room enough for the bounty.”

Thomas McConkie, https://mormonstages.com/blog/articles/feed-my-sheep/

Alma 45-49

READING FOR NEXT WEEK:

Alma 50-55

WHY IS THERE SO MUCH WAR IN THE BOOK OF MORMON?

“Indeed, most military events in the Book of Mormon have both religious and political importance. The Nephites did not dichotomize their world between church and state as we do. Ancient peoples generally viewed war as a contest between the gods of one people and the gods of another. For the Nephites, however, God’s will was often revealed through the ordeal of battle: God scourged and punished his people by the ravages of war, or God blessed his people by marching at the head of their armies and giving them the victory (this was a deeply held religious belief of Captain Moroni, but one scoffed at by his enemy Zerahemnah). To the Nephites, the matters of war were all-important religious affairs and sacred obligations, not the optional exploits of imperialistic monarchs or of mercenary soldiers of fortune.
Points like these suggest that having the Nephite worldview in mind (as one piece of useful equipment) would be helpful as we strive to understand the attitudes, words, teachings, and important lessons God revealed to these people and as we strive to take those lessons and experiences to heart.”

“The wars in the Book of Mormon were not just a series of reruns, the Nephites against the Lamanites. Each war had different causes, different parties, unique problems, and distinctive consequences. We as a people have not yet come to know the wars of the Book of Mormon as individual conflicts and campaigns (as we know World War II, or the Revolutionary War), but when we come to know each distinctive Book of Mormon war as we know the distinctive wars of the last few centuries, the pages of the book will become more alive to us.”

“These wars are remarkable and intriguing. Each has a life and character of its own, yet, as a group, they are similar enough that we can see that they arose in the same civilization. Viewed as a whole, some interesting patterns emerge. For example, several of the wars arose when one group attempted to separate from another. Obviously, freedom of travel was limited in this civilization; defection, or dissension in one group that opened up possible involvement with another, was viewed as treason and grounds for armed intervention. 

Note also that warring parties consistently picked opportune moments to strike. Many of these wars occurred at the time of transitions of political power. Amlici waged his war [3] while the nature of Nephite government— kingship or judgeship —was still in question. The Amalickiahite Wars [7-8] were fought immediately after Alma left and his son Helaman assumed office. Thus, the transfer of political office from one person to the next was obviously a problem in the small Nephite world, as one would expect, since the Nephite rulers came from a minority population group (see Mosiah 25:2). With considerable social, political, and military difficulty, the Nephite ruling families clung tenuously to the leadership of their community. 

There are also many types of wars here: Some were single attacks; others involved protracted sieges, split fronts, announced wars, or surprise attacks. Differing and developing uses of armor, technology, strategy, and weaponry can all be observed in the detailed records of the history of warfare in the Book of Mormon. 

These and similar details help in assaying the historicity of this record. The purpose of inquiring into historicity is not to subject revelation to the constraints of reason or scholarship, but rather to use the techniques of scholarship as a limited means to a spiritual end. By thinking carefully, systematically, and acutely about the warfare material in the Book of Mormon, a diligent student will appreciate more fully the truth, miracle, and meaning of this ancient record.” 

John W. Welch, “Why Study Warfare in The Book of Mormon,"
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1097&context=mi

MORONI

“Mormon masterfully abridged the scriptural record about Moroni, chief captain of the Nephite armies, demonstrating to his anticipated readers that this was a man most needed not only for his day, but also for our own. In accordance with Mormon’s hopes, Captain Moroni endures as a model of courage and righteousness to many Latter-day Saints. His powerful example is obscured only by ignorance and misunderstanding of the world in which he lived. Brigham Young taught that the scriptures can best be understood by reading them “as though [we] stood in the place of the men who wrote them” (Journal of Discourses 7:333; hereafter JD). There is an immense historical and cultural distance separating Moroni from modern comprehension. This distance can be narrowed by striving to view Moroni within the context of his own world.”

“This seemingly simple list of character qualities, scrutinized within the context of modern times, raises important questions. For example: What constitutes “perfect understanding” and how is it obtained? For one who “does not delight in bloodshed” but rejoices in the “sacred word of God” (Alma 44:5), why is Captain Moroni seemingly so committed to the sword? What is the source and meaning of his ancient law of liberty? What is the origin and nature of the Nephite oaths that might cause him to commit “even to the loss of his blood?” (Alma 48:13). The list of questions goes on, but reflection is persuasive that Moroni’s character and actions are more understandable within their historical, cultural, and theological context.”

“To state, therefore that Captain Moroni was “a man of a perfect understanding” is to declare that he diligently studied and lived by the sacred word of God, and that he understood the consequences of not giving heed to the covenants.”


“While twentieth-century readers correctly view this moment as a time of great patriotism, it is important to note that any such feelings of the Nephites were founded in their covenants. The focus in the record is not upon an emotional flag-waving fervor, but upon the necessity of keeping covenants with the Lord in order to be preserved in the land. 

The covenant renewal pattern of Captain Moroni’s compatriots is more properly understood within the framework of ancient Israelite thought. Nephite social cohesion, like the “unity of the Israelite people and its relationship with God, was founded on covenant, and this covenant was in its original form a purely religious affair” (McCarthy, Old Testament Covenant 23). While most Latter-day Saints are familiar with covenants, few realize that anciently the covenant was the very foundation for government. Moroni’s sentiment parallels ancient Israel’s view that government was based upon covenants between God and his children, as well as between God’s children. When Moroni rallies the forces, it is not to some partisan political cause but to the cause of their covenants with God.

Moroni realized that freedom came from diligence and giving heed to the word of God, and not from Nephite cunning and military might.”

“Reading the Captain Moroni chapters in the book of Alma through the lens of the “covenant” allows us a better grasp of the mind and heart of this great servant of God, a chance to see as he saw, and to feel as he felt. We can liken these classic stories of the “war” chapters in Alma, such as the raising of the “Title of Liberty,” to us when we study them within the context of the ancient covenantal perspective. One of Mormon’s many editorial summaries makes it clear that he meant these chapters to be understood this way. Noting the Nephite prosperity and strength in the twenty-first year of the reign of Judges, Mormon attributes these blessings to the mercy and justice of the Lord, “to the fulfilling of all his words unto the children of men” (Alma 50:19).”


Thomas R. Valletta, https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/book-mormon-alma-testimony-word/14-captain-and-covenant-0