Author: LeGrand Baker

  • 1 Nephi 1:1-6 — LeGrand Baker — The Three-act Ancient Temple Structure of 1 Nephi 1:1-6

    1 Nephi 1:1-6

    1. I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father; and having seen many afflictions in the course of my days, nevertheless, having been highly favored of the Lord in all my days; yea, having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days.
    2. Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, that consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.
    3. And I know that the record that I make is true; and I make it with mine own hand; and I make it according to my knowledge.
    4. For it came to pass in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah, (my father, Lehi, having dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days); and in that same year there came many prophets, prophesying unto the people that they must repent, or the great city Jerusalem must be destroyed.
    5. Wherefore it came to pass that my father, Lehi, as he went forth prayed unto the Lord, yea, even with all his heart, in behalf of his people.
    6. And it came to pass as he prayed unto the Lord, there came a pillar of fire and dwelt upon a rock before him; and he saw and heard much.

    The first six verses of Nephi’s account can be seen as a review of a three-act Israelite temple drama. Ancient dramas could usually be reduced to three themes or acts, divided into shorter scenes, following the pattern of the cosmic myth. The first act explained why it was necessary for the hero to leave home. In sacral dramas, the first act often took place among the gods in the Council in Heaven, it often told of the appointments and assignments to be fulfilled on the earth, sometimes it reported a rebellion and a war in heaven, and it may have included an account of the creation and the Garden. Nephi seems to sum this up in a very brief rendering of act one. Act two is the hero’s encounter with this mortal world, where he is humiliated and defeated (sometimes, as in the Osiris story, the hero is actually killed), but in the end he triumphs over his enemies. Act three is his triumphant return home to celebrate his victory and claim his throne. Sometimes, as in the “Hymn of the Pearl,” it is a shared throne.

    It is also a shared throne in the first chapter of Ephesians. This is a good example, because while the pattern is the same, the focus is different. In the first 14 verses, Paul discusses the ordinances and covenants made in the premortal world. He passes quickly over the problems of this world in the next four verses by uttering a prayer that we will know what is our assignment here, and what blessings our fulfillment of our covenants will bring. Then, he concludes the chapter with the promise that just as God had enabled the Savior to fulfill his covenants, so God will enable us to fulfill ours. That reminder includes the assurance that the Father set the Savior on his throne “at his own right hand in the heavenly places.”

    The most beautiful example of the pattern of the sacral myth in the Old Testament is the 23rd Psalm. It is a microcosm of the ancient Israelite temple drama in three acts.{1}

    Act One, the Premortal World
    .            The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.
    .            He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:
    .            He leadeth me beside the still waters.
    .            He restoreth my soul:
    .            He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake.

    Act Two, the Mortal World
    .            Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
    .            I will fear no evil: for thou art with me;
    .            Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
    .            Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies:
    .            Thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
    .            Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life:

    Act Three, the Eternal World
    .            and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever (Psalm 23:1-6).

    That is the most beloved of all the psalms because it resonates with our souls. It does so because it is the eternal autobiography of every man and woman.

    Nephi followed that pattern with a great deal of precision. That precision evinces Nephi’s deliberateness, rectitude, and care. One can tell that an author has deliberately followed a prescribed pattern if the pattern he is following is too complex to stumble upon it by accident, and if the complex pattern is followed in sequence and without deviation. Nephi’s first six verses meet that criteria. His subtextual drama begins in the premortal world, and then moves quickly into this one.

    Act One
    .            I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father;

    Act Two
    .            Having seen many afflictions in the course of my days,
    .            Having been highly favored of the Lord in all my days;
    .            Having had a great knowledge of the goodness of God
    .            Having had a great knowledge of the mysteries of God,
    Therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days

    The record is kept sacred by his writing in a dual language using the same words to convey two separate meanings. He tells us it is written in the language of the Egyptians (the world). But it is also written in the learning of the Jews (sacral language) so only those who have the keys to that knowledge can understand its second, sacred meaning.

    And I know that the record which I make is true; and I make it with mine own hand; and I make it according to my knowledge.

    There are several ways to make a record true with one’s hand, and one usually reads Nephi’s statement to mean that he wrote it himself. But Nephi’s emphasis in not on its production but on its truthfulness. There is one way to use one’s hand to testify about the truthfulness of something. For example, when we are on the witness stand in court we raise our hand. It is in that way that the hand testifies the words are true. It is done by covenant. Verse 2 would be able to stand as absolute evidence in any reasonable court. In it, he asserts the record is true, raises his hand as a covenant that it is true, and testifies that this is not hearsay but first hand knowledge.

    Nephi then introduces the idea of kingship:
    .            “in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah.”

    He then introduces the idea of priesthood in the person of Lehi, who is a prophet:
    .            “My father, Lehi”

    He mentions sacred space, for in ancient Israel, Jerusalem and its Temple are sacred space.
    .            “having dwelt in Jerusalem in all his days”

    He then calls our attention to the prophets who have made covenants and who are fulfilling those assignments:

    .            Prophets prophesying unto the people that they must repent, or the great city Jerusalem must be destroyed

    Now there is a prayer.
    .            My father, Lehi, as he went forth prayed unto the Lord, yea, even with all his heart, in behalf of his people

    Now the Shechinah—the light or veil that separates us from God.{2}
    .            And it came to pass as he prayed unto the Lord, there came a pillar of fire and dwelt upon a rock before him

    Act Three is very short, just as it is in the 23rd Psalm.
    .           He saw and heard much

    In those 6 short verses Nephi has mentioned every significant facet of the ancient Israelite temple drama. It is apparent that his intent was not to teach us about that drama but to show us that he knew it. Thereby, he has established, in a brilliantly crafted, encoded colophon, that he knows the mysteries and can be trusted as a prophet.

    ——————————————-
    FOOTNOTES

    {1} For a discussion of the Twenty-Third Psalm see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 619-40; Second edition, p. 441-57.

    {2} The definition of shechinah found in the LDS Bible Dictionary reads as follows:
    Schechinah, The Presence. A word used by the later Jews (and borrowed from them by the Christians) to denote the cloud of brightness and glory that marked the presence of the Lord as spoken of in Exodus 3:1-6; 1 Kings 8:10; Isaiah 6:1-3; Matthew 17:5; Acts 7:55. The Prophet Joseph Smith described this phenomenon in connection with his first vision, as a ‘light…above the brightness of the sun,’ and said that he saw two Personages whose “brightness and glory defy all description,” standing “in the light” (JS-H 1:16-18). LDS Bible dictionary, 773.

    It is also the light that filled the room when Moroni came to Joseph; the smoke that filled the temple in Isaiah 6; the “pillar of fire and dwelt upon a rock” in 1 Nephi 1; the light that made Moses’s bush to appear to be burning; and the cloud through which the brother of Jared spoke to the Savior.

    For a discussion of the shechinah as the veils see the sections called, “1 Nephi 11:2-7, One Must Say and Do Truth” and “1 Nephi 11:8-22, The Condescension of God.”
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

  • 1 Nephi 1:1-2 — LeGrand Baker — Angels helped Joseph Translate

    (This is an excerpt from my Joseph and Moroni. The full text is in “Published Books” in this website.)

    While Joseph and Oliver were house guests in the Peter Whitmer home, the men of the family liked having them around and were glad to help whenever they could. The visitors had little effect on the routine of their farm work, but for David’s mother, Mary Whitmer, that was not the case at all. In addition to her usual chores, like gathering the eggs, feeding the chickens, and milking the cows, she now had to fix extra for meals, bake more bread, and wash all her guests’ clothes—by hand on a scrub board. It made a great deal of difference to her that there were two more grown men living in her home.{1}

    Joseph had kept his promise to Moroni and had not shown the plates to anyone, so Mary didn’t know he really had them. It may have seemed unfair to Mary that she should have the burden of looking after these two self-invited guests. She may have complained; if she didn’t, she probably wanted to.

    One day, Mary went out into the barn. She was startled when she first saw an angel standing there with a knapsack over his shoulder, but his kindly appearance soon caused all her fear to go away. Her description of him was like the description of the old gentleman Joseph, Oliver, and her son David had talked with when they were riding in the wagon.

    He said to her, “You have been very faithful and diligent in your labors, but you are tired because of the increase in your toil; it is proper, therefore, that you should receive a witness that your faith may be strengthened.” He then untied his knapsack and showed her the golden plates. The angel “turned the leaves of the book of plates over, leaf after leaf, and also showed her the engravings upon them; after which he told her to be patient and faithful in bearing her burden a little longer.”{2}

    After Mary examined the plates, the angel left the barn. She followed him because she wanted to ask him a question, but he was gone.

    The angel’s showing Mary the plates teaches about how the Lord looks after His children. The Three Witnesses and the Eight Witnesses saw the plates and they were given the responsibility of testifying that they had seen them and they were told never to deny that testimony. But Mary was not given that responsibility. She was shown the plates because the Lord wished to give her peace and to help her understand.

    The Testimony of Sarah Conrad

    Mary Whitmer never wavered in her support for Joseph Smith after she saw the angel and the plates. But she did do something to lighten her burden and make it easier to care for her family and guests.

    The angel had suggested that she hire someone to help her, so she hired her niece, a girl named Sarah Conrad, to live at the house and help with the chores.{3} She did not tell Sarah what Joseph and Oliver were doing, but it did not take long for Sarah to discover that something unusual was going on. Sarah noticed that the Prophet and his friend “would go up into the attic, and they would stay all day. When they came down, they looked more like heavenly beings than they did just ordinary men.”{4}

    At first Sarah was curious, but in time their luminous appearance actually frightened her. She told her aunt how she felt and asked what made those men “so exceedingly white.”{5}

    When Mrs. Whitmer explained to Sarah about the Book of Mormon, she “told her what the men were doing in the room above and that the power of God was so great in the room that they could hardly endure it. At times angels were in the room in their glory which nearly consumed them.”{6} The light that shone from Joseph and Oliver’s faces came from their having been with the angels.

    This explanation was reasonable enough and satisfied Sarah. She not only stayed with the Whitmers, but she also became one of Joseph’s good friends. She was baptized, and much later, after she and the other Saints were driven from Nauvoo, she settled with them in Provo, Utah.{7}

    Joseph never told his readers how he translated the Book of Mormon except to say that he used the Urim and Thummim and that he did it “by the gift and power of God.” But there are some interesting indications that he had help from other angels besides Moroni.{8}

    Sarah’s is the earliest of a number of accounts that testify that at times, when the Prophet was receiving revelation or was in the presence of heavenly beings, he, like Moses, actually glowed (Exodus 34:29-35).

    Wilford Woodruff tried to describe the Prophet’s appearance on one of those occasions. He said, “His face was clear as amber.”{9} Philo Dibble, who was present when the Prophet received the revelation that is now the 76th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, reported, “Joseph wore black clothes, but at this time seemed to be dressed in an element of glorious white.”{10}

    Sarah’s testimony that the men who were working on the translation of the Book of Mormon “looked so exceedingly white,” combined with Mrs. Whitmer’s explanation that “angels were in the room in their glory which nearly consumed them,” gives a valuable key to understanding the Book of Mormon and to knowing how it was translated. One may assume that if there were angels in the room, they had some purpose for being there other than just to pass the time of day. Their presence in the translating room certainly had an impact upon the ultimate outcome of Joseph’s work.

    Angels Helped Joseph Translate

    Neither Joseph Smith, nor Oliver Cowdery, nor the Whitmers, nor Sarah Conrad left any record identifying who the angels were, but others also knew, and they have given some important information about who the angels might have been.

    Elder Parley P. Pratt did not identify the angels by name, but he testified that through Joseph Smith “and the ministration of holy angels to him, that book came forth to the world.”{11} His brother Orson added that during those years, Joseph “was often ministered to by the angels of God, and received instruction” from them.{12}

    President John Taylor, who was a dear friend and confidant of the Prophet Joseph mentioned some of the angels by name. He said:

    Again who more likely than Mormon and Nephi, and some of those prophets who had ministered to the people upon this continent, under the influence of the same Gospel, to operate again as its representatives? Who more likely than those who had officiated in the holy Melchisedec priesthood to administer to Joseph Smith and reveal unto him the great principles which were developed? Well, now, do I believe that Joseph Smith saw the several angels alleged to have been seen by him as described, one after another? Yes, I do.{13}

    On another occasion, when President Taylor was discussing the restoration of the gospel, he said, “I can tell you what he [Joseph] told me about it.” Then he told this story:

    Afterwards the Angel Moroni came to him and revealed to him the Book of Mormon, with the history of which you are generally familiar, and also with the statements that I am now making pertaining to these things. And then came Nephi, one of the ancient prophets, that had lived upon this continent, who had an interest in the welfare of the people that he had lived amongst in those days.{14}

    President Taylor was even more explicit in another address to the Saints:

    And when Joseph Smith was raised up as a Prophet of God, Mormon, Moroni, Nephi and others of the ancient Prophets who formerly lived on this Continent, and Peter and John and others who lived on the Asiatic Continent, came to him and communicated to him certain principles pertaining to the Gospel of the Son of God. Why? Because they held the keys of the various dispensations, and conferred them upon him, and he upon us. He was indebted to God; and we are indebted to God and to him for all the intelligence that we have on these subjects.{15}

    Similarly, President George Q. Cannon once assured his listeners:

    [The Prophet Joseph] had doubtless, also, visits from Nephi and it may be from Alma and others. He was visited constantly by angels…. Moroni, in the beginning, as you know, to prepare him for his mission, came and ministered and talked to him from time to time, and he had vision after vision in order that his mind might be fully saturated with a knowledge of the things of God, and that he might comprehend the great and holy calling that God has bestowed upon him.{16}

    Joseph said very little about his meeting with Book of Mormon prophets other than Moroni. However, in the famous letter to John Wentworth, the one in which he wrote the Articles of Faith, the Prophet explained that the Book of Mormon came forth only “after having received many visits from the angels of God unfolding the majesty and glory of the events that should transpire in the last days.”{17} The “many visits” could, of course, have all been from Moroni. But Moroni is only one angel and Joseph wrote that he had received “many visits from the angels.” That statement by the Prophet, coupled with those of his friends, leads one to conclude that the translation of the Book of Mormon was something of a joint effort between Moroni; Joseph Smith, who used the Urim and Thummim; Nephi (probably more than one Nephi); Alma; Mormon; and other original authors of the Book of Mormon.

    One cannot read the Book of Mormon without noticing the Lord’s promises to the prophets that their messages would be passed on to people in the last days.{18} It is not surprising, then, that those same prophets who wrote those messages should be present with Joseph while he was translating their own writings. If the original authors did help in the translation of their own parts of the book, that would guarantee that the English version of the Book of Mormon says just exactly what the authors wanted it to say, and could help account for the remarkably rich diversity in the wordprints of the various authors.
    ——————————-
    FOOTNOTES

    {1} Jensen, Biographical Encyclopedia, 1:267.

    {2} Jensen, Biographical Encyclopedia, 1:267.

    {3} Newell, “History of Sarah (Sallie) Heller Conrad Bunnel,” and “My Grandmother Bunnel.”

    {4} Interview statement reported in, Richard L. Anderson, “The House Where the Church Was Organized,”Improvement Era, April, 1970, 21.

    {5} Oliver B. Huntington, “Diary,” typescript copy at BYU Library. vol. 2, 415-16. Huntington heard this story from Sarah, herself, when she was 88 years old.

    {6} Huntington, “Diary,” 2:415-16.
    {7} Huntington, “Diary,” 2:415-16. See also Anderson, “The House,” Improvement Era, April, 1970 21. I have also spoken with Sarah’s descendants who confirmed the story.

    {8} For a discussion of how Joseph translated, see: Elder Neal A. Maxwell, “By the Gift and Power of God,” Ensign, Jan. 1997, 36-41. Regarding the time that it took to translate and write the 116 pages, Joseph Smith wrote that Martin arrived “about the 12th of April, 1828, and commenced writing for me while I translated from the plates, which we continued until the 14th of June [1828]” (History of the Church, 1:20).

    {9} Wilford Woodruff, Conference Report, April, 1898, 89.

    {10} Juvenile Instructor, 27:303-04.

    {11} Journal of Discourses, 9:212. See also: Journal of Discourses, 3:185.

    {12} Journal of Discourses, 15:185. See similar testimonies in Journal of Discourses, 13:66 and 14:140.

    {13} Journal of Discourses, 21:163-64.

    {14} Journal of Discourses, 21:161-62.

    {15} Journal of Discourses, 17:375-76.

    {16} Journal of Discourses, 23:363.

    {17} Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 4:537.

    {18} For examples see: 2 Nephi 33:3-4; 3 Nephi 5:18; Mormon 8:12, 9:30-31; Enos 1:15-16; Ether 12:25-29. See also, 2 Nephi 3:19-21, 26:16, chapter 27; Mormon 5:12-13; Mosiah 1:7; D&C 17:6, D&C 10:46-53.
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

  • 1 Nephi 1: 1-2 — LeGrand Baker — Temple Code in the Book of Mormon

    In his introduction in 1 Nephi 1:1, Nephi wrote, “yea, having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days.” Those are his primary objectives: to teach of the goodness and the mysteries of God. He tells us at the outset—then immediately shows us—that he intends to write in “double-layered discourse.” He will use the surface text to show the goodness of God, but he will reserve the most sacred things—the mysteries—to a subtext that can only be seen and read by those who know the depth of the ancient Israelite temple drama. He wrote,

    1 … yea, having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days.
    2 Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians (1 Nephi 1:1-2).

    Yea is a very important word here. It is “used to introduce a statement, phrase, or word stronger or more emphatic than that immediately preceding.”{1} So, the words following yea are not simply the conclusion. They are the culmination or crest of the ideas that introduced it.

    Verse 2 does not say, “I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of a mixture of the languages of the Jews and the Egyptians.” It says he will write in a dual language using the same words to convey two separate meanings.

    In verse 2, Nephi is giving us a clue to understand his sacred subtextual record. There are two distinct elements of his writing, the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians. At that time in the Israelite world, Egyptian was a dominant language, just as English is now. It was a language that many who were educated and literate could speak and, possibly, could read and write.

    Nephi was a prophet, and his language, like that of Lehi and Isaiah, was the language of temple and priesthood—the learning of the covenant Jews—an audience blessed with “eyes to see.” Thus Nephi’s work is filled with language that is dualistic and symbolic in its meaning. In the record we have today, English functions much like Egyptian, allowing people who read it to understand the “goodness of God.” But the code language is still there and deals with the “mysteries of God.”

    There are two main themes woven into the First Nephi narrative—the ancient Israelite temple drama and the Atonement of the Messiah. When woven together, they become the golden thread that runs through the entire narrative of First Nephi, giving continuity and purpose to the surface text and to the equally important subtext, each independently but with perfect harmony.

    Nephi’s first objective: to teach about the goodness of God— is accomplished by his repeatedly reminding us that notwithstanding all the roadblocks that were thrown in front of his father and himself, the Lord intervened to help them overcome those hindrances and fulfill their assignments.

    Nephi’s second object: to illuminate “the mysteries of God,”is transmitted to us through its inspired translation. One of the greatest miracles of the Book of Mormon is that it was translated into King James English so we can move from the Bible to the Book of Mormon and back again, knowing that the meanings of the words in one are the same as the meaning of the words in the other.

    That being so, all we have to do to know what Nephi meant by the word translated mysteries is to find out how that word is used in the Bible. What we find is that every time mystery is found in the New Testament, it is a translation of mysterion, which means “a secret or ‘mystery’ through the idea of silence imposed by initiation into religious rites.”{2}

    The distinguished Biblical scholar, Raymond E. Brown, has shown that the meaning of the Greek word mysterion (translated “mystery” in the English versions of the New Testament) and of the Hebrew word sode (translated “secret” in the English versions of the Old Testament) is essentially the same. Mysterion is more specific since it refers to secrets disclosed during initiation into sacred religious rites, while sode is more general in that it refers to the deliberations (or decisions) of either a religious or a secular council. Brown observes that the New Testament mysterion refers to the Council in Heaven. He shows that in the Old Testament sode sometimes refers to that Council or its decisions (as in Amos 3:7), though it is sometimes used to describe any gathering, whether legal, or illegal and conspiratorial.{3}

    Understanding these words casts a fascinating light on the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. The Nephites most likely spoke Hebrew or some other Semitic language, not Greek, so the Greek word mysterion was probably not a part of their language, whereas the Hebrew word sode (with its English equivalents) was likely familiar to the ancient Book of Mormon peoples. In the Book of Mormon, as in the Bible, sode might refer to a Council in Heaven sode experience, or a ceremony related to the temple drama representing a sode experience, or even the secret decisions of conspirators. In this, the English translation of the Book of Mormon is very precise. When the underlying word sode is used in the negative sense, it is translated as “secret,” as in “secret combinations.” However, when the underlying word sode is used in the positive sense—indicating a temple or temple-like experience—it is always translated as “mystery,” equivalent to the English New Testament translation of the Greek mysterion. Thus, Nephi writes of “having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God” (1 Nephi 1:1). Read that way, one can find references to the ancient Christian rites throughout the New Testament, and references to the ancient Nephite temple rites throughout the Book of Mormon.

    Nephi was probably about 45 years old when he wrote in his very first verse that he had “a great knowledge of…the mysteries of God,” he was declaring that he understood the ancient Israelite temple drama, ordinances, and covenants.{4}

    Nephi says he was very selective, not only about what he wrote on the small plates, but also about how he wrote it. In both the surface and the subtext, he told only sacred things that would fit into the temple pattern he wished to illustrate. The English translation accurately transmits all of that to modern readers. This being so, we would do well to look very carefully at what he says, but even more especially at how he says it.
    ———————————-
    FOOTNOTES

    {1} Oxford English Dictionary, definition 3.

    {2} The Greek dictionary at the back of James Strong, The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, 3466. For a more extensive discussion of the sode experience as it relates to the Council in Heaven see the chapter called “Sode Experience” in Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 195-208; Second edition, p. 139-148.

    {3} Raymond E. Brown, The Semitic Background of the Term “Mystery” in the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968), 2-6.

    {4} That pattern of using a sacral subtext to teach and explain the ancient Israelite temple drama was used by the prophets throughout the Book of Mormon. The entire last half of Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord is a careful but undisclosed analysis of that Book of Mormon subtextual message.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  • 1 Nephi 1:1 — LeGrand Baker — “Therefore I write” — The Chiastic Structure of First Nephi

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    1 Nephi 1:1 — LeGrand Baker — “Therefore I write” — The Chiastic Structure of First Nephi

    First Nephi has a carefully structured, chiastic, arrangement. Its language is unlike anything else in the Book of Mormon. It is written like a Greek or Norse epic poem. It is a chiasmus, and, like those other ancient epic poems, it follows the model of the cosmic myth. The cosmic myth is always in the pattern of a chaismas. In its simplest form it looks like this:

    .     A. The hero is required to leave home.
    .          B. He is given a seemingly impossible task.
    .               C. He receives the necessary tools to begin
    .                    D. He confronts overwhelming odds
    .               c. He receives additional tools
    .          b. He fulfills the task.
    .     a. The hero returns home, triumphant.{1}

    That is also the outline of the plan of salvation and of the ancient Israelite temple drama.{2} Nephi also uses that pattern when he writes 1 Nephi:

    .     A. Nephi and his family must leave home.
    .          B. They are given a seemingly impossible task.
    .               C. They receive the brass plates and Ishmael’s family.
    .                    D. Rebellion and starvation in the wilderness.
    .               c. The Liahona leads to a mountain top for sustenance.
    .          b. They travel to Bountiful to complete their task.
    .     a. They arrive at the promised land.

    The pattern is actually more complex than that and is discussed in the my last chapter about 1 Nephi called, “1 Nephi 22 — LeGrand Baker — Nephi’s Conclusion.”

    The ancient pattern after which First Nephi is written is called by modern scholars “the hero cycle” or “the cosmic myth.”{3} It is cosmic because it reflects the pattern of stories recited and written throughout human history. It is a complete worldview. It is called a myth because the principles it teaches are not dependent on the historicity of the story.{4} That is, the story it tells may be historically true, like First Nephi, or it may be fictional, like Star Wars or Hamlet, but the principles it teaches are universally the same.

    To say that 1 Nephi is an epic poem means much more than that it is lengthy, involved, and tells about a hero’s journey, as Meyer Abrams explained:

    An epic poem is a ceremonial performance, and is narrated in a ceremonial style which is deliberately distanced from ordinary speech and proportioned to the grandeur and formality of the heroic subject and epic architecture.{5}

    We have wondered if First Nephi had ever been used that way in a ceremonial performance. Such a thing was not unknown in ancient Israel. Every seventh year, during the pre-exilic Israelite New Year’s Festival, the king and the entire congregation would recite the book of Deuteronomy as a reminder of the Lord’s covenants and of Moses’s instructions to them.{6} Deuteronomy was Moses’s last sermon to the people just before he departed. Such a ceremonial use of First Nephi would have given a sustained religious underpinning for the Nephite split with the Lamanites, and may, in part, account for the repeated admonition to “remember” the covenants made to the fathers.

    It may also account for why Mormon searched the royal archives to find the original plates of Nephi, rather than using just a later copy, to attach to the gold plates that Moroni would eventually deliver to the Prophet Joseph (Words of Mormon:1:3-5).

    Nephi was probably about 45 when he began writing First Nephi, and it took him ten years to write it.{7} It seems that if Nephi, who obviously had an excellent education, would spend ten years writing a fifty-plus page work in the chiastic style of an epic poem, then every word of Nephi’s original manuscript version must have been what it was intended to be, and that the whole of the version Nephi engraved on the gold plates was carefully polished. We believe that is also true of our English version. That is, we believe the English version is not so much a “translation” as it is an English rendering of the original.{8}

    So, admittedly without having any proof of how or where—or even if—it might have been used by the Nephites for ritual purposes, we wonder if Nephi’s poem was used in connection with “a ceremonial performance.” Could it be that the Nephites used First Nephi in the same way the Israelites used Deuteronomy or the Book of Genesis in the portrayal of the covenant renewal drama during their Feast of Tabernacles?

    ———————————
    FOOTNOTES

    {1} The ancient Hymn of the Pearl is an excellent example. See LeGrand L. Baker and Stephen D. Ricks, Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord? The Psalms in Israel’s Temple Worship in the Old Testament and in the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City, Eborn Books), first hardback edition 2009, p. 97-135; second paperback edition 2010, p. 79-98) The paperback edition is found on this website under “published books.”

    {2} The pattern of the Israelite and Nephite temple dramas is the theme that runs throughout our book, Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord. The book gives a reconstruction of the Israelite temple drama at the time of Solomon’s Temple. The second half of the book shows that virtually every sermon in the Book of Mormon is based on the Nephite temple experience.

    {3} Two classic works on the universality of the hero cycle or cosmic myth are Joseph Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces (New York: MJF, 1949); and Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend, Hamlet’s Mill: An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time (Boston: Gambit, 1969).

    {4} For a discussion of the cosmic myth see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, hardback edition, p. 97-135; paperback edition, p. 79-98)

    {5} Meyer Abrams, A Glossary of Literary Terms (Boston, Heinle & Heinle , 1999), 77.

    {6} John A. Tvedtnes, “King Benjamin and the Feast of Tabernacles” in John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks, eds., By Study and Also by Faith: Essays in Honor of Hugh W. Nibley on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday, 27 March 1990, 2 vols. (Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1990), 2:206.

    {7} Nephi reports that he received instructions to make the small plates 30 years after the family had left Jerusalem. He has completed 1 Nephi after they had been gone 40 years (2 Nephi 5:28-34).

    {8} For a discussion of Nephi’s possible personal involvement in the English translation see LeGrand L. Baker, Joseph and Moroni (Salt Lake City, Eborn Books, 2007), 91-98.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  • 1 Nephi 1:1 as an Ancient Colophon — LeGrand Baker

    1 Nephi 1:1

    1. I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father; and having seen many afflictions in the course of my days, nevertheless, having been highly favored of the Lord in all my days; yea, having had a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God, therefore I make a record of my proceedings in my days.

    Anciently, writers often used a literary device called a colophon at the beginning or end of a document. It identified the author, declared his authority, and briefly stated what he was writing about.{1}

    Verse 1 of First Nephi is an impressive ancient colophon. Standing alone, it is sufficient evidence that the Book of Mormon is an ancient document. It is a bit awkward for us to read today, but it is the awkwardness that makes it so important. Its language would be perfectly at home tucked amid Plato’s writings, but there was nothing in Joseph Smith’s New England backcountry culture that could have caused him to write the sentence in that way.

    Another example is the beginning of Zeniff’s autobiography:

    I, Zeniff, having been taught in all the language of the Nephites,
    having had a knowledge of the land of Nephi…
    having been sent as a spy…
    Therefore, I contended with my brethren…. (Mosiah 9:1-2)

    Another example is this exchange of official correspondence:

    14 Now I close my epistle. I am Moroni; I am a leader of the people of the Nephites.
    15 Now it came to pass that Ammoron, when he had received this epistle, was angry; and he wrote another epistle unto Moroni, and these are the words which he wrote, saying:
    16 I am Ammoron, the king of the Lamanites; I am the brother of Amalickiah whom ye have murdered. Behold, I will avenge his blood upon you, yea, and I will come upon you with my armies for I fear not your threatenings.

    Nephi’s colophon is awkward to us because it seems to be logically upside down. If we, or the Prophet Joseph, were to write those ideas we would say:

    I am Nephi, and I am writing for the following five reasons:
    .        First…. I was taught in all the learning of my father.
    .        Second….I have seen many afflictions.
    .        Third….I have been highly favored of the Lord.
    .        Forth….I have a knowledge of the goodness of God.
    .        Fifth….I have a knowledge of the mysteries of God.

    However, Nephi’s colophon is not like that. Rather, it is written in a Greeklike logical pattern whose structure is like a simple addition problem with five points and a conclusion:

    I Nephi
    .        having been taught in all the learning of my father
    .        plus … seen many afflictions
    .        plus … highly favored of the Lord
    .        plus … knowledge of the goodness of God,
    .        plus … knowledge of the mysteries of God,
    conclusion : Therefore I write.

    This second pattern is the same structure as a simple addition problem, which is the same pattern as an ancient logical argument. It would be very comfortable among the works of Plato, but sounds awkward to us just as it would have been awkward to Joseph Smith and his contemporaries. Even though there was nothing in Joseph’s own background to cause him to write a sentence in that form, it is the form in which Nephi’s well educated contemporaries would have written. Therefore, the structure of Nephi’s colophon is convincing evidence that we are dealing with an ancient text.

    Of the colophons in the Book of Mormon, Nephi’s is the most significant and by far the most interesting because of its structural completeness, its window into Nephi’s purposes and personality, and especially because of its multilayered meanings.

    ——————————–
    FOOTNOTE

    {1} The first chapter of Revelation is an excellent example. The author identifies himself as John the apostle. He has been instructed by an angel to write, and his writings will testify of the Jesus the Savior
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  • 1 Nephi 10:8 — LeGrand Baker — John the Baptist

    1 Nephi 10:8 — LeGrand Baker — John the Baptist

    Isaiah 40:3-5 — LeGrand Baker — John the Baptist

    Isaiah 40:3-5
    3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
    4 Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:
    5 And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

    1 Nephi 10:8
    8 Yea, even he should go forth and cry in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight; for there standeth one among you whom ye know not; and he is mightier than I, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose. And much spake my father concerning this thing.

    In addition to 1 Nephi, this reference to Isaiah 40 is found in all four of the New Testament Gospels. It is important for four reasons: 1) It identifies John as the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy. 2) It bears double testimony the Savior–John’s testimony, and Isaiah’s testimony of the eternal validity of John’s testimony. 3) It is evidence of John’s foreordination. 4) It is a key to understanding the second half of Isaiah.

    Of those four, the first three are self explanatory, so let me talk about the fourth.

    Isaiah is divided into two large sections. Much of the first is quoted in Second Nephi. The second is a review of the cosmic myth or the plan of salvation. The two parts are separated, connected probably, by the account of King Hezekiah’s being healed and then seeing the Saviour.

    Because the second large section begins with the prophecy of John the Baptist, it would be appropriate to look at the context in which that prophecy appears. So here is a quick review of at Isaiah 40:

    v. 1 Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God.

    In ancient Palestine, after one had expressed his sorrow or his repentance by putting ashes on his head and dressing in sackcloth, he would express his being comforted by washing off the ashes, anointing himself with oil, and dressing in clean garments.

    In Isaiah 61, the Lord speaks of comforting the dead who were in the spirit prison ( see D&C: 138:42) by using that same sequence:

    …to comfort all that mourn;

    To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion [make the dead a part of Zion],

    to give unto them beauty for ashes [“beauty” has reference to a shining headdress or crown. Before they can be so crowned, the ashes must be washed off],

    the oil of joy for mourning,

    the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness;

    that they might be called trees of righteousness [Same concept as Alma 32: trees make fruit, fruit makes seeds, seeds make trees, and on and on and on: thus the concept of eternal increase.], the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified.

    Isaiah 61:1-3)

    v. 2 Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned:

    [Notice that what follows is given as evidence that she is pardoned: note the word “for.”]

    for she hath received of the LORD’s hand double for all her sins.

    [As in Isaiah 61, “double” is a reference to the fact that the birthright son received a double portion of the inheritance, which included all of the blessings of Abraham. These birthright blessings are received “of the LORD’s hand.]

    v. 3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.

    [“Highway” = WAY is usually a reference to obedience to ordinances and covenants, but since this is written within the context of the preexistence, I would guess that here it has a specific reference to the Covenant of the Father, as in Moroni 10 and Ephesians 1.]

    v. 4 Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:

    [Low places will become as temples and temples [mountains] will be low, as in available to everyone. There will be no counterfeits of the WAY.

    v. 5 And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

    [The glory of the LORD can be revealed in only sacred place, often the Holy of Holies, i.e. the throne room.]

    v. 6-7 The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field: The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

    […that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed….are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead. (D&C 132:7)]

    v. 9 O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain;

    [temple]

    O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up,

    [As in prayer. When the ancient Jews and Christians prayed, they lifted their hands toward heaven.]

    be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!

    [If one is to see God, it must be in the temple or some other sacred space.]

    v. 10 Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold,

    [Scholars say that this is one of those typical statements about the strength and power of the sometimes vengeful God of the Old Testament. However, it seems to me that in this context it is clearly about something else.]

    his reward is with him, and his work before him.

    [For behold, this is my work and my glory–to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. (Moses 1:39)]

    v. 11 He shall feed his flock like a shepherd:

    [Fruit of the tree of life]

    he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom,

    [embrace]

    and shall gently lead those that are with young.

    v. 12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span….

    v. 21 Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?

    v. 22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth….

  • 2 Peter 1-11 – LeGrand Baker – Making your calling and election sure

    This analysis of 2 Peter 1 was written as a part of:

    Alma 38:12 – LeGrand Baker – “that you may be filled with love”

    We are still in Alma 38 where uses one short clause to describe a remarkable concept.

    12 …see that ye bridle all your passions, that ye may be filled with love.

    In that verse, the word “that” is a very powerful conjunction. Other ways of saying it (“so that,” “in order that”) are weaker because the word is modified. Simply using “that” creates an unqualified relationship between the cause and the effect. (To see the power of the conjunction, try reading the sacrament prayers without the word “that.” You will find that without the conjunction the prayers become only disconnected ideas.)

    Alma said to his son: “see that ye bridle all your passions, that ye may be filled with love.”

    It is difficult for people in our culture to put those words into their proper perspective because in our vernacular language “passions” are often equated with lewdness, lasciviousness, and sexuality and seem to be the driving power behind much of the music, entertainment, and advertisements that bombard our lives.

    A sidenote to Alma’s charge to “bridle all your passions” Paul’s explanation:

    15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled (Titus 1:15).

    True love is a passion: the way both our bodies and our minds express love through tenderness, affection, and the desire to make another happy and secure.

    The best commentary I know on Alma’s meaning is the words of Peter (1 Peter 1:1-19). They begin with an almost poetic description of the intent of the early Christian’s temple drama, followed by step by step instructions about how to make one’s calling and election sure, then conclude with Peter’s testimony about his experience on the Mount of Transfiguration.

    As we read closely, verses 1-7 their focus sharpens on the specifics of the path one must follow to ascend to those heights. He presents us with very succinct instructions about how to bridle our passions, “that ye may be filled with love.” He begins,

    1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith [pistis] with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:1).

    Pistis is a powerful Greek word that incorporates the ideas of both making and keeping covenants. Here it is something one receives “through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ .” Righteousness describes the correctness of authority and procedure in priesthood ordinances and covenants. (See the chapter “Meaning of ‘Faith’– pistis” and “Meaning of ‘Righteousness’–zedek and Zadok”in Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord).

    Is short, Peter has used pistis and righteousness to represent the entire early Christian temple services. Then he gives a beautifully insightful description of what that temple experience meant.

    2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
    3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
    4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust (2 Peter 1:2-4).

    In Peter’s summation, the blessings of the temple are just two promises: “that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.” There, “having” calls attention to a condition in the past “Having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust” has already happened and creates the situation of the present: “that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature.”

    “Lust” means wanting something to the exclusion of wanting other thins. It, like anger, can become addictive because it produces an adrenalin high. It may be the appetite to possess something or someone. It may be the need of attention, praise, wealth, or power. For example such needs may cause a wealthy man to run for political office or a poor woman to try to use gossip to control the neighborhood. These are different in extent of the power, but not in the quality of the soul.

    Then Peter teaches us how to overcome lust and enthrone charity as our dominant personalty characteristic, just as Alma teaches that we must “bridle all your passions, that ye may be filled with love.”

    Peter’s 8 steps to doing that are these:

    And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith [pistis] virtue.”(2 Peter 1:5)

    To many Mormons, “virtue” has come to mean chastity, but it means much more than that. It is the sum of manly perfection: of integrity (no gap between what one says and what one does); of rectitude (doing the right things for the right reasons); of physical, emotional, and intellectual excellence. It is the qualities of manliness that is personified in George Washington.

    and to virtue knowledge; (2 Peter 1:5)

    Inspired scriptures all teach the same thing because the ideas come from the same source. I think is not a stretch to say that Peter, the first President of the ancient Church of Christ, should mean by “knowledge” the same thing that the Lord taught Joseph Smith.

    24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come (D&C 93:24).

    That is, truth is knowledge of reality in sacred time, and is the only knowledge that has eternal value.

    6 And to knowledge temperance; (2 Peter 1:6)

    Temperance is moderation that is a product of self control. It is not doing anything in excess, but moving through life with an even keel, acting according to one’s own will, not being acted upon by excess of any kind.

    and to temperance patience (2 Peter 1:6).

    Patience is most beautifully described in Psalm 25. Patience with whom? With ourselves, with God, with other people, and with difficult circumstances.

    and to patience godliness [reverence](2 Peter 1:6).

    The Bible footnote and Strong (# 2150) both say the Greek word means “reverence.” We cannot hurt anyone or anything that we revere. It is recognizing and acknowledging the worth of another. It precludes the possibility of anger, contempt, and prejudice.

    7 And to godliness brotherly kindness (2 Peter 1:7).

    In this verse, the King James Version uses the phrase “brotherly kindness,” but elsewhere in the New Testament that same Greek word is always translated as “brotherly love” which has a somewhat stronger connotation. Strong: Greek 5360 [first edition, 1890] reads: “philadelphia; fraternal affection: brotherly love (kindness), love of the brethren.” [Emphasis is in the original).

    Righteous masculine virtues include extended and focused brotherly love. The Prophet Joseph emphasized this when he said, “Friendship is the grand fundamental principle of Mormonism, to revolution civilize the world.—pour forth love.” {1}

    True love and eternal friendships originate and continue in sacred space and sacred time.

    and to brotherly kindness charity.(2 Peter 1:7)

    While “brotherly love” is a focused love, charity is a universal love. It is as broad as “reverence” and also as focused as philadelphia. It is the maturation and culmination of both. The law of consecration is what one does when charity is what one is. In the New Testament that combination of God’s love and his loving kindness is called “grace.” The Hebrew word hesed is the equivalent and is often translated as “mercy” or “lovingkindness..”

    The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament shows the power of that friendship/relationship:

    We may venture the conjecture that even in cases where the context does not suggest such mutuality it is nevertheless implicit, because we are dealing with the closest of human bonds. {2}

    An explanation and clarification of the phrase, “dealing with the closest of human bonds,” is found in a new edition of Strong’s Concordance:

    hesed, unfailing love, loyal love, devotion. kindness, often based on a prior relationship, especially a covenant relationship. {3}

    Another definition says: “Hesed has in view right conduct in free kindness within a given relation. … [as in] Psalm 50:5, where Yahweh calls for a gathering of His hesedim [translated ‘saints’] who have made a covenant in sacrifice. It seems that the term hesed has a special place at the conclusion of a covenant.”{4}

    The hesed relationship described in Psalm 25 evokes the terms of the premortal covenant between Jehovah and his children in this world. Elsewhere that same hesed relationship also exists as an eternal, fraternal bond among men. Consideration of the this-world continuation of those fraternal relationships brings us brings us back to Peter’s assurance that “brotherly kindness” (philadelphia) and charity are prerequisite to making one’s calling and election sure. Peter continues:

    8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
    9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
    10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
    11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:8-11).

    And that bring us back to Alma’s instruction to his son Shiblon.

    See that ye bridle all your passions, that ye may be filled with love (Alma 38:12).

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – ENDNOTES

    {1} Joseph Smith, The Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet Joseph, compiled and edited by Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook [Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1980], 234.

    {2}G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, eds., trans. Davod E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vols. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1986), article about hesed, 5:45-48). The Greek equivalent is Philadelphia, fraternal love, as explained in fn 905, p. 680.

    {3} John R. Kohlenberger III and James A. Swanson, The Strongest Strong’s, Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), Hebrew dictionary # 2617.

    {4} Gerhard Friedrich, ed. (Translator and editor

    Geoffrey w. Bromiley), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Miciugan,Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1981), 9:386-7.

  • 2 Peter 1:1-10 — LeGrand Baker — for Ben

    October 8, 2007

    My Dear Ben,

    Thank you for your email. I am deeply honored that you would include me among your two “most trusted friends.” I love you very much.

    The scripture that first ran through my mind as I read your email is the very famous one from the prophet Samuel, “Behold to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.” (1 Sam. 15:22) That is one of the most misunderstood scriptures in the canon. In the ancient Near East, when people sat down to a meal, they did more than give a blessing on the food, they dedicated the food to their god and invited him to join them in the meal. That is why the Jews could not eat with gentiles. To share a meal with a heathen would be to acknowledge their god. In that light, the context of Samuel’s statement is this: the Lord had promised victory to King Saul and his armies, but had instructed him to kill the people and also their animals. The battle was successful, but they did not kill and waste the food. Rather they saved “the very best” of the animals to sacrifice to the Lord. When one made a peace offering, only some blood and fat were put on the fire, and the meat was eaten—symbolically in the presence of God, who was also at the table. It was when Samuel got there, and found that Saul and his armies couldn’t wait to have their picnic, that he said “to obey is better than to sacrifice.” Obedience is not better than a legitimate sacrifice done in righteousness (zedek), it is only better than a picnic.

    Sacrifice means the same as sacral, sacred, sacrament. It does not mean to give something up. It means to set something apart from the profane, and make it sacred. We are required to make only two sacrifices. One is tithing, which we set apart to be used for sacred purposes. The other is ourselves—a broken heart and contrite spirit—to make one’s Self sacred, so we can return to be with God.

    As I read Abraham 3, this is the conversation that took place among the Council of the gods.

    24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down [future tense] , for there is space there, and we will take [future tense] of these materials, and we will make [future tense] an earth whereon these may dwell;

    25 And we will prove [future tense] them herewith, to see if they will do [future tense] all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command [future tense] them;

    26 And they who keep their first estate shall be [future tense] added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have [future tense] glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have [future tense] glory added upon their heads for ever and ever. [“who keep their first estate” and “who keep their second estate” are both written the same way and are both a projection in the future. English majors have a name for that kind of future tense, but I don’t know what it is.] (Abraham 3:24-26)

    If all of that is in the future tense, then their first estate, and the world they were about to build to test their obedience was the pre-mortal spirit earth on which we lived before we came here

    As I understand that, the “them” and “they” are intelligences for whom the spirit world was built. There, in our pre-mortal spirit world, the question was “will you obey?” Those who obeyed were then invited to come to this earth—to our second estate—where a different question would be addressed. Before we came here, there were two reasons that one might obey. One was because we could see the advantages, and knew which side our bread was buttered on. The other was that we loved the Lord and his children, and our obedience was a product of that love.

    So we came here where we can neither fully understand nor remember. If this world was devised to test whether Heavenly Father’s children would obey, it was poorly designed. Most people have no idea what to obey, and those who try go against their cultural norms and get burned to the stake. It was in the previous world that we demonstrated that we would obey. This world was designed to ask, “Why did you obey?”

    If back then, it was because we understood it would be to our advantage, then we seek self aggrandizement here. If we obeyed there because we loved our Father and his children, then that will be our motive for obedience here. We will obey because we choose to obey. That kind of obedience is technically not obedience at all, because, rather than being subservient to another, it is an exercise of one’s own will.

    On the mountain, when Jehovah gave Moses the Ten Commandments, he described himself as “shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” (Exodus 20:6) Jesus paraphrased that to his disciples when he said,

    15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
    16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; (John 14:15-16)

    In both versions, obedience is a product—a natural consequence—of love. That is also consistent with another commandment the Jehovah gave to Moses. He said,

    5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. (Deuteronomy 6:5)

    Later, he expanded that commandment when he said,

    18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord. (Leviticus 19:18)

    When a lawyer confronted Jesus with the question, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” Jesus combined the two to make them one.

    37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
    38 This is the first and great commandment.
    39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
    40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (Matthew 22:35-40.)

    Ben, as I read your email, I detected buried not very far beneath the surface of your question, “Help me understand what the Lord wants me to do?” a far more urgent question: “Help me understand what the Lord wants me to do to fulfill my covenants and make my calling and election sure?”

    It is easier for me to answer that question than the one about missionary rules. The reason it is easier is because the Apostle Peter has done it for me. At the beginning of Second Peter (his final instructions to the Saints when he knew he was going to be killed) he gave the answer. He wrote a simple formula about how to make one’s calling and election sure:

    1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ [this is official from the President of the Church], to them that have obtained [past tense] like precious faith [pistis = making and keeping covenants. He is writing to people who have received their endowments] with us through the righteousness [zedek = correctness in temple things] of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

    2 Grace [lovingkindness, hesed] and peace [as in Moroni 7:2-4 — He is writing to the same kind of Saints that Moroni was writing to] be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, [peace comes through knowledge because peace is a power that transcends sorrow]

    3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, [“all things” means ALL things] through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: [the call has already been issued. Again the audience is the same as in Moroni 7]

    4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises [another reference to the temple]: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature [he says “might be” because he is about to tell us how], having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. [lust is an excessive desire for anything]

    5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith [pistis = making and keeping covenants] virtue [the Greek word means manliness or vigor] ; and to virtue knowledge [Define knowledge as “And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come (D&C 93:24). The Savior said to Nicodemus, “he that doeth truth cometh to the light” (John 3:21). One can not DO truth, if one does not KNOW truth];

    6 And to knowledge temperance [being moderate, doing nothing in excess]; and to temperance patience [not just with other people, but also with ourselves and with God. After all, sometimes God doesn’t do things as quickly as we think he ought to.] and to patience godliness [the footnote in our Bible says that word is “reverence.” We can’t hurt anything we revere];

    7 And to godliness brotherly kindness [the special kind of love that people in the church share for each other]; and to brotherly kindness charity [the kind of love that the Saviour has for us. When we love him as he love us, then we will love others as we love him].

    That isn’t a list, it’s a sequence. Let me show you.

    1 faith = pistis = something that we are given, a power that we may exercise

    2 virtue = something we have = the integrity to do what must be done

    3 knowledge = something we are given and expected to act upon

    4 temperance = the way we conduct our own lives

    5 patience = attitude and actions toward other people

    6 godliness = reverence = attitude and actions toward other people

    7 brotherly kindness = attitude and actions toward other people, especially those

    with whom we serve in the church.

    8 charity = attitude and actions toward other people.

    The law of consecration is what one does when charity is what one is.

    The first four steps Peter outlines are about what one has to do for one’s Self enable us to serve. The second four are the steps that qualify us for eternal life. Even though they are a sequence, each of them must be developed in cycles, somewhat simultaneously with the others, because they build on each other. Peter continues,

    8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
    9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
    10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: (2 Peter 1:1-10)

    As far as I know, to make our calling sure is simply to fulfill the covenantal responsibilities we were called to perform, that is to keep the covenants we made at the Council in Heaven, before we came here. When we have done that, our election will have become absolutely sure.

    Now, my beloved friend, there is a very good reason I showed this to you. It is that there is nothing in that sequence that suggests anyone else has to even notice what you are doing, what you have done, or who you are. The qualities of greatness have nothing to do with what the world (or even many members of the church) calls being “great.” True greatness has only to do with the qualities of one’s soul. That greatness shines from your eyes and illuminates your whole person. It is the single thing that defines who and what you are.

    If love is the engine that drives our actions, and if we obey because we choose to, then both love and obedience are—together—the single expression of the eternal law of our own beings. They define who Ben was at the Council, who Ben is just now, and who Ben will always be. It is that light that causes me to love you so much.

    I suspect that the ultimate answer to both of your questions is simply this: Relax; be truly Ben; be happy and laugh a lot; and seek to be like the Savior who used up his life because he loves us, and who performed the atonement to make us free—so we can be whatever we choose to be.

    I do love you,

    LeGrand

  • 1 Nephi 1:0 — LeGrand Baker — How Joseph translated the Book of Mormon

    1 Nephi 1:0 — LeGrand Baker — How Joseph translated the Book of Mormon

    [I wrote this for our ward newsletter, June 2004,and  supposed some of you might find it interesting. The ideas are more fully discussed in my book, Joseph and Moroni.]

    “The most perfect Book,” How Joseph translated the Book of Mormon – LeGrand Baker

    At the time Nephi (she said it was Nephi) showed Mrs. Whitmer the Gold Plates,{1} the angel suggested she hire someone to help her around the house while Joseph and Oliver were staying there working on the translation of the Book of Mormon. She hired her niece, a girl named Sarah Conrad, to live at the house and help with the chores. She did not tell Sarah what Joseph and Oliver were doing, but it did not take long for Sarah to discover something unusual was going on. Sarah noticed that the Prophet and his friend “would go up into the attic, and they would stay all day. When they came down, they looked more like heavenly beings than they did just ordinary men.”{2} At first Sarah was curious, but in time their appearance actually frightened her. She went to her aunt and threatened to leave if she was not told what made those men “so exceedingly white.”{3}

    When Mrs. Whitmer “told her what the men were doing in the room above and that the power of God was so great in the room that they could hardly endure it. At times angels were in the room in their glory which nearly consumed them.”{4} The light with which Joseph shown came from his having been with the angels. This explanation was reasonable enough, and satisfied Sarah. She not only stayed with the Whitmers, but also became one of Joseph’s good friends, was baptized, and much later, after the Church was driven from Kirtland, Missouri, and Nauvoo, she settled with the Saints in Provo, Utah. {5}

    Sarah’s is the earliest of a number of accounts which testify that at times, when the Prophet was receiving revelation or was in the presence of heavenly beings, he, like Moses, actually glowed. Wilford Woodruff used the words, “His face was clear as amber,” when he tried to describe the Prophet’s appearance on one of those occasions.{6} Philo Dibble, who was present when the Prophet received the revelation which is now the 76th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, reported, “Joseph wore black clothes, but at this time seemed to be dressed in an element of glorious white.”{7}

    Sarah’s testimony that the men who were working on the translation of the Book of Mormon “looked so exceedingly white,” combined with Mrs. Whitmer’s explanation, “angels were in the room in their glory which nearly consumed them,” gives us a valuable key to understanding the Book of Mormon, by having a better insight to how it was translated. One may assume that if there were angels in the room they had some purpose for being there other than just to pass the time of day. It is reasonable to believe that their presence in the translating room implies that they were somehow involved int the actual work of translation.

    Neither Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, the Whitmers, nor Sarah Conrad left any record identifying who the angels were; but others also knew; and we have some information from them.

    Parley P. Pratt, did not identify the angels by name, but he testified that through Joseph Smith “and the ministration of holy angels to him, that book came forth to the world.”{8} His brother, Orson, added that during those years Joseph “was often ministered to by the angels of God, and received instruction” from them. {9}

    President John Taylor, who was a dear friend and confidant of the Prophet Joseph mentioned some of the angels by name. He said,

    Again, who more likely than Mormon and Nephi, and some of those prophets who had ministered to the people upon this continent, under the influence of the same Gospel, to operate again as its [the gospel’s] representatives? Well, now, do I believe that Joseph Smith saw the several angels alleged to have been seen by him as described one after another: Yes, I do.{10}

    On another occasion, when President Taylor was discussing the restoration of the Gospel, he said, “I can tell you what he [Joseph] told me about it.” Then told this story:

    Afterward the Angel Moroni came to him and revealed to him the Book of Mormon, with the history of which you are generally familiar, and also with the statements that I am now making pertaining to these things. And then came Nephi, one of the ancient prophets, that had lived upon this continent, who had an interest in the welfare of the people that he had lived amongst in those days.{11}

    On yet another occasion, President Taylor was even more explicit.

    And when Joseph Smith was raised up as a Prophet of God, Mormon, Moroni, Nephi and others of the ancient Prophets who formerly lived on this continent, and Peter and John and others who lived on the Asiatic Continent, came to him and communicated to him certain principles pertaining to the Gospel of the Son of God…. He was indebted to God; and we are indebted to God and to him for all the intelligence that we have on these subjects.{12}

    Similarly, George Q. Cannon once assured his listeners,

    [The Prophet Joseph] had doubtless, also, visits from Nephi and it may be from Alma and others. He was visited constantly by angels;… Moroni, in the beginning as you know, to prepare him for his mission came and ministered and talked to him from time to time, and he had vision after vision in order that his mind might be fully saturated with a knowledge of the things of God. {13}

    Joseph said very little about his work with Book of Mormon prophets other than Moroni. However, in the famous letter to John Wentworth, the one in which he also wrote the Articles of Faith, the Prophet explained that the Book of Mormon came forth only “after having received many visits from the angels of God unfolding the majesty and glory of the events that should transpire in the last days.”{14} The “many visits” could, of course, have all been from Moroni. But Moroni is only one angel and Joseph wrote that he had received “many visits from the angels.” That statement by the Prophet, coupled with those of his friends, leads one to conclude that the prophets who wrote the Book of Mormon either helped Joseph understand what he was reading, or actually participated in the translation of the Book of Mormon. It seems reasonable to me to suppose that the translation process was something of a joint effort between Moroni,

    Joseph Smith who used the Urim and Thummim, Nephi (perhaps more than one Nephi), Alma, Mormon “and others” of th e book’s original authors. Let me explain why I believe that is so.

    One cannot read the Book of Mormon without being aware that its original authors were very concerned that their message be accurately conveyed to the people of our day.{15} It would be consistent with the desires they expressed in their own lifetimes, and equally consistent with the covenants the Lord made with them about the preservation and coming forth of the Book of Mormon,{16} that those same prophets who originally wrote the words should be permitted to be present when Joseph Smith was working on the translation of their own writings. But It is my personal opinion that they were more involved than just acting as advisors.

    I once heard Nibley say that a translation, no matter how good, is, in fact, only a commentary – because at best, it is only the translator’s best guess about what the author intended to say. (The variety and number of translations of the Bible are sufficient evidence of how true that is.) However if the person who wrote the text in the first language, also wrote it in the second language, then the result would not be a “translation” at all. It would be a primary text written by the original author. Similarly, if the original authors translated their own portions of the Book, then when we read the Book, we are reading the actual words as they were written by Nephi, Alma, Mormon and the other great prophets. That would mean that the Book of Mormon in English is not a translation of a primary source, but is itself a “primary source” because it is the actual words of the original authors, and the ideas expressed by them there are as near to what they intended to say as the English language is able to convey. I believe that, and that is the way I read the Book of Mormon.

    It is my personal opinion that the original authors did participate in the translation of the Book of Mormon, and that the precision of their language – as they expressed it in English – imposes upon their readers the obligation to study with great care, not just the meaning of the words, but also the structure of the sentences, and the relationship of the ideas, in order to discover the full intent of the writings of those ancient American prophets.

    ———— END NOTES

    1. {1}  Andrew Jensen, Biographical Encyclopedia, 1:267.
    2. {2}  Richard L. Anderson, “The House Where the Church Was Organized,”Improvement Era,April, 1970, p. 21.
    3. {3}  Oliver B. Huntington, “Diary,” typescript copy at BYU Library. Vol. 2, p. 415-6.Huntington heard this story from Sarah, herself, when she was 88 years old.
    4. {4}  Huntington, “Diary,” 2:415-6.
    5. {5}  Huntington, “Diary,” 2:415-16. See also Anderson, “The House…”, Improvement Era,April, 1970, p. 21. I have also spoken with her descendants who confirmed the story.
    6. {6}  Wilford Woodruff, Conference Report, April, 1898, p. 89.
    7. {7}  Juvenile Instructor, 27:303-4.
    8. {8}  Journal of Discourses, 9:212. (Hereafter, JD)
    9. {9}  JD 15:185. See similar testimonies in JD 13:66 and 14:140.

    {10} JD 21:164.{11} JD 21:161.

    1. {12}  JD 27:374.
    2. {13}  JD 13:47; and JD 23:363.
    3. {14}  Documentary History of the Church, 4:537.
    4. {15}  For examples see: II Nephi 33:3-4; III Nephi 5:18; Mormon 8:12, 9:30-31; Enos 1:15-16;Ether 12:25-29. See also, II Nephi 3:19-21, 26:16, chapter 27; Mormon 5:12-13; Mosiah1:7; Doctrine and Covenants 17:6.
    5. {16}  Doctrine and Covenants 10:46-53.

    (End of this week’ comments)