Author: LeGrand Baker

Alma 5:41-49 — LeGrand Baker — Alma’s authority and testimony

There are three main themes in these verses:

v. 42: gives us a working definition of “good works”

v 43, 44, 49: defines Alma’s priesthood authority

v. 44-48: Alma’s powerful testimony.

I would like to discuss them in that order.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Definition of “good works”

42  And whosoever doeth this must receive his wages of him; therefore, for his wages he receiveth death, as to things pertaining unto righteousness, being dead unto all good works (Alma 5:42).

Here Alma is equating “things pertaining unto righteousness” with “good works.” Righteous is zedek, as in the name Melchizedek, it means the same as right: correct, square, precise. I understand righteousness to mean correct in temple things, whether that is correctness in performing the ordinances and covenants, or correct in living according to those covenants, both are righteousness. Thus, in Alma’s equation, good works means the same thing. That is consistent with James in the Bible and with what Alma says about “holy works” in Alma 12.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

This is a sermon delivered with all the priesthood authority of the president of the church. In that regard it is like Moroni 7, which Mormon introduces by clarifying the authority by which he spoke:

2   And now I, Mormon, speak unto you, my beloved brethren; and it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, and his holy will, because of the gift of his calling unto me, that I am permitted to speak unto you at this time.(Moroni 7:2)

The authors of the Book of Mormon assume the prophet’s priesthood authority, but rarely tell us how they got it. In Alma’s words to the people of Zarahemla he asserted his authority in an unmistakable way. His words are:

43  I speak in the energy of my soul; for behold, I have spoken unto you plainly that ye cannot err, or have spoken according to the commandments of God.
44  For I am called to speak after this manner, according to the holy order of God, which is in Christ Jesus; yea, I am commanded to stand and testify unto this people
49  ….this is the order after which I am called, yea, to preach unto my beloved brethren, yea, and every one that dwelleth in the land… (Alma 5:43, 44, 49 )

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Bracketed by those declarations of authority, is Alma’s testimony, which I have written here as a paragraph rather than leaving it broken into verses:

45-48   … I do know that these things whereof I have spoken are true…. they are made known unto me by the Holy Spirit of God (That is an interesting phrase because of its ambiguity. It may be read “by the Holy Ghost,” or it may be read like the Ether 3 when the Saviour, as a spirit, visited the Brother of Jared). Behold, I have fasted and prayed many days that I might know these things of myself. And now I do know of myself that they are true; for the Lord God hath made them manifest unto me by his Holy Spirit; and this is the spirit of revelation which is in me….it has thus been revealed unto me, that the words which have been spoken by our fathers are true, even so according to the spirit of prophecy which is in me, which is also by the manifestation of the Spirit of God….I know of myself that …I know that Jesus Christ shall come, yea, the Son, the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace, and mercy, and truth. And behold, it is he that cometh to take away the sins of the world, yea, the sins of every man who steadfastly believeth on his name. (v 45-48)

It seems impossible to me that a prophet could make a speech more formal—and therefor more binding than Alma has done here. He is God’s prophet and is teaching what he has been instructed to teach! (Mormon does the same thing, and just as emphatically in Moroni 7.)

After again asserting his authority, “this is the order after which I am called, yea, to preach unto [all],” he tells them what he has been instructed to preach. It is this: “that they must repent and be born again.” In the next few verses he explains how they are to achieve that end.

Alma 5:37-41 — LeGrand Baker — ‘The Good Shepherd’

Alma 5:37-41
37 O ye workers of iniquity; ye that are puffed up in the vain things of the world, ye that have professed to have known the ways of righteousness nevertheless have gone astray, as sheep having no shepherd, notwithstanding a shepherd hath called after you and is still calling after you, but ye will not hearken unto his voice!
38 Behold, I say unto you, that the good shepherd doth call you; yea, and in his own name he doth call you, which is the name of Christ; and if ye will not hearken unto the voice of the good shepherd, to the name by which ye are called, behold, ye are not the sheep of the good shepherd.
39 And now if ye are not the sheep of the good shepherd, of what fold are ye? Behold, I say unto you, that the devil is your shepherd, and ye are of his fold; and now, who can deny this? Behold, I say unto you, whosoever denieth this is a liar and a child of the devil.
40 For I say unto you that whatsoever is good cometh from God, and whatsoever is evil cometh from the devil.
41 Therefore, if a man bringeth forth good works he hearkeneth unto the voice of the good shepherd, and he doth follow him; but whosoever bringeth forth evil works, the same becometh a child of the devil, for he hearkeneth unto his voice, and doth follow him.

This week, Jim Cannon and I read John 10 together. Verses 1-18 are a close parallel to those verses in Alma 5. John 10:4 reads,

4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.

When we finished reading, Jim smiled and made one of the understated profound statements that is that is so typical of him. He said, “What this says is that the sheep have to do something.”

That’s what Alma is saying also, it is the responsibility of the shepherd to speak with a voice the sheep can hear and understand, but it is the responsibility of the sheep to follow. Many religions fail to make that connection.

One of the strongest (and strangest) doctrines of apostate Christianity is that the Saviour will make up the difference if one believes –– if one only has faith.

David Noel Freedman is one of the great biblical scholars of the last generation, in his article on “faith” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, wrote:

“Faith is a peculiarly Christian concept. While other religious traditions have aspects of what the churches have come to name “faith,” none has the specific quality of intellectual assent that distinguishes faith from fidelity. The problem of faith and the central discussion of it arises in the context of the medieval attempts to codify and integrate the Christian experience into the emerging philosophical language of the scholastics. (Article by David Noel Freedman, “Faith,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Doubleday, New York, 1992, vol. 2 p. 744-745.)

When I sent this to Bruce Cowser, he responded:

A very interesting distinction he makes. I looked at several dictionaries and a thesaurus, and every one defines “fidelity” in terms of “faithfulness.” Put another way, his postulate distinguishes “faith” from “faithfulness.” Wonder how we even got the word “faithful” if it doesn’t have the same root as “faith.”

The answer, of course, is that our modern use of faith is based on Catholic and Protestant belief, rather than on the Greek pistis from which the word faith is translated in the New Testament. The modern meaning of faith is belief—intellectual assent. The problem with that is that what one believes may have no necessary or predictable relationship with reality. Faithful, on the other hand, has kept its original meaning. It means one’s doing what one said he would do— integrity, keeping one’s covenants. The Greek pistis means the tokens of the covenant. So to have faith means to have the token. To exercise faith means to use the token. To be faithful means to be true to the covenant the token represents.

Freedman’s is a masterful phrase, the “quality of intellectual assent that distinguishes faith from fidelity.” It perfectly defines the belief that all one has to do is believe, muddle through as best one can, and somehow the Saviour will magically make up the difference and carry us off to heaven. That idea is illustrated by one of the most famous paintings in Christendom. It shows “the Good Shepherd” carrying a lamb that was lost. It is based on the parable of the lost sheep in Matthew 18:12-14. The painting is lovely, but what it fails to show is that when the shepherd returns to his flock he puts the sheep with the rest of the flock, and gives it another opportunity to follow him. He doesn’t continue to carry it forever.

The Saviour does not carry people who are not prepared to go there to the Celestial Kingdom. The notion that he does would presuppose that either the Celestial Kingdom is unclean, as they are; or else that he has cleansed them even though they had not fully repented. Neither idea is compatible with the scriptures. Rather, he speaks and leads the way. Those who choose to do so, follow him. “The sheep have to do something.” Throughout the gospels, Jesus frequently refers to his followers as his sheep.

The idea that all one has to do is believe and muddle through is a description of a sheep herder who imposes his will upon the sheep, not that of a shepherd who gives them the right to choose.

Nephi said it most clearly, and there is nothing in his words that suggests intellectual assent without fidelity.

17 O repent ye, repent ye! Why will ye die? Turn ye, turn ye unto the Lord your God. Why has he forsaken you?
18 It is because you have hardened your hearts; yea, ye will not hearken unto the voice of the good shepherd; yea, ye have provoked him to anger against you.
19 And behold, instead of gathering you, except ye will repent, behold, he shall scatter you forth that ye shall become meat for dogs and wild beasts.
20 O, how could you have forgotten your God in the very day that he has delivered you?
21 But behold, it is to get gain, to be praised of men, yea, and that ye might get gold and silver. And ye have set your hearts upon the riches and the vain things of this world, for the which ye do murder, and plunder, and steal, and bear false witness against your neighbor, and do all manner of iniquity. (Helaman 7:17-21)

In the culture of ancient Israel, the imagery of sheep and shepherd meant the sheep chose to trust and follow the shepherd, and the shepherd had the responsibility to respond to that trust by providing for and protecting the sheep. That sentiment is found in Isaiah and the Psalms, from which Alma and Nephi would have drawn their imagery. Here are some examples:

Psalm 80 is a prayer. It begins with the notion that Jehovah will lead his people.

1 Give ear, O Shepherd of Israel, thou that leadest Joseph like a flock; thou that dwellest between the cherubim, shine forth. (Psalms 80:1)

(The words, “thou that dwellest between the cherubim,” are a reference to the throne that sat at the back wall in the Holy of Holies in Solomon’s temple. The throne was between two great cheribims whose wings touched the side walls and the ceiling of the room. )

Probably the most famous of all the Old Testament references to the Shepherd are Isaiah 40 and the 23rd Psalm. Nephi was probably referring to both of them when he wrote:

25 And he gathereth his children from the four quarters of the earth; and he numbereth his sheep, and they know him; and there shall be one fold and one shepherd; and he shall feed his sheep, and in him they shall find pasture. (1 Nephi 22: 25)

Isaiah 40 shows Jehovah’s compassion.

11 He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young. (Isaiah 40:11)

Jehovah’s compassion for the little lambs and for their mothers (those with young) does not preclude the notion that when they are able, they will join the rest of the flock. Neither does it negate his insistence that the mature and able sheep must follow him as an expression of their own will.

Many of you have sat in my office and read with me the copy of Psalm 23 that hung on my wall. The psalm is written like a three act play. Act one begins, “The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.” Act two is this lonely, dreary world. It begins, “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death.” And act three is simply, “and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.”

If I understand that psalm correctly, the following is all part of act one. It is a recollection of our pre-mortal world (discussion of that interpretation is found in Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord).

1 The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.
2 He maketh me to lie down in green pastures [in the imagery of sheep and shepherd, the green pastures would be the fruit of the tree of life]: he leadeth me beside the still waters.[waters of life]
3 He restoreth my soul (D&C 93: 38): he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. [There is always a new name that seals or ratifies a new covenant. The new name is a token of the covenant. For example, when we are baptized, we take upon ourselves the name of the Saviour, becoming his children. So that phrase might read, “he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his covenant’s sake,” without changing its meaning.] (Psalms 23:1-3)

The first words in Psalm 23 define our eternal relationship with the Saviour:

“The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.”

In the scriptural accounts of the Council in Heaven, it is always the Father who presides, and it is Jehovah who conducts and makes the assignments. In almost all of the accounts we have of fore-ordinations, they contain the principles and promises expressed in these words: “The Lord is my Shepherd”— he is in charge, and he will lead us in the way we must go to fulfill our eternal covenants.

It was he who gave instructions and foreordained us to our specific tasks; he and his Father made enabling covenants regarding the fulfillment of those tasks; and it is by his sustaining power that we are enabled to perform those tasks and keep those covenants –– “The Lord is my shepherd” –– the one whom I shall follow.

The Lord promised the Prophet Joseph,

41 Fear not, little children, for you are mine, and I have overcome the world, and you are of them that my Father hath given me;
42 And none of them that my Father hath given me shall be lost.
43 And the Father and I are one. I am in the Father and the Father in me; and inasmuch as ye have received me, ye are in me and I in you.
44 Wherefore, I am in your midst, and I am the good shepherd, and the stone of Israel. He that buildeth upon this rock shall never fall.
45 And the day cometh that you shall hear my voice and see me, and know that I am.
46 Watch, therefore, that ye may be ready. Even so. Amen. (Doctrine and Covenants 50:41-46)

Alma’s words are scarey and uncompromising.

38 Behold, I say unto you, that the good shepherd doth call you; yea, and in his own name he doth call you, which is the name of Christ; and if ye will not hearken unto the voice of the good shepherd, to the name by which ye are called, behold, ye are not the sheep of the good shepherd.
39 And now if ye are not the sheep of the good shepherd, of what fold are ye? Behold, I say unto you, that the devil is your shepherd, and ye are of his fold; and now, who can deny this? Behold, I say unto you, whosoever denieth this is a liar and a child of the devil.

There is lots of ancient temple code in those words. Knowing the name by which one is called is the most obvious. But the one that really caught my attention was this phrase: “whosoever denieth this is … a child of the devil” When Alma talks about one’s being a child of God, he is using the formal, legal notion of one who may, by right, inherit. If he is using “child of the devil” in that same way (and I believe he is) then he the warning he is giving is very severe indeed.

Alma 5:30-36 — LeGrand Baker — ‘come unto me’

Alma 5:30-36
30 And again I say unto you, is there one among you that doth make a mock of his brother, or that heapeth upon him persecutions?
31 Wo unto such an one, for he is not prepared, and the time is at hand that he must repent or he cannot be saved!
32 Yea, even wo unto all ye workers of iniquity; repent, repent, for the Lord God hath spoken it!
33 Behold, he sendeth an invitation unto all men, for the arms of mercy are extended towards them, and he saith: Repent, and I will receive you.
34 Yea, he saith: Come unto me and ye shall partake of the fruit of the tree of life; yea, ye shall eat and drink of the bread and the waters of life freely;
35 Yea, come unto me and bring forth works of righteousness, and ye shall not be hewn down and cast into the fire—
36 For behold, the time is at hand that whosoever bringeth forth not good fruit, or whosoever doeth not the works of righteousness, the same have cause to wail and mourn.

There appear to be three major encoded ideas here. The fun thing is that they are not in code at all. These seem to be instances where the words simply mean precisely what they say. But since we tend not to expect them to mean what they say, we are apt to water down their meaning. In these instances, the precision of the words become the code. The ideas are:

1. The arms of mercy are extended towards them

2. The Saviour says, “come unto me” and “I will receive you.”

3. The relationship between “works of righteousness” and “bringeth forth not good fruit,”

I think the best commentaries on these verses are from the Sermon on the Mount. That sermon reads like a how-to explanation of what the Saviour has said before from 3 Ne. 9 through the Beatitudes.

1.} The arms of mercy are extended towards them

When the Saviour spoke to the Nephites out of the darkness, he said:

14 Yea, verily I say unto you, if ye will come unto me ye shall have eternal life. Behold, mine arm of mercy is extended towards you, and whosoever will come, him will I receive; and blessed are those who come unto me. (3 Nephi 9:14)

There are places where the phrase “arms of mercy” seems to be only figurative, but it may also carry with it the same connotation as “hand” in the following scriptures. When that occurres, the scriptures are not talking figuratively. These scriptures help one see that.

29 Now know I that the LORD saveth his anointed;
he will hear him from his holy heaven
with the saving strength of his right hand. (Psalms 20:6)

and

23 Nevertheless I am continually with thee:
thou hast holden me by my right hand.
24 Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel,
and afterward receive me to glory.
25 Whom have I in heaven but thee?
and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee.
26 My flesh and my heart faileth:
but God is the strength of my heart,
and my portion for ever. (Psalms 73:23-26.)

And the Lord commands Job

10 Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency;
and array thyself with glory and beauty. [put on appropriate clothing] ….
14 Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee. (Job 40:10-14.)

Another psalm describes one way Job might have responded.

5 My soul shall be satisfied as with marrow and fatness;
and my mouth shall praise thee with joyful lips:
6 When I remember thee upon my bed,
and meditate on thee in the night watches.
7 Because thou hast been my help,
therefore in the shadow of thy wings will I rejoice.
8 My soul followeth hard after thee:
thy right hand upholdeth me. (Psalms 63:5-8.)

That brings us to the next idea:

2} The Saviour says, “come unto me” and “I will receive you.”

If one reads “come unto me” as meaning, “come to where I am..” then the imagery of the extended arm takes on a new relevance. In the Sermon on the Mount, the Saviour explained how that might be done.

19 And behold, I have given you the law and the commandments of my Father, that ye shall believe in me, and that ye shall repent of your sins, and come unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit. Behold, ye have the commandments before you, and the law is fulfilled.
20 Therefore come unto me and be ye saved; for verily I say unto you, that except ye shall keep my commandments, which I have commanded you at this time, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

That, in turn, brings us to the Saviour’s most immediate commands:

22 …Whosoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger of his judgment.
whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
23 Therefore, if ye shall come unto me, or shall desire to come unto me, and rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee—
24 Go thy way unto thy brother, and first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come unto me with full purpose of heart, and I will receive you. (3 Ne. 12: 19-24)

That, now brings us to the third of Alma’s principles:

3} The relationship between “works of righteousness” and “bringeth forth not good fruit,”

I presume that “Righteousness” is translated from the Nephite equilivant of the Hebrew “zedek.” In that case “works of righteousness” would mean the same as his “holy works” in Alma 12. If that is true then “works of righteousness” is a reference to temple ordinances and covenants, which Alma seems to be equating with “good fruit.” Again the Sermon on the Mount provides the best commentary:

15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. [same word Alma uses. It helps to understand what the Saviour is saying when we remember that Alma equates the fruit, with the fruit of the tree of life and with the works of righteousness. If the Saviour is doing the some, then the fruits he is talking about are the priesthood ordinances.] Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them.
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them: I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (3 Nephi 14:15-23.)

In chapter 32 Alma teaches that one must plant a seed, nurture it to maturity, then partake of the fruit of the tree of life. By then, one has become such a tree, not only to one’s own salvation, but also to assist in the salvation of others.

Putting all those ideas together and we have an eternal spiral – the Lord extends his hand to us that we may taste the fruit, then we help others so that they may recognize the Lord’s hand and accept his invitation also, that person, in turn, helps others, ad infinitum.

Alma 5: 24-30 — LeGrand Baker — clothing that is unclean

Alma 5: 24-30

24     Behold, my brethren, do ye suppose that such an one can have a place to sit down in the kingdom of God, with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob, and also all the holy prophets, whose garments are cleansed and are spotless, pure and white?

To sit in the presence of royalty presupposes an equality of rank. This would be especially so among these men who were among the pre-mortal gods and who fulfilled their covenants while on the earth. Alma is not asking, “Do you suppose you can be where they are,” he is asking “Do you suppose you can be like them – that they will accept you as one of themselves.” He answers his question in the next verse.

25.     I say unto you, Nay; except ye make our Creator a liar from the beginning, or suppose that he is a liar from the beginning, ye cannot suppose that such can have place in the kingdom of heaven; but they shall be cast out for they are the children of the kingdom of the devil.
26.     And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, if ye have experienced a change of heart, and if ye have felt to sing the song of redeeming love, I would ask, can ye feel so now?
27a     Have ye walked keeping yourselves blameless before God?

In Isaiah and the psalms, walk is a code word like path and way, which indicates how one climbs the mountain (temple). So what he is asking is: Are you keeping the covenants

27b.     Could ye say, if ye were called to die at this time, within yourselves, that ye have been sufficiently humble? That your garments have been cleansed and made white through the blood of Christ, who will come to redeem his people from their sins?

A while ago I pointed out that redeem is often used in the Book of Mormon to mean to bring one into the presence of God. This is an example where its context suggests it does not necessarily mean that, but rather that it means just what it means in both Hebrew and Greek. That is, to ransom or to purchase.

28.     Behold, are ye stripped of pride? I say unto you, if ye are not ye are not prepared to meet God. Behold ye must prepare quickly; for the kingdom of heaven is soon at hand, and such an one hath not eternal life.
29.     Behold, I say, is there one among you who is not stripped of envy? I say unto you that such an one is not prepared; and I would that he should prepare quickly, for the hour is close at hand, and he knoweth not when the time shall come; for such an one is not found guiltless.
30     And again I say unto you, is there one among you that doth make a mock of his brother, or that heapeth upon him persecutions?

Pride, envy, contempt for others are often facades behind which one seeks to hide one’s Self— sometimes a mask behind which one seeks to hide one’s Self from one’s Self.

Earlier in this same speech Alma referred to their sacred clothing, now he is talking about clothing that is not so sacred.

One can not wear two sets of clothing, just as one cannot server two masters. This is beautifully illustrated in the Hymn of the Pearl that I quoted last week.

Near the beginning of the boy’s odyssey he meets a friend, about whom he says:

28 We warned each other against the Egyptians
And against consorting with the unclean. [“Unclean” is not about hygiene. It means ceremonially inappropriate. For example, for a Jew, pork is unclean.]
29 But I clothed myself in garments like theirs,
That they might not suspect that I was come from without
30 To take the pearl,
And so might waken the serpent against me.
After the boy has received the communication from his parents, he reports,
61 And I snatched away the pearl
And turned about, to go to my father’s house.
62 And their dirty and unclean garment
[That is, the clothing that was consistent with his former way of life, but not appropriate to his rank and priesthood]
I took off and left in their land,
63 And directed my way that I might come
To the light of our homeland, the East.

It is not until after he has removed the unclean clothing that his parents send him his royal robes.

Not long ago we observed that in the Book of Mormon and elsewhere in the scriptures “naked” may have nothing whatever to do with nudity. Rather, nakedness indicates one’s losing the uniform or insignia that shows one’s rank, position, authority, or priesthood.

There is an important sequence that runs like a single silk thread through the tapestry of the scriptures: One must voluntarily become naked before God before he can cloth one with robes of righteousness. Here are some examples of these ideas:

Job does not distinguish between his actions and his clothing:

14 I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: my judgment was as a robe and a diadem. (Job 29:14)

Nephi prays to receive that clothing.

33 O Lord, wilt thou encircle me around in the robe of thy righteousness! O Lord, wilt thou make a way for mine escape before mine enemies! Wilt thou make my path straight before me! Wilt thou not place a stumbling block in my way—but that thou wouldst clear my way before me, and hedge not up my way, but the ways of mine enemy. (2 Nephi 4:33)

The hymn of the dead who are sealed in eternal marriage in Isaiah 61 celebrate their clothing.

10 I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels. (Isaiah 61:10)

Mormon equates an involuntary nakedness before God with the final judgement.

5 For behold, when ye shall be brought to see your nakedness before God, and also the glory of God, and the holiness of Jesus Christ, it will kindle a flame of unquenchable fire upon you. (Mormon 9:5)

Jacob does the same thing.

14 Wherefore, we shall have a perfect knowledge of all our guilt, and our uncleanness, and our nakedness; and the righteous shall have a perfect knowledge of their enjoyment, and their righteousness, being clothed with purity, yea, even with the robe of righteousness. (2 Nephi 9:14)

In this world we dress ourselves in facades and masks that hide us from others and often from our Selves. When we do that, we tend to keep those masks on when we pray, and they become a wall between one’s Self and one’s God. The facades sometimes serve some appropriate cultural purpose, but never an honest personal one. The pretenses have to go. So Alma’s asks these questions: are ye stripped of pride? stripped of envy? is there one among you that doth make a mock of his brother, or that heapeth upon him persecutions?

Alma 5:14-24 — LeGrand Baker — engraven upon your countenance

There seems to be 4 dominant themes in these verses.

1) The first, “Have ye spiritually been born of God?” is a clear reference to the blessings of kingship and priesthood promised in Psalms 2 and 110; and repeated in the Beatitudes, Moroni 7 and so many other places in the scriptures. That theme is elaborated on throughout Alma 5 with references to one’s having the right to wear sacral clothing.

2)Another theme is the resurrection and final judgment. Alma asked, “Do ye exercise faith in the redemption of him who created you? Do you look forward with an eye of faith, and view this mortal body raised in immortality, and this corruption raised in incorruption, to stand before God to be judged according to the deeds which have been done in the mortal body?” (v. 15) The Book of Mormon prophets consistently taught that one’s resurrection would precede one’s final judgment. (2 Nephi 9:22, Jacob 6:9, Alma 33:22, Alma 40:21, Mormon 7:6, Mormon 9:13-14) So it appears that Alma’s next questions — about clothing — are about how one will be dressed when one approaches the Saviour to be judged. In his discourse, Alma describes the clothing in one of two ways, which constitute the other two themes of this part of his discourse:

3) The garments of the unrighteous will be stained with blood

4) The garments of the righteous will be spotless and white.

Alma asks, “do ye imagine to yourselves that ye can lie unto the Lord in that day, and say—Lord, our works have been righteous works upon the face of the earth—and that he will save you? (v. 17)

The answer is: “Not likely. It will be jolly hard to make that lie sound even a little bit convincing.” The reason it will be hard is because when one stands before the Saviour to be judged, his resurrection will already have happened. The final judgment comes after we have already received our resurrected bodies. Samuel the Lamanite explained:

15    For behold, he surely must die that salvation may come; yea, it behooveth him and becometh expedient that he dieth, to bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord.
16    Yea, behold, this death bringeth to pass the resurrection, and redeemeth all mankind from the first death—that spiritual death; for all mankind, by the fall of Adam being cut off from the presence of the Lord, are considered as dead, both as to things temporal and to things spiritual. (Helaman 14:15-16)

In D&C 88 the Lord explained how the resurrection works: The first rule is that one’s resurrected body must be compatible with one’s spiritual capacity:

22    For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.
23    And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.
24    And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory; therefore he is not meet for a kingdom of glory. Therefore he must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.

The second rule is that when one is resurrected, the parts of one’s physical body that one claims, are the parts that are compatible with one’s spiritual capacity:

28   They who are [present tense] of a celestial spirit shall receive [future tense] the same body which was [past tense] a natural body; even ye shall receive [future tense] your bodies, and your glory shall be [future tense] that glory by which your bodies are [present tense] quickened.
29   Ye who are quickened [present tense] by a portion of the celestial glory shall then receive [future tense] of the same, even a fulness.
30    And they who are quickened [present tense] by a portion of the terrestrial glory shall then receive [future tense] of the same, even a fulness.
31    And also they who are quickened [present tense] by a portion of the telestial glory shall then receive [future tense] of the same, even a fulness.

As I read that, it says that the glory that now animates one in this life shall be the glory that defines one in the resurrection.

I think what Alma is saying is that at the final judgment, if one is standing before the Saviour with a telestial resurrected body, it will be jolly hard to make the case that one has really kept the celestial law. But Alma describes that situation in terms of one’s clothing, rather than in terms of the nature of one’s body.

Alma asks:

18    Or otherwise, can ye imagine yourselves brought before the tribunal of God with your souls filled with guilt and remorse, having a remembrance of all your guilt, yea, a perfect remembrance of all your wickedness, yea, a remembrance that ye have set at defiance the commandments of God? …
20    I say unto you, can ye think of being saved when you have yielded yourselves to become subjects to the devil?
21   I say unto you, ye will know at that day that ye cannot be saved; for there can no man be saved except his garments are washed white….
22    And now I ask of you, my brethren, how will any of you feel, if ye shall stand before the bar of God, having your garments stained with blood and all manner of filthiness? Behold, what will these things testify against you?
23    Behold will they not testify that ye are murderers, yea, and also that ye are guilty of all manner of wickedness?

It is probable that no one in the congregation had actually committed murder by killing anyone’s physical body. It is for more likely that the murder he was talking about was the same as he would later accuse himself of having committed:

13    Yea, I did remember all my sins and iniquities, for which I was tormented with the pains of hell; yea, I saw that I had rebelled against my God, and that I had not kept his holy commandments.
14    Yea, and I had murdered many of his children, or rather led them away unto destruction; yea, and in fine so great had been my iniquities, that the very thought of coming into the presence of my God did rack my soul with inexpressible horror. (Alma 36:13-14)

If that is so, then the crimes he accused them of, were not only the things they had done of themselves, but also the things they had caused or encouraged others to do.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

In sharp contrast to that imagery, Alma asks,

14    And now behold, I ask of you, my brethren of the church, have ye spiritually been born of God? Have ye received his image in your countenances? Have ye experienced this mighty change in your hearts?
15    Do ye exercise faith in the redemption of him who created you? Do you look forward with an eye of faith, and view this mortal body raised in immortality, and this corruption raised in incorruption, to stand before God to be judged according to the deeds which have been done in the mortal body?
16    I say unto you, can you imagine to yourselves that ye hear the voice of the Lord, saying unto you, in that day: Come unto me ye blessed, for behold, your works have been the works of righteousness upon the face of the earth?…
19    I say unto you, can ye look up to God at that day with a pure heart and clean hands? I say unto you, can you look up, having the image of God engraven upon your countenances?….
21   … there can no man be saved except his garments are washed white; yea, his garments must be purified until they are cleansed from all stain, through the blood of him of whom it has been spoken by our fathers, who should come to redeem his people from their sins. …
24    Behold, my brethren, do ye suppose that such an one can have a place to sit down in the kingdom of God, with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob, and also all the holy prophets, whose garments are cleansed and are spotless, pure and white?

Again, Alma moves his referents from this life to the next with remarkable ease. With reference to this life, he asks: “Have ye received his image in your countenances?” Then with reference to the final judgment he asks again, “Can you look up, having the image of God engraven upon your countenances?”

That immediately brings to mind three quotes. All three describe how one must look in order to be like God. The first is from President McKay who writes about the light that shines from one’s person. The other two are from ancient texts. They, like Alma, describe the clothing one must wear in order to be in the presence of God.

President McKay wrote:

Every man and every person who lives in this world wields an influence, whether for good or for evil. It is not what he says alone; it is not alone what he does. It is what he is. Every man, every person radiates what he or she really is. Every person is a recipient of radiation. The Saviour was conscious of that. Whenever He came into the presence of an individual, He sensed that radiation — whether it was the woman of Samaria with her past life: whether it was the woman who was to be stoned, or the men who were to stone her; whether it was the statesman, Nicodemus, or one of the lepers. He was conscious of the radiation from the individual. And to a degree so are you. and so am I. It is what we are and what we radiate that affects the people around us. (David O. McKay, Radiation of the Individual,”The Instructor, October, 1964, p. 373-374.)

The first of the ancient texts is an excerpt from Enoch’s sode experience:

And I fell prone and bowed down to the Lord, and the Lord with his lips said to me: “Have courage, Enoch, do not fear, arise and stand before my face into eternity.” And the archistratege Michael lifted me up, and led me to before the Lord’s face. And the Lord said to his servants tempting them: “Let Enoch stand before my face into eternity,” and the glorious ones bowed down to the Lord, and said: “Let Enoch go according to Thy word.” And the Lord said to Michael: “Go and take Enoch from out his earthly garments, and anoint him with my sweet ointment,[ footnote: “oil” ] and put him into the garments of My glory.” And Michael did thus, as the Lord told him. He anointed me, and dressed me, and the appearance of that ointment is more than the great light, and his ointment is like sweet dew, and its smell mild, shining like the sun’s ray, and I looked at myself, and was like one of his glorious ones. (Secrets of Enoch, 22:4-10 from R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, Vol. 2 [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1913], 2:443)

The second ancient text is from the Hymn of the Pearl that is found in the Acts of Thomas. The Hymn of the Pearl is a perfect example of the cosmic myth.(If you don’t have a copy of The Pearl, I have sent it along as an attachment.)

This typed copy has additions in brackets and is slightly changed from its printed source, which is: Hdgar Hennecki (Edited by Wilhelm Schneemelcher, English translation edited by R. McL. Wilson), New Testament Apocrypha, Writings Relating to the Apostles; Apocalypses and Related Subjects, Vol. 2, (Westminster Press, Philadelphia), 498-504.

There are two things he says about the sacred garment that especially remind one of Alma’s “the image of God engraven upon your countenances.” They are: “the likeness of the king of kings was completely embroidered all over it,” and “I saw that all over it the motions of knowledge were stirring.”

Near its beginning, before the hero leaves his home “in the east” (that is, among the gods), he describes his royal garments this way:

9 And they took off from me the splendid robe
Which in their love they had wrought for me,
10 And the purple toga,
Which was woven to the measure of my stature,
[That it was woven to fit him becomes important later on]
11 And they made with me a covenant
And wrote it in my heart, that I might not forget:
[That the covenant is written in his heart is also important later]
12 “If thou go down to Egypt
And bring the one pearl
[Many scholars believe the pearl is the boy himself ]
13 Which is in the midst of the sea,
In the abode of the loud-breathing Serpent,
[some translations say “dragon.” ]
14 Thou shalt put on again thy splendid robe
And thy toga which lies over it,
15 And with thy brother, our next in rank,
Thou shalt be heir in our kingdom.”
[Then, near the end of the poem, after he has fulfilled the mission he was sent to do, his garment returns to him and he is clothed in it in preparation for his return to his Father’s home.]
72 And my splendid robe which I had taken off,
And my toga with which it was wrapped about,
73 From the heights of Hyrcania
My parents sent thither
74 By the hand of their treasurers,
Who for their faithfulness were trusted therewith.
75 Indeed I remembered no more its dignity,
For I had left it in my childhood in my father’s house,
76 But suddenly, when I saw it over against me,
The splendid robe became like me, as my reflection in a mirror;
77 I saw it wholly in me,
And in it I saw myself quite apart from myself,
78 So that we were two in distinction
And again one in a single form.
[That is, he sees himself as two people in one. There is the person who had
the experiences on the earth, and the person of glory who he was, is, and will be.
These two come together to make the one person that is his total Self. ]
79 And the treasurers too
Who had brought it to me, I saw in like manner,
80 That they were two of a single form,
For one sign of the king was impressed upon them,
81 [There is a tear in the original manuscript here so it cannot be read. Apparently it says, referring to the king,]
He who restored to me through them
my pledge [covenant] and my riches,
82 My splendid robe adorned
Gleaming in glorious colours,
83 With gold and beryls,
Chalcedonies and opals,
84 And sardonyxes of varied colour,
This also made ready in its grandeur,
85 And with stones of adamant
Were all its seams fastened.
86 And the likeness of the king of kings
Was completely embroidered all over it
[That is important. The rob (the inner garment) had symbols on it
which represented the boy’s being like God.]
87 And like stones of sapphire again in its
Grandeur resplendent with manifold hues.
88 And again I saw that all over it
The motions of knowledge were Stirring.
89 And I saw too
That it was preparing as for speech.
90 I heard the sound of its songs
Which it whispered at its descent:
91 “I belong to the most valiant servant,
For whom they reared me before my father,
92 And I perceived also in myself
That my stature grew according to his labours.”
[While the boy was wallowing in the muck of this world, the robe
had to grow so it would still be able to fit the boy when he returned.
His experiences were the source of this growth.]
93 And with its royal movements
It poured itself entirely toward me,
94 And in the hands of its bringers
It hastened, that I might take it;
95 And my love also spurred me
To run to meet it and receive it,
96 And I stretched out and took it.
With the beauty of its colours I adorned myself.
97 And my toga of brilliant colours
I drew completely over myself.
98 I clothed myself with it and mounted up
To the gate of greeting and homage.
99 I bowed my head and worshipped
The splendour of the father who had sent the robe to me,
100 Whose commands I had accomplished,
As he also had done what he promised.

Alma 5:10-15 — LeGand Baker — meaning of hope

Alma 5:10-15
10     And now I ask of you on what conditions are they saved? Yea, what grounds had they to hope for salvation? What is the cause of their being loosed from the bands of death, yea, and also the chains of hell?
11     Behold, I can tell you — did not my father Alma believe in the words which were delivered by the mouth of Abinadi? And was he not a holy prophet? Did he not speak the words of God, and my father Alma believe them?
12     And according to his faith there was a mighty change wrought in his heart. Behold I say unto you that this is all true.
13     And behold, he preached the word unto your fathers, and a mighty change was also wrought in their hearts, and they humbled themselves and put their trust in the true and living God. And behold, they were faithful until the end; therefore they were saved.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

In verses 10 to 13 Alma does two things that are independent, yet they are the same. He answers the question, “on what conditions are they saved?” then he repeats the question differently “what grounds had they to hope for salvation?” The significance of the latter is that he is not using “hope” to suggest uncertainty or just simply wishing really hard. Rather, he uses “hope” to represent their sure knowledge of their ultimate salvation. That usage is demonstrated by his clarification in the next two questions:

“What is the cause of their being loosed from the bands of death, yea, and also

[what was the cause of their being loosed from] the chains of hell?”

Let’s look at what he says first, that is, at his discussion of the conditions on which they were saved. After that, lets examine his use of “hope.”

Alma lays out the conditions of salvation in a simple logical form, with each idea building on, and presupposing the ones that go before it. He does that with rhetorical questions, but the questions do not get in the way of the logic.

ON WHAT CONDITIONS ARE THEY SAVED?

10     And now I ask of you on what conditions are they saved? Yea, what grounds had they to hope for salvation? What is the cause of their being loosed from the bands of death, yea, and also the chains of hell?
11     Behold, I can tell you–did not my father Alma believe in the words which were delivered by the mouth of Abinadi? And was he not a holy prophet? Did he not speak the words of God, and my father Alma believe them?
12     And according to his faith there was a mighty change wrought in his heart. Behold I say unto you that this is all true.
13     And behold, he preached the word unto your fathers, and a mighty change was also wrought in their hearts, and they humbled themselves and put their trust in the true and living God. And behold, they were faithful until the end; therefore they were saved.

Let’s analyze that closely. Alma II begins by describing the conversion of his father Alma I.

1a. my father Alma believe in the words which were delivered by the mouth of Abinadi?

2a. according to his faith [pistis = making and keeping covenants]

3a. there was a mighty change wrought in his heart.

4a. he preached the word unto your fathers [Sharing the gospel is a part of the covenants, and therefore one’s receiving salvation is partly dependent on one’s sharing the gospel.]

Then Alma II repeats the sequence with reference to the fathers of the people in his audience. The sequence is the same, but some of the items are assumed rather than stated.

1b. [The first assumed point is that their parents believed the prophet, Alma I]

2b. [The next is that they made covenants at the waters of Mormon]

3b. a mighty change was also wrought in their hearts,

4b. [their covenant at the waters if Mormon had been that they would support each other and the kingdom. This they did by living the law of consecration in the wilderness, and by trusting God to deliver them from the Lamanites. Alma describes that sequence by saying:] and they humbled themselves and put their trust in the true and living God.

Then he draws a conclusion.

5     And behold, they were faithful until the end; therefore they were saved.

His statement: “they were faithful until the end; therefore they were saved,” asks the question: How does one understand the word “end?” The phrase we usually use is to express that same idea is “endure to the end.”

“End “ has several meanings. The one we usually use means the conclusion, to finish, completion, closure. So we often equate the phrase “to endure to the end” to mean “to stick to it until one gets dead.” That works well, but may not always be correct. For one thing, one may have missions to perform after one gets dead. (An example is my friend who is well along in years who says he wants to die so he can get on with life.) But there is another reason it may not always be correct. “End” is a noun that means a plan or a design, as in, “We will work toward this end.” If that is the meaning, then “to endure to the end” would mean to stick to it until one has accomplished the plan — or until one has fulfilled one’s covenant assignments. Other meanings of “end” suggest the same thing. “End” may also mean purpose, goal, objective. In that case “to endure to the end” would mean to stick to it until one has fulfilled one’s objective — that is an equally precise way of saying until one has fulfilled one’s covenants. (Actually, I’m not at all sure how relevant that last bit is in describing one’s life in this world, because for the most part one’s getting the job done and one’s getting out of this world are pretty much equivalents.)

Since it seems clear that Alma was teaching that in this instance, their assurance of salvation came before they were dead, one may assume his statement, “they humbled themselves and put their trust in the true and living God. And behold, they were faithful until the end; therefore they were saved” is about this life, rather than their deaths. That brings us back to his other point in verse 10.

YEA, WHAT GROUNDS HAD THEY TO HOPE FOR SALVATION?

What does he mean by “hope.”

The answer seems to be in the next set of questions:

14     And now behold, I ask of you, my brethren of the church, have ye spiritually been born of God? Have ye received his image in your countenances? Have ye experienced this mighty change in your hearts?
15     Do ye exercise faith in the redemption of him who created you? Do you look forward with an eye of faith, and view this mortal body raised in immortality, and this corruption raised in incorruption, to stand before God to be judged according to the deeds which have been done in the mortal body?(Alma 5:14-15).

It seems to me that Alma is using “hope” the same way Mormon and Moroni use it at the conclusion of the Book of Mormon.

Mormon’s great discourse is about the transitional steps between being “the peaceable followers of Christ,” and becoming “the sons of God.” (Moroni 7:3 & 48) As such, it is a commentary on the Beatitude,”And blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.” (3 Nephi 12:9.)

Moroni 7 may be read many ways. For a teenager or a new member of the church it says one should believe in the Saviour (faith), believe that keeping his commandants will bring blessings (hope), and be nice to people (charity). As one grows in the gospel the words retain their meanings but they take on a maturity that gives them greater depth and spirituality, that informs both their attitudes and their actions.

However if one accepts that the word “faith” means the same thing in the Book of Mormon that it means in the New Testament — that it has the same meaning as the Greek “pistis,” which denotes the token of the covenant — then that sets Mormon’s sermon in a temple/covenant context — and in that context the language of the sermon is changed altogether. When one reads it that way, one also notices that the discussion of faith, hope, and charity is repeated three times as the epitome of the temple text that is the Book of Mormon: Ether 12, Moroni 7, and Moroni 10.

An example of “faith” as the token of a covenant, is the phrase “faith in Christ.” The Saviour is the personification of the Father’s covenant (Moroni 10:32-33), he is the fulfillment of that covenant, and he is also the token of that covenant. For that reason, when one acts or approaches the Father in the name of Christ, one is not only using the only name that brings salvation; but one is also evoking the only token that validates the covenants between one’s self and our Heavenly Father.

If one reads “faith” in Moroni 7 that way, then it also changes the language so that “hope” means exactly what Mormon says it means:

41     And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise. (Moroni 7:41)

Similarly, charity means just what Mormon says that means:

47 But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him.

I understand Mormon’s saying that “charity is the pure love of Christ,” is to say that charity is the love the Saviour has for us, and also that charity is the love we have for him, as well as the love we have for his children — and that all those things, though identifiably different, are in fact only one kind of love.

Mormon concluded his sermon by using hope the same way Alma used it, to mean an assurance of things to come:

48 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart, that ye may be filled with this love, which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ; that ye may become the sons of God; that when he shall appear we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is; that we may have this hope; that we may be purified even as he is pure. Amen. (Moroni 7:47-48)

In that chapter, and elsewhere, I understand:

“Faith” to mean making one’s life a living token of one’s covenants.

“Hope” to mean one’s living one’s life as though the blessings of the covenants were already fulfilled.

“Charity” to be the love one shares with the Saviour and his children — that love is the ultimate eternal sealing power that binds one’s Self with God, and that also binds one’s Self to all the other people whom one loves. (As in the model I recently suggested that shows how each of us is connected with everyone else.)

If “hope” means living one’s life as though the blessings of the covenants were already fulfilled, then the question of whether they were first saved then died, or first died then saved, becomes a moot question. Whether they had finished the assignment they received at the Council, or still had a lot to do after they left this life, is also beside the point. If the Holy Ghost had taught them to hope, as the prophets use that word, then they were comfortable in the assurance of their salvation. And even if there were more assignments to be fulfilled in the next world it could still be said of them, “behold, they were faithful until the end; therefore they were saved.”

If that is what Alma meant when he asked, “what grounds had they to hope for salvation?” Then the next questions he directed to his listeners take on a very literal meaning:

14     And now behold, I ask of you, my brethren of the church, have ye spiritually been born of God? Have ye received his image in your countenances? Have ye experienced this mighty change in your hearts?
15     Do ye exercise faith in the redemption of him who created you? Do you look forward with an eye of faith, and view this mortal body raised in immortality, and this corruption raised in incorruption, to stand before God to be judged according to the deeds which have been done in the mortal body?

Alma 5:1-7 — LeGrand Baker — spiritual life and death

There is a fun bit of information given by Alma in v. 4 and 5. Speaking of the people who followed his father Alma, he says:

they were delivered out of the hands of the people of king Noah,
they were brought into bondage by the hands of the Lamanites
they were in captivity, and again the Lord did deliver
we were brought into this land
we began to establish the church of God throughout this land also.

Bible scholars who analyze that same sort of language in Acts, conclude that when Luke writes, “they traveled” he was giving second hand information, but when he writes “we traveled” that indicates Luke was traveling with Paul and his party. If we can use that same criterion here, then it is apparent that Alma II was not with is father at the Waters of Mormon, or when they were held captive by the priests of Noah, but was with him when the Lord delivered them from the Lamanites the final time. That indicates to me that Alma II was born just a short time before his father’s people came to Zarahemla.

6a.    And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, you that belong to this church,

An important key to reading the Book of Mormon is to know the audience to whom a sermon is addressed. An example is that in a sermon, the repetition of the phrase “my beloved brethren” indicates the speaker is in a formal priesthood gathering. Jacob’ sermon at the temple (ch. 2) uses that phrase repeatedly, as does Alma 7, and Mormon’s sermon in Moroni 7.

In contrast, King Benjamin, in Mosiah 8, addresses “My friends and brethren, my kindred and my people,” then he doesn’t use the word “brethren” again. The Saviour’s sermon at the temple in 3 Nephi 9 to 17 is spoken to families — “men, women, and children.” In 3 Nephi 27 the Saviour is speaking to his disciples who “were gathered together and were united in mighty prayer and fasting.” That information is important when one reads the sermons. The fact the Saviour’s sermon at the temple was spoken to and about families is very important in understanding that sermon’s temple connotations.

In Alma 5, the prophet was talking to both members and non-members of his church, but this was not primarily an instructional sermon to the non-members. The first part of his sermon is directed to wayward members of the church — and even though he doesn’t beat around the bush, he is careful not to speak too clearly. Much of what he writes is in code. If one assumes that Alma’s audience understood the code and were not just hearing pretty poetic phrases, then that also tells us a great deal about his audience. Let me show you what I mean.

6b.   have you sufficiently retained in remembrance the captivity of your fathers? Yea, and have you sufficiently retained in remembrance his mercy and long-suffering towards them?

This may be read as an historical reference to the trouble they had with the Lamanites, as he had just reminded them. But his next sentence suggests he was referring to something far more important than that.

6c.   And moreover, have ye sufficiently retained in remembrance that he has delivered their souls from hell?

In a quick read, an easy way to deal with that statement is to observe that the words “he has delivered their souls from hell,” might be that he was talking about people who were then dead, but that isn’t what he said he was talking about.

His words can be read as Hebrew poetry where he simply repeats his same idea in different ways. And when it is read that way it is very beautiful. But, as is often true with Hebrew poetry, the second statement is not a repitition of the first idea, but an expansion of it. What Alma says is:

6b-7a.   have ye sufficiently retained in remembrance that he has delivered their souls from hell? Behold, he changed their hearts; yea, he awakened them out of a deep sleep, and they awoke unto God.

Alma was describing the power of their conversion — “he changed their hearts.”

As I’ve mentioned before, in the ancient world the heart was understood to be the seat of both one’s intellect and one’s emotions. So to change their hearts did not mean just to change their feelings and attitudes, it meant to change their thought patterns and their systems of belief. Changes in one’s academic thinking are as much a part of the conversion process as are changes in one’s sense of kindness and compassion. He explains:

7b.   Behold, he changed their hearts; yea, he awakened them out of a deep sleep, and they awoke unto God.

The notion of awakening has an important meaning in the scriptures. It is often found in a couplet: “Awake and arise,” as in 2 Nephi 1:1, and Moroni 10:31.

This is not just a poetic couplet, the words “awake” and “arise” have different meanings. That difference was emphasized by Paul, who wrote, “Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.” (Ephesians 5:14.) There, Paul was not writing to people who were physically dead and in the grave. The symptoms of the death he was talking about will melt away as one assimilate’s the light that shines from the presence of the Saviour.

To “awake” suggests becoming fully cognizant of that light, while to “arise” suggests becoming physically alive in it.

Isaiah equated “awake” with the notions of kingship and priesthood when he wrote, “Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments.” (Isaiah 52:1)That is quoted twice in the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 8:24-25.)(3 Nephi 20:36-38.), and paraphrased by Moroni who emphasize that same connotation but extended it to include the idea of eternal families. (Moroni 10:31 & Isaiah 54:1-3)

The same idea is expressed a bit differently by Isaiah where, just a few verses before that, he says: “Awake, awake, stand up.” (Isaiah 51:17, In 2 Nephi 8:17-24 it is quoted without a chapter break.)

The words, “stand up,” are significant, for in Old Testament times one stood to make a covenant. (2 Kings 23:1-3) And that practice may help one understand the significance of Alma’s words:

7b.   Behold, he changed their hearts; yea, he awakened them out of a deep sleep, and they awoke unto God.

Alma continues by describing what he meant when he says “they awoke unto God.”

7c.   Behold, they were in the midst of darkness; nevertheless, their souls were illuminated by the light of the everlasting word;

That reads as an extension of the previous sentence, rather than a repetition of the same idea.

It is universally understood that when one’s eyes are closed, as in sleep, one is in darkness. An interesting aside is that if one is asleep and dreaming, part of the dream is that there is enough light to see. But the light by which one sees in a dream is a fantasy, just as the dream is. The actual darkness from having one’s eyes closed is not perceived in the dream even though it is the reality. Walking in darkness without the light of the gospel is like that. To awaken is to open one’s eyes and to be in a world of real light.

Alma says, “their souls were illuminated by the light of the everlasting word,” but words, by themselves, are not luminous. And whereas the words in the previous sentence (heart, sleep, awake) have a physical connotation, this has a spiritual meaning. It says “their souls were illuminated.” Steve Stay suggested to me that it might more accurately reflect Alma’s meaning if it read: “by the light of the Everlasting Word.” I suspect he is correct, for Alma seems to be expressing the same idea as John’s:

1   In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2   The same was in the beginning with God.
3   All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4   In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5   And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. (John 1:1-5)

The idea is the same as quoted above from Paul: “Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.” (Ephesians 5:14.)

Alma continues:

7d.   yea, they were encircled about by the bands of death, and the chains of hell, and an everlasting destruction did await them.

The death Alma was talking about was not physical death, nor was the hell one that would follow mortal life. Both the death and the hell he was talking about were experienced during this life. Fortunately we have Alma’s own words to tell us precisely what he meant. When he was speaking to Zeezrom, he explained that the phrase, “chains of hell,” meant not knowing the mysteries of God.

9   And now Alma began to expound these things unto him, saying: It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.
10   And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full.
11   And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell. (Alma 12:9-11)

The scary thing is that for Alma, “the chains of hell” are not a condition of those who have never known the gospel, but are a condition of those who have forgotten — who once knew, or who once might have known, and have chosen not to know.

It seems to me that it is safe to assume that the people whom Alma was speaking to in Zarahemla understood the connotations of Alma’s words, and therefore understood the full impact of his message. If that is so, then it seems to me that it is safe to assume he was addressing a temple worshiping people. If that is so, then knowing who his audience was sheds an important light on what he was saying to them — and to us — and why he was saying it.

Alma 3:26-27 — LeGrand Baker — meaning of ‘works’

26    And in one year were thousands and tens of thousands of souls sent to the eternal world, that they might reap their rewards according to their works, whether they were good or whether they were bad, to reap eternal happiness or eternal misery, according to the spirit which they listed to obey, whether it be a good spirit or a bad one.
27    For every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey, and this according to the words of the spirit of prophecy; therefore let it be according to the truth. And thus endeth the fifth year of the reign of the judges (Alma 3:26-27).

This is one of those problematic passages that it is easier to ignore than to deal with. But to ignore it creates multiple problems in understanding the Book of Mormon.

The difficulty is that it seems impossible to square this concept of afterlife with our understanding of the three degrees of glory, or even with the doctrine of a post-life spirit world that is divided into a prison and a paradise. We understand that as soon as the dead repent and have their temple work done for then, they can get out of spirit prison and to go to paradise. Mormon’s appraisal (these are Mormon’s words, not Alma’s) may suggest a paradise and a spirit prison, but because there is no suggestion about a way out of the spirit prison, the ancient BofM doctrine appears to be different from ours. Thus giving rise to an idea that I have heard since my youth, that the people of the Book of Mormon did not understand all the “higher” principles of the gospel. That list usually included temple work, eternal marriage, salvation for the dead, and the three degrees of glory. I believe they understood the gospel in its fullness. So this little essay is an attempt on my part to say that Mormon and the Book of Mormon prophets who taught the same thing knew exactly what they were talking about, and what they wrote is very serious indeed.

For example, the idea that one who is dead can repent and will receive all the blessings the repentant can receive is clearly taught in the Old Testament, Especially in Psalms and Isaiah. Both books are quoted in the Book of Mormon. The last third of Psalm 22 is about the Saviour’s going to “the great congregation” where he taught in the spirit world. Isaiah 61 is about the principle of salvation for the dead. (It is paraphrased extensively in D&C 138, and quoted in verse 42) The Saviour also paraphrased it in the Beatitudes (“Blessed are they that mourn for they shall be comforted.). His doing so presupposes that his audience understood his reference. I think that is sufficient evidence that the doctrine was understood by the authors of the Book of Mormon.

So that presents the dilemma: “If Mormon understood the post-earth life spirit world and the doctrine of salvation for the dead, why didn’t he say so in this passage?” I suppose the answer is this: “That doctrine is not what Mormon was talking about.” If that answer is correct, then we are left with the question: “Then what was Mormon talking about.”

26    And in one year were thousands and tens of thousands of souls sent to the eternal world, that they might reap their rewards according to their works, whether they were good or whether they were bad, to reap eternal happiness or eternal misery, according to the spirit which they listed to obey, whether it be a good spirit or a bad one.
27   For every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey, and this according to the words of the spirit of prophecy; therefore let it be according to the truth. And thus endeth the fifth year of the reign of the judges (Alma 3:26-27).

In the Oxford English Dictionary, the first definition of “list” as a verb uses “lust” as a synonym. The second is “listen.” The third is to put a border around, or to enclose. The fourth is that the verb “list” is the same word as enlist. It also further clarifies the meaning of “enclose.” It reads, “In senses 3 and 4 the word is now taken chiefly as an aphetic form of enlist and is written ‘list.” In every instance, it represents a studied desire possess or to actively belong. Mormon’s phrase, “the spirit which they listed to obey,” fits with all of those definitions.

It establishes a relationship between a master and a subordinate. That relationship is further emphasized by the entire clause, “For every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey”

The idea of being employed by a superior is further clarified by the clause, “that they might reap their rewards according to their works.” So Mormon is not talking about people who are acting on their own volition, but about people who are employed by someone who they are willing to obey.

What they are employed to do is only defined as their “works.” So the entire passage pivots on the meaning of the word “works.” Strong does not help much here. The Greek noun translated “works” simply means “that with which any one is occupied,… that which one undertakes to do…, any thing accomplished…, an act, deed, thing done…” So if one is going to discover its meaning one has to examine the way it is used. When one does that, then its meaning becomes much more explicit. In many places in the scriptures, “works” is a reference to either priesthood ordinances or to keeping covenants.

“Works” as ordinances is most apparent when Alma is explaining that Adam and Eve were taught by angels how to pray and how to enter the presence of God.

29   Therefore he [God] sent angels to converse with them, who caused men to behold of his glory.
30   And they began from that time forth to call on his name; therefore God conversed with men, and made known unto them the plan of redemption, which had been prepared from the foundation of the world; and this he made known unto them according to their faith [the tokens of the covenants] and repentance and their holy works [ordinances]. (Alma 12:29-30)

But it is apparent that it is not limited to the ordinances we receive, but seems to apply to any act associated with the power and authority of God. Moroni uses it that way.

17   And now, as I, Moroni, said I could not make a full account of these things which are written, therefore it sufficeth me to say that Jesus showed himself unto this man in the spirit, even after the manner and in the likeness of the same body even as he showed himself unto the Nephites.
18   And he ministered unto him even as he ministered unto the Nephites; and all this, that this man might know that he was God, because of the many great works which the Lord had showed unto him. (Ether 3:17-18)

Three passages from the gospel of John make that meaning very clear.

3   Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works [exercise of priesthood power] of God should be made manifest in him.
4   I must work the works [exercise of priesthood power] of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
5   As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.(John 9:3-5)

and

25   Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works [exercise of priesthood power] that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me. (John 10:25)

and

10   Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works [exercise of priesthood power].
11   Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ [exercise of priesthood power] sake.
12   Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works [exercise of priesthood power] that I do shall he do also; and greater works [exercise of priesthood power] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
13   And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. (John 14:10-13)

Perhaps the most conclusive evidence of that is the way “works” is used by James. There he shows the relationship between faith and works. The word translated “faith” is pistis, which is, as Paul says, “the evidence” of things unseen. It means an evidence of fidelity, or the token of a covenant.

17   Even so faith [Here James uses the Greek word, pistis – the tokens of the covenants], if it hath not works [the ordinances], is dead, being alone.
18   Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19   Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20   But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21   Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22   Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? (James 2:17-22.)

Alma certainly used it that way. In the phrase “works of righteousness,” “Righteousness” was, no doubt, zedek which means correctness, especially in temple things.

16   I say unto you, can you imagine to yourselves that ye hear the voice of the Lord, saying unto you, in that day: Come unto me ye blessed, for behold, your works have been the works of righteousness upon the face of the earth?
17   Or do ye imagine to yourselves that ye can lie unto the Lord in that day, and say—Lord, our works have been righteous works upon the face of the earth—and that he will save you?
18   Or otherwise, can ye imagine yourselves brought before the tribunal of God with your souls filled with guilt and remorse, having a remembrance of all your guilt, yea, a perfect remembrance of all your wickedness, yea, a remembrance that ye have set at defiance the commandments of God?
19   I say unto you, can ye look up to God at that day with a pure heart and clean hands? I say unto you, can you look up, having the image of God engraven upon your countenances? (Alma 5:16-17)

and

24   And see that ye have faith, hope, and charity, and then ye will always abound in good works.
25   And may the Lord bless you, and keep your garments spotless, that ye may at last be brought to sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the holy prophets who have been ever since the world began, having your garments spotless even as their garments are spotless, in the kingdom of heaven to go no more out. (Alma 7:24-25)

Alma gives the qualifications of those who were ordained by Heavenly Father at the Council in Heaven as having “exceeding faith and good works.”

And this is the manner after which they were ordained—being called and prepared from the foundation of the world according to the foreknowledge of God, on account of their exceeding faith and good works; in the first place being left to choose good or evil; therefore they having chosen good, and exercising exceedingly great faith, are called with a holy calling, yea, with that holy calling which was prepared with, and according to, a preparatory redemption for such. (Alma 13:3)

Throughout the Book of Mormon, “works” is also used to denote the proper exercise of priesthood power. The Lamanite queen is quoted as having used the word in that way.

And she said unto him: The servants of my husband have made it known unto me that thou art a prophet of a holy God, and that thou hast power to do many mighty works in his name; (Alma 19:4)

Samuel the Lamanite used it the same way.

And may God grant, in his great fulness, that men might be brought unto repentance and good works, that they might be restored unto grace for grace, according to their works. (Helaman 12:24)

As does the Saviour at the conclusion of the Beatitudes.

14   Verily, verily, I say unto you, I give unto you to be the light of this people. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid.

15   Behold, do men light a candle and put it under a bushel? Nay, but on a candlestick, and it giveth light to all that are in the house;
16   Therefore let your light so shine before this people, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.
17   Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. I am not come to destroy but to fulfil; (3 Nephi 12:14-17)

King Benjamin uses the phrase “good works” to mean the things one must do to have eternal life.

Therefore, I would that ye should be steadfast and immovable, always abounding in good works, that Christ, the Lord God Omnipotent, may seal you his, that you may be brought to heaven, that ye may have everlasting salvation and eternal life, through the wisdom, and power, and justice, and mercy of him who created all things, in heaven and in earth, who is God above all. Amen. (Mosiah 5:15)

However, the Book of Mormon also uses the word “works” to mean the criterion for going to hell. The word is used to refer to the most unrighteous covenantal relationships.

And it came to pass as he was thus pondering—being much cast down because of the wickedness of the people of the Nephites, their secret works of darkness, and their murderings, and their plunderings, and all manner of iniquities—and it came to pass as he was thus pondering in his heart, behold, a voice came unto him saying: (Helaman 10:3)

The Saviour explained,

10   And if it so be that the church is built upon my gospel then will the Father show forth his own works in it.
11   But if it be not built upon my gospel, and is built upon the works of men, or upon the works of the devil, verily I say unto you they have joy in their works for a season, and by and by the end cometh, and they are hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence there is no return.
12   For their works do follow them, for it is because of their works that they are hewn down; therefore remember the things that I have told you.
13   Behold I have given unto you my gospel, and this is the gospel which I have given unto you—that I came into the world to do the will of my Father, because my Father sent me.
14   And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross; and after that I had been lifted up upon the cross, that I might draw all men unto me, that as I have been lifted up by men even so should men be lifted up by the Father, to stand before me, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil—
15   And for this cause have I been lifted up; therefore, according to the power of the Father I will draw all men unto me, that they may be judged according to their works.….
32   But behold, it sorroweth me because of the fourth generation from this generation, for they are led away captive by him even as was the son of perdition; for they will sell me for silver and for gold, and for that which moth doth corrupt and which thieves can break through and steal.
33   And in that day will I visit them, even in turning their works upon their own heads. (3 Nephi 27:1-33)

That prophecy is shown to have been fulfilled by Mormon’s description of the Nephite apostasy.

27  And it came to pass that when two hundred and ten years had passed away there were many churches in the land; yea, there were many churches which professed to know the Christ, and yet they did deny the more parts of his gospel, insomuch that they did receive all manner of wickedness, and did administer that which was sacred unto him to whom it had been forbidden because of unworthiness. (4 Nephi 1:27)

Given this understanding of “works,” that is, that is that “works” means the Satanic activities of humans, then a whole series of scriptures in the Book of Mormon takes on an entirely new meaning.

10   Even this mortal shall put on immortality, and this corruption shall put on incorruption, and shall be brought to stand before the bar of God, to be judged of him according to their works whether they be good or whether they be evil—
11   If they be good, to the resurrection of endless life and happiness; and if they be evil, to the resurrection of endless damnation, being delivered up to the devil, who hath subjected them, which is damnation—(Mosiah 16:10-11)

And Alma’s famous discussion of justice and mercy.

2   I say unto thee, my son, that the plan of restoration is requisite with the justice of God; for it is requisite that all things should be restored to their proper order. Behold, it is requisite and just, according to the power and resurrection of Christ, that the soul of man should be restored to its body, and that every part of the body should be restored to itself.
3   And it is requisite with the justice of God that men should be judged according to their works; and if their works were good in this life, and the desires of their hearts were good, that they should also, at the last day, be restored unto that which is good.
4   And if their works are evil they shall be restored unto them for evil. Therefore, all things shall be restored to their proper order, every thing to its natural frame—mortality raised to immortality, corruption to incorruption—raised to endless happiness to inherit the kingdom of God, or to endless misery to inherit the kingdom of the devil, the one on one hand, the other on the other—
5   The one raised to happiness according to his desires of happiness, or good according to his desires of good; and the other to evil according to his desires of evil; for as he has desired to do evil all the day long even so shall he have his reward of evil when the night cometh. (Alma 41:2-5)

The Book of Mormon makes little or no distinction between one whose works are overtly wicked and those who pretend to righteousness. That is shown in this famous passage spoken by the Saviour.

22   Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23     And then will I profess unto them: I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (3 Nephi 14:22-23)

But it is reiterated in Mormon’s great discourse on faith, hope, and charity.

4   And now my brethren, I judge these things of you because of your peaceable walk with the children of men.
5   For I remember the word of God which saith by their works ye shall know them; for if their works be good, then they are good also.
6   For behold, God hath said a man being evil cannot do that which is good; for if he offereth a gift, or prayeth unto God, except he shall do it with real intent it profiteth him nothing. (Moroni 7:4-6)

Without using the word “works” the Prophet Joseph taught the same principle.

34   Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?
35     Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—
36  That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37   That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man. (D&C 121:34-37)

Conclusion.

Given the consistency in the use of the word “works,” and the widespread consistency in the Book of Mormon doctrine about our being judged by our works, I think it is reasonable to assert that our passage in Alma does not imply that Mormon did not understand either the doctrines of salvation for the dead or of the three degrees of glory. What it does imply is that people who, with full understanding of what they are doing, toy with sacred ordinances and covenants are in permanent and very serious trouble.

Alma 1:20-33 — LeGrand Baker with Tyson Hill – meaning of equality

These verses, in the first chapter of Alma, contain another of those amazingly profound statements that Mormon passes over as though there was nothing extraordinary about it. This time it is his definition of equality.

The notion that somehow all people are equal comes from very deep roots within our western culture. But it always sits in juxtaposition to the cold reality that people are not really equal at all. Let me give you a quick review of the ideas of equality that are a part of our western heritage. George Orwell’ phrase in Animal Farm, may not be an eternal truth, but it is certainly an accurate appraisal of this world’s reality: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

1. From our present Jewish version of the Law of Moses, we are taught that Jehovah is the God of everybody, but that he loves some much more than he loves others. That was not only true between Israelites and Gentiles, but between Israelites as well. For example, the Law, as we have it, provided that in ancient Israel, if a man were unable to pay his debts, he and his family could be enslaved by his creditor.

2. From the ancient Greeks we have inherited the tradition of participatory government. But the ancient Greek democracy was limited to the elite.

3. From the Romans we inherited our notion of equality before the law, but that was also a selective equality, based on wealth and political status.

4. The New Testament teaches us that we should love one another and submit to authority, and those doctrines were soon turned into a rationale for oppression.

5. Observing the almost universal use of religion to oppress the masses, the philosopher/historian, Will Durant, believed that religion was an invention of the aristocracy to control and weigh down the masses. He used the Christianity of the Dark Ages to make his point. He wrote that the poor were taught that if they would endure their poverty and be subservient in this world, then they would have glorious mansions in the next world. He believed that this tactic had been used by the elite of every ancient culture, and noted that the upper classes were always eager to guarantee to the lower classes every wealth and pleasure they could hope for in the next world – in exchange for their willingness to tolerate poverty in this world.

6. Modern egalitarianism is based on that same assumption. Rousseau taught that equality was impossible because the natural human motivation is avarice and self-aggrandizement. He insisted that the best that could be hoped for was an imposed equanimity, with a self-defined and self-appointed moral elite controlling government, and the powers of both production and distribution. Communism and socialism are variations of his thinking. The problem is that when the same group controls government, production, and distribution, a two-cast system is established that belies the whole notion of a self-appointed moral elite.

7. As I observed two weeks ago, Jefferson believed equality meant that all people had the same innate sense of right and wrong, and upon that principle he justified a government created and elected by the people – believing that a government elected by the masses would have the same sense of right and wrong as the masses who created and elected it. There was nothing in Jefferson’s beliefs that suggested that all people had the same aptitudes or abilities. (See: Gary Wills, Inventing America, Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence). He left it to American rugged individualism to sort out the practical implications of that equality.

8. Since Jefferson’s time, our society has invented several new slogan-like definitions of equality. They sound good, but have little practical meaning. “Equal opportunity,” and “equal rights” are concepts written into our laws, but not clearly defined; fought over in the courts, but never resolved; and thus they have become great political footballs.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Into that maze of conflict between philosophy and reality, Mormon quietly introduces the only fully rational definition of equality I have ever found.

26   And when the priests left their labor to impart the word of God unto the people, the people also left their labors to hear the word of God. And when the priest had imparted unto them the word of God they all returned again diligently unto their labors; and the priest, not esteeming himself above his hearers, for the preacher was no better than the hearer, neither was the teacher any better than the learner; and thus they were all equal, and they did all labor, every man according to his strength.
27  And they did impart of their substance, every man according to that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and the afflicted; and they did not wear costly apparel, yet they were neat and comely.
28  And thus they did establish the affairs of the church; and thus they began to have continual peace again, notwithstanding all their persecutions.
29  And now, because of the steadiness of the church they began to be exceedingly rich, having abundance of all things whatsoever they stood in need—an abundance of flocks and herds, and fatlings of every kind, and also abundance of grain, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious things, and abundance of silk and fine-twined linen, and all manner of good homely cloth.
30  And thus, in their prosperous circumstances, they did not send away any who were naked, or that were hungry, or that were athirst, or that were sick, or that had not been nourished; and they did not set their hearts upon riches; therefore they were liberal to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, whether out of the church or in the church, having no respect to persons as to those who stood in need.
31  And thus they did prosper and become far more wealthy than those who did not belong to their church. (Alma 1:20-33.)

The key words are these: “and the priest, not esteeming himself above his hearers, for the preacher was no better than the hearer, neither was the teacher any better than the learner; and thus they were all equal, ”

“And thus they were all equal!” The “equality” they experienced was the product of their esteem for each other.

The only true equality between two humans is their mutual esteem. No social, economic, or political situation can alter that reality. For example, a Greek scholar might be captured and made that slave of a wealthy Roman. If the slave is contemptuous of the master’s harshness, the master, in the slave’s estimation, is lesser than the slave, and can never be the slave’s equal. It would make no difference how much authority the master exercised over the slave, in the eyes of the slave, the master can never be the slave’s equal until the slave esteems him as such. The college professor can never be the equal of the old farmer, until the farmer esteems him as such. Conversely, the farmer can never be equal to a professor until the professor appreciates the goodness and wisdom of the fine old man. And the cost of a lack of such esteem is subtracted from the richness of the life of the one who withholds it.

Our human condition being what it is, governments are necessary to enforce some sort of equanimity in our legal and economic systems, but “charitable” condescension or patronization are poor substitutes for esteem. Neither the powers of government, its laws, nor the courts can impose an equality of esteem upon any society. It is a product of the individual soul.

Similarly, it is impossible to create a Zion society, by proclaiming it “zion” and inviting people to come in. Rather “Zion is the pure in heart,” which I understand to mean people who esteem others as themselves, and who conduct their lives in accordance to that mutual esteem. A collection of that kind of people becomes a Zion society. But the individuals must be Zion, before a Zion society can become a reality. I can discover no difference between that concept of mutual esteem, and the law of consecration. And I can discover no difference between the law of consecration and love that is called charity. Obedience to the law of consecration is what one does – but only when charity is what one is.

The natural consequence is, “And they did impart of their substance, every man according to that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and the afflicted….And now, because of the steadiness of the church they began to be exceedingly rich, having abundance of all things whatsoever they stood in need….”

Thus these people had established and maintained Zion as a subculture withing a culture that was not Zion at all. And their Zion remained viable until the mutual esteem began to disintegrate:

Yea, he [Alma] saw great inequality among the people, some lifting themselves up with their pride, despising others, turning their backs upon the needy and the naked and those who were hungry, and those who were athirst, and those who were sick and afflicted. (Alma 4:12.)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

This week, Tyson asked me something that caused me to send him a draft of what you just read. After that, as the week progressed, I realized that our conversation was becoming a necessary conclusion to what I had written. I hope you don’t mind my sending you reports of our conversations. I thought the last time I did that  it would really be the last time, but since he is responsible for my thinking some good thoughts, I don’t think it would be quite honest if I just turned them into a little essay and did not give him the credit. It also occurs to me that you will like to know him. Another consideration is that I understand that you understand that you are getting this email because I love you, and many of you know and love each other also. So I don’t suppose you will mind if you hear me tell Tyson that I love him too. This week Tyson and Tenay are on their way to Seattle where he will soon begin law school.

– – – – – – – –

— T: —

I have another question that I was pondering on last night. How does one develop true charity (especially since it’s so important)? I understand the importance of serving others, and I know that we have briefly discussed knowing and understanding the entire plan in order to appreciate others, but how do I develop charity for everyone, perhaps even those who I barely meet or have no real opportunity to serve?

– – – – – – – –

— L: —

I suspect the reason identifying how to have charity is such a difficult question is that we don’t have a concrete sense of what charity is. Therefore one has nothing one can grab hold of and say, “this is it.” I just finished writing what I’m going to send out next week in the BofM Project. Let me send it to you, and then I’ll try to help you answer your question. [I sent Tyson the first draft of the today’s comment.]

– – – – – – – –

— T: —

I enjoyed the political tie that you put into your analysis of charity. However, you have only partially answered my question. I now understand more fully what charity is, or even how it can be understood. I do, not, however, yet know how to obtain it. How do I esteem others as myself? I know that sounds incredibly, stupidly, and embarrassingly prideful, but I see this flaw in myself. How can I really esteem others: my co-workers, random people on the subway, my enemies…as myself

– – – – – – – –

— L: —

Tyson, in your email you wrote, “I do, not, however, yet know how to obtain it. How do I esteem others as myself?” I think the problem you describe is in the reality of the meaning of loving one’s Self. So the initial question is: HOW -by what criterion – does one esteem one’s Self.

– – – – – – – –

— T: —

I really liked what you wrote on charity. I don’t know how I esteem myself. That’s a tricky question. I’m prone to pride at times and at other times, negative humility.

– – – – – – – –

— L: —

I appreciate our conversations. You are a wonderful stimulus for my thinking. I thought my BofM Project for next week was finished, but you have shown me that it is not –– thanks. One tends to define one’s Self in terms of one’s wants and needs. And therefore defines one’s esteem for others in terms of acknowledging that they have similar wants and needs. But what if one defined oneself in terms different from that. What if one believed this: “I am a person whom the Saviour loves, and the best evidence that I have that I exist is that I know he loves me and that I love him in return.” I love and feel love – therefore I am.

– – – – – – – –

— T: —

Obviously I love and believe that answer. Does that mean that having charitable Christ-like love for others starts by understanding and feeling Christ’s love for ourselves?

– – – – – – – –

— L: —

I think that is exactly where it begins – I suppose it ends there as well. To the degree that one can identify and define one’s Self in terms of the Saviour’s love, to that degree one runs out of other alternative ways of identifying and defining other people

– – – – – – – –

— T: —

How do you recommend one being able to recognize and most importantly feel Christ’s love for us?

– – – – – – – –

— L: —

I suspect the answer to that is the standard answer to all things. But because the answer is so easy to come by, its depth is difficult to discover – because it rolls off the tongue so easily it appears trite. The formula given in the Sermon on the Mount is the same as the formula one learns in the temple. “Ask, and it shall be given unto you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.” As far as I can tell: Asking happens in prayer, seeking happens in the way one reads the scriptures and the way one lives. I suppose knocking has something to do with, “that they do always remember him.” But in the end none of those things are sufficient in themselves. They only affirm one’s willingness to receive a gift. The fulfillment is in the gift.

– – – – – – – –

— T: —

Thanks LeGrand. I agree with what you have said and have been actively seeking and praying for charity. I thought of the two great commandments that Christ gives, both of which define true charity and apparently are the only way to keep the commandments.

– – – – – – – –

— L: —

You are a remarkable young man Tyson. Lots of people think they want to know the deep things of the gospel. But you want to know the greatest mystery of them all. I love you.

– – – – – – – –

— T: —

I love you too LeGrand. Thanks for always helping me to be a better person.

– – – – – – – –

— L: —

I don’t think you need much help.

– – – – – – – –

Conclusion:

Without ever mentioning it – probably without being aware of it – Tyson put his finger squarely on the central point of the whole issue. His comments are remarkably candid and honest. And it is that kind of honesty that is the key. One can neither love others nor oneself unless one is comfortable with one’s Self. That requires faith, which leads to repentance, which leads to an even increasing sensitivity to the voice of the Spirit, which promotes a self-honesty. It is, as Bruce observed, a never-ending spiral, whose object is to lead one so closely to discovering who and what one is, that one may again, in this world, be true to the law of one’s own being.

Tyson won the chess game, by the way.