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.

Jacob 5 - 7

Q: What is an allegory? A story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning — a moral or political one. A symbol. 

Q: What other trees are important scriptural symbols? The trees in the Garden of Eden? The tree of life in Lehi’s dream? The tree that grows from the seed planted in our hearts (Alma 32:37)? The cross? Are there any others? 

From FAIR Latter-day Saints:
Q: Why is the Lord always threatening to burn the vineyard?
Olive trees will usually grow back after being burned, producing suckers from the old roots. This is often more time-effective than trying to start a completely new crop of trees from scratch.
Q: Is "loftiness" a bad thing? (5:48)
Yes. Olives can easily reach 15-20 meters in height. This makes it harder to pick the fruit and wastes the tree's energy by supporting wood that is not productive of fruit.
This is likely why the Lord of the vineyard "plucks off" [as opposed to "pruning"] the trees — every few years one must cut off all the undesired growth, to keep the trees smaller and more productive/manageable.
Q: Why does the Lord always go "down" to the vineyard?
A few Roman manuals on olive culture (prepared for Roman citizens who were newly made "farmers" on lands which had been seized by the empire — sort of a Latin Olive Farming for Dummies) are extant.
These manuals always recommended that the villa (farmhouse) be placed uphill from the crop areas and animals: and, not surprisingly, upwind from the manure pile! https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Question:_Is_the_Book_of_Mormon%27s_account_of_olive_horticulture_in_Jacob_5_accurate%3F  

Sister Anette Dennis 
. . I discovered books that were entertaining and engaging but also used symbolism in their stories. I loved helping my children understand the symbolism the author was using to teach deeper principles, even gospel principles. 

Jesus taught through stories and symbols. . . .  His parables were symbols through which He could teach deeper lessons to those who had ears to hear, but those not seeking the deeper meaning would not understand. Just as many who read those same books I read to my children never knew there were deeper meanings and so much more to get out of those stories. Sister Anette Dennis  

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2024/04/14dennis?lang=eng

John Tanner -(All John Tanner quotes from today's discussion come from his essay, “Literary Reflections on Jacob and His Descendants,” found through this link: https://rsc.byu.edu/book-mormon-jacob-through-words-mormon-learn-joy/literary-reflections-jacob-his-descendants
Unfortunately, discussion of this allegory is often so preoccupied with the world-historical interpretations of Zenos’ allegory that we miss the central point Jacob likely had in mind: that God loves and looks after the house of Israel, no matter where its branches or blood are scattered. The allegory is more than a complex puzzle whose solution unlocks world history. The allegory dramatizes God’s steadfast love, as a recent Ensign article has recognized (Swiss). Thematically, Zenos’ allegory ought to take its place beside the parable of the prodigal son, for both make the Lord’s mercy movingly memorable. 

John Tanner
A key phrase in the allegory of the vineyard, “and it grieveth me that I should lose this tree,” is repeated eight times. By means of such formal repetition, called by literary critics “anaphora,” the allegory sounds a refrain that celebrates the Lord’s long-suffering love. The very recurrence of the line underscores the quality of that divine love—unfailing, persistent, tenacious, resolute. This characterization of the Lord matters as much as, if not more than, the historical details of his plan to redeem Israel. The allegory teaches that the Lord of the vineyard works out his grand design in history. But more than this, it shows us that he weeps over sin: “And it came to pass that the Lord of the vineyard wept, and said unto the servant: What could I have done more for my vineyard” (Jacob 5:41; see Moses 7:28–41). The Lord of the universe can be “touched with the feeling of our infirmities” (Heb 4:15), for it grieveth him that he should lose any tree of the vineyard. What a remarkable witness: God is not deus absconditus but deus misericors (or, God is not an absent God, but a feeling God)! I find this allegory one of the most eloquent scriptural testimonies of God’s love anywhere. Surely Jacob did too. 

John Tanner - Jacob 6:4-5
Just so we don’t miss the point, Jacob tells us what matters most in the allegory. It is not figuring out detailed historical correspondences; it is feeling and seeing “how merciful is our God unto us, for he remembereth the house of Israel . . . and he stretches forth his hands unto them all the day long,” and as a result, repenting: “Wherefore, my beloved brethren, I beseech of you in words of soberness that ye would repent, and come with full purpose of heart, and cleave unto God as he cleaveth unto you” (Jacob 6:4–5). This is the neglected undersong of Zenos’ allegory. 

Daniel Belnap

It is no surprise that the allegory still resonates today. The allegory reveals truths concerning who we are, what we are expected to do, and what we can become. More importantly, the allegory reveals to us that the Lord truly has a plan, that He is aware at all times what is going on in His vineyard, and that He strives only for the best of all involved. The true power of the allegory comes from understanding that not only is He seeking for oneness and good fruit but also for servants who become companions, associates, and equals, or “heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ, . . . that we may be also glorified together” (Romans 8:17).”[22]

https://rsc.byu.edu/vol-7-no-1-2006/ye-shall-have-joy-me-olive-tree-lord-his-servants#_noteref-20

John Tanner - Jacob 7:24

The Lamanites were not distant, faceless, nameless enemies; they were his brothers, nephews, and cousins whose names and families he knew. Remembering this helps me read with more sympathy Jacob’s sad parting observation: “Many means were devised to reclaim and restore the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth; but it all was vain, for they delighted in wars and bloodshed, and they had an eternal hatred against us, their brethren” (Jacob 7:24). 

John Tanner - Jacob 7:26 

Jacob, like Moroni, writes three farewells: at the end of Jacob 3, 6, and 7. His valediction expresses the accumulated sorrows of a nomadic life: “And also our lives passed away like as it were unto us a dream, we being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem, born in tribulation, in a wilderness, and hated of our brethren, which caused wars and contentions; wherefore, we did mourn out our days” (Jacob 7:26). By now, it should be clear that the sensitivity, vulnerability, and quiet eloquence of this leave-taking is of a piece not only with the facts of Jacob’s life but with his style.

No other Book of Mormon author uses the term “dread.” Similarly, no one else uses “lonesome,” nor can I imagine any one else capable of the expression “our lives passed away like as it were unto us a dream,” or “we did mourn out our days.” None are so open about anxiety, none so poetic. No wonder Elder Neal Maxwell called Jacob a poet-prophet (1). Jacob is a poet-prophet whose voice we should learn to recognize, and to love. 

President Susan Tanner - February 2009

I am touched by how frequently the Lord expresses His love for His people, even if they stray—maybe especially when they stray. Think of the parables the Savior gives about lost things: sheep, coins, a prodigal son (see ​Luke 15​). The shepherd goes out after the lost sheep; the woman diligently searches her house for the lost silver; the father runs out to his wayward son while he is “yet a great way off … and [falls] on his neck, ​​and [kisses] him” (​Luke 15:20​). Likewise, in the parable of the olive tree we glimpse the Lord’s long-suffering love for those who stray (see ​Jacob 5​). Again and again, the Lord of the vineyard laments, “It grieveth me that I should lose this tree” (​Jacob 5:7, 11, 13, 32​). Throughout the book of Isaiah, the Lord reassures Israel that He cannot forget them: “Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands” (​Isaiah 49:16​). In the book of Ezekiel the Lord says, “I will seek that which was lost, and bring again that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken” (​Ezekiel 34:16​). 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2009/02/helping-new-converts-stay-strong?lang=eng

Elder Patrick Kearon 

“God is in relentless pursuit of you. He wants all of His children to choose to return to Him,  and He employs every possible measure to bring you back. Our loving Father oversaw the Creation of this very Earth for the express purpose of providing an opportunity for you and for me to have the stretching and refining experiences of mortality. . . Everything about the Father’s plan for His beloved children is designed to bring everyone home.” 
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2024/04/45kearon?lang=eng

Other Books/Essays of Interest:

The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5 by Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch.

https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/allegory-olive-tree-olive-bible-and-jacob-5

Ralph Swiss - "The Tame and Wild Olive Trees   https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1988/08/the-tame-and-wild-olive-trees-an-allegory-of-our-saviors-love?lang=eng

Jack Welch and David Seely - https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/insights-and-evidences-allegory-olive-tree

Jacob 1 - 4

 Jacob, the Prophet

Among the various Nephite leaders of the Book of Mormon, Jacob comes across as an
unusually vulnerable figure. Jacob’s many references to his own anxiety account for
half of all the references to anxiety found in the Book of Mormon. Going so far as to
express anxiety about his anxiety, Jacob understands that his discomfort results from
his profound love and concern for his people. He worries that his fear over them will
outweigh his love for them. From the first instance of his speaking being recorded in
the Book of Mormon, he expresses trepidation concerning the Nephites’ spiritual
standing. “I am desirous for the welfare of your souls. Yea, mine anxiety is great for
you; and ye yourselves know that it ever has been. Because he views his people’s
eternal welfare and righteousness as inextricably intertwined with their temporal
welfare and the creation of a just society, he catalyzes his anxiety into compassion for
the oppressed. Deidre Nicole Green, Jacob. 

Jacob had been assured by his father Lehi that he would “dwell safely with his brother,
Nephi”. The fact that Lehi promises that Jacob will dwell safely, rather than simply in
peace or comfort, suggests that Jacob feels unsafe with his family, and this possibly
includes feeling physically unsafe. Jacob’s own deeply-felt need for protection,
informed by his anxiety, turns him toward the protection of others, a theme that
becomes central to his ministry. Deidre Nicole Green, Jacob.

At the outset of the book, this vulnerable religious leader has just lost his older brother,
Nephi, and with him the assurance of safety and protection. With his suddenly
heightened sense of vulnerability, Jacob does not seek safety by secluding himself in a
shroud of silence and invisibility. Instead, he proves to be as courageous as he is
vulnerable by turning the attention of the Nephite men, who are the most dominant and
oppressive in society, to the most subordinate and overlooked, including the Nephite
women and children and the outcasts and outsiders of Nephite society. Deidre Nicole Green, Jacob.

Jacob advocates for those who have been rendered voiceless and have had their
agency and well-being compromised in a society that unjustly constructs hierarchies on
the basis of wealth, skin color, and gender. By giving voice to the voiceless, Jacob’s
book demands our response to the issues that they face, which remain pressing today.
Jacob reminds us that our religion cannot be reduced to the otherworldly; the quality of
our spirituality is measured by the way we both regard and treat those who, like the
incarnate Christ, are esteemed as naught within human societies. Deidre Nicole Green, Jacob.

Jacob is the first religious authority in the Book of Mormon who does not function

simultaneously as a political leader. This allows him to focus solely on the spiritual

well-being of those in his stewardship and to pursue the unification of disparate groups

by emphasizing their shared spiritual standing.

Even though 2 Nephi 5:6 gives a good overview of the lineages who supported Nephi,

as discussed above regarding that verse, this is the first time in the Book of Mormon

where it is stated that Lehi’s colony was in fact, fully divided into seven distinct tribes.

These tribal designations are repeated in 4 Nephi, Mormon, and even in D&C. Seven

was a sacred number in ancient Israel, which may explain, at least in part, why these

seven tribes lasted for approximately 1,000 years of Nephite and Lamanite history.

Interestingly, seven was also a sacred number among ancient Mesoamerican

societies, and various legends from that region of the world depict their peoples as

having emerged from seven caves or lineages. While no definitive connection can be

made between these legends and the Book of Mormon, the relationship is certainly

intriguing and may point to a shared historical setting. John W. Welch

Jacob 1

Verses 13-14 are critical for understanding the rest of the Book of Mormon. Jacob

begins with two names that will for the essential cultural dichotomy in the Book of

Mormon, Lamanites and Nephites. The statement begins by noting that those who are

not Lamanites are Nephites. It is a binary division. John W. Welch

Jacob explains that these two collective terms include tribal names. There are

Jacobites, Josephites, Zoramites, Lemuelites, and so forth, but Lamanite and Nephite

are not used in the sense of tribal designations. Specifically, Jacob says “I shall call

them Lamanites that seek to destroy the people of Nephi, and those who are friendly to

Nephi, I shall call Nephites.”

This begins the essential division between “us” and “them” which characterizes so

many ancient societies. The division is not tribal and is in no way genetic. It is a

political designation, which explains how it is so easy for Book of Mormon peoples to

cross the boundaries. Lamanites easily become Nephites by believing as Nephites do,

and when Nephites no longer believe as Nephites are supposed to, they become

Lamanites. As Jacob says, the difference is whether anyone is friendly or an enemy. 

John W. Welch

It is also important to remember that it was Nephi who discussed the cursing of the

Lamanites and their skin of blackness. For Jacob, that doesn’t enter into his discussion

of the difference between Lamanite and Nephite at all – except that the skin of

blackness defines the character of the enemy. Most importantly, Jacob never says that

skin pigment was a difference. It is only whether one is a friend or an enemy.

Book of Mormon Minute by Brant Gardner.

On the surface, several aspects of this tribal organization seem peculiar. Although

Zoram and Lehi’s sons Jacob and Joseph were each assigned their own tribes, there

is no separate tribe for Sam, who instead is numbered with the tribe of Nephi.

Additionally, while Laman and Lemuel each have their own tribes, the sons of Ishmael

share a tribal name rather than have their own respective groups named after each

son.

John W. Welch provides a useful analysis of the legal implications for this

arrangement, but the division of Lehi’s children into seven tribes may still seem

somewhat arbitrary to the reader. While we do not know all the reasons for this seven-

tribe structure, it is consistent with widespread pre-Columbian traditions which hold that

various Mesoamerican peoples were descended from seven founding leaders or

groups. Book of Mormon Central.

Jacob 2 Temple Sermon - The Problem(s)

Three times a year under the Law of Moses, men, women, and children had to come to

the temple. These were festival days, such as the Feast of Tabernacles, and they were

filled with feasting, rejoicing, celebration, glorifying God, being grateful for the giving of

the law, and the performing of sacrifices to atone for all sins. Even the Day of

Atonement – which begins with fasting, prayer, and mourning – ends with a great time

of jubilation as the people rejoice about how they have been blessed. It also may have

been the coronation of the second Nephite king. So it was likely a big event with a big

gathering, and may have had multiple sessions. Despite the many activities going on,

Jacob’s sermon was possibly the first order of business. And it seems to me that the

people might have been a little surprised at what he told them.

Jacob had noted two positive things about his audience. The first was that, as yet, they

had obeyed the commandments. The second was that they had come to “hear the

pleasing word of the Lord.” Those two positive comments establish the baseline

against which he will now show the reality of their situation. Jacob had noted that they

had searched for riches, and now notes that they have obtained them. Jacob is not

against riches. There is nothing in his sermon that suggests that riches are inherently

problematic. What is a problem, however, is that “some of you have obtained more

abundantly that that of your brethren.” Wealth isn’t the problem; it is the uneven

distribution of that wealth. However, it isn’t even the actual distribution of wealth. It is

virtually impossible that all could be precisely equally rich. The problem isn’t the wealth

itself, but the human reaction to that wealth.

Because there are those who have accumulated more wealth, they consider

themselves better than those who have not accumulated that wealth. The sin is that

you “persecute your brethren because ye suppose that ye are better than they.” The

sin is exalting oneself over another, particularly for something so worldly as wealth.

Perhaps this is a reason that Jacob noted that there were those in the society who had

been obedient. For Jacob, the problem is the smaller set of people who assume that

they are better than others. While that is probably a smaller number, it is also probably

the more powerful in society. Human society tends to empower the rich, even though

wealth may not display the type of leadership that social welfare might require. 

Book of Mormon Minute by Brant Gardner

If the arrogant Nephite men are going to experience a mighty change of heart that

leads to righteous behavior, it is going to require that they first empty themselves of

their arrogance by looking not only to Jacob but also to those they view as the least

authoritative. Even more expansively, Jacob allows those who might be labeled

“apostate” to call the Nephites to repentance. By teaching in this way, Jacob

encourages the Nephites to develop meekness, a “particular spiritual receptivity to

learning both from the Holy Ghost and from people who may seem less capable,

experienced, or educated, who may not hold important positions, or who otherwise

may not appear to have much to contribute.” The Nephites must divest themselves of

self-righteousness, renounce their claims of entitlement and disabuse themselves of

the illusion that they occupy a superior social standing. 

Deidre Nicole Green, Jacob.

Jacob 3 Temple Sermon - How to fix the problem(s)

I love the expression “firmness of mind.” It takes a lot of exertion to hang in there when

no one around you is. Righteous resolve begins with firmness of mind. And the

promises here are great. You can just feel the Lord’s love and strengthening power

that is available to the righteous.

The Lord will console you in your afflictions, including in those sins that you’re trying to

forsake, and he will plead your cause. What is “the pleasing word of God”? It is the

Atonement of Christ, the message that you can be forgiven. So, “feast upon his love.”

How do you think they felt, those of them who needed to change (as we all do)? There

is love for every one of God’s children, and the pleasing word of God “healeth the

wounded soul”.

Is Jacob just talking about the people who are hurt or suffering from the sins of their

husbands or fathers? No. Everyone is spiritually wounded to some extent, and

therefore everyone needs divine healing. The Lord is merciful, the Lord is kind, and

what better place to talk about these things than at the temple where we are taught

more about the Atonement of Christ than any other place. So in essence, Jacob’s

message is that sin is real, and we should call it what it is. But his message is also that

the Lord can heal those wounds caused by sin and bring reconciliation between those

who have caused or received harm. John W. Welch

Jacob 4 – Conclusion and Introduction to Allegory

Verses 15-18 - Introduction to Allegory in Jacob 5