Category: 1 Nephi

1 Nephi 1:7-11
7 And it came to pass that he returned to his own house at Jerusalem; and he cast himself upon his bed, being overcome with the Spirit and the things which he had seen.
8 And being thus overcome with the Spirit, he was carried away in a vision, even that he saw the heavens open, and he thought he saw God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God.
9 And it came to pass that he saw One descending out of the midst of heaven, and he beheld that his luster was above that of the sun at noon-day.
10 And he also saw twelve others following him, and their brightness did exceed that of the stars in the firmament.
11 And they came down and went forth upon the face of the earth; and the first came and stood before my father, and gave unto him a book, and bade him that he should read.

With those words ,Nephi firmly established that his father was a true prophet, and he did so with a legalistic precision that the Jews and Christians would have recognized as legitimate even as late as New Testament times. The Bible clearly establishes the criterion for a true prophet, and Nephi emphatically states that he and his father met that standard.

The definition of that standard is expressed in Amos’s testimony: “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7). The key word there is secret. It is translated from the Hebrew sode, which means the decisions of a divine council.{1}

Many Old Testament scholars agree that the council Amos referred to was the Council in Heaven, and that in similar contexts throughout the Old Testament, sode refers to the decisions made by that premortal Council of the gods. The most detailed study of the meaning of sode in the Old Testament and of its equivalent, mysterion in the New Testament (translated “mystery”), is by Raymond Brown. He writes:

We may begin with the Hebrew word “sod”. … the word has a wide semantic area: confidential talk, a circle of people in council, secrets….When we approach the early biblical uses of “sod” with the idea of “council” or “assembly” in mind, we find that this meaning particularly fits the passages dealing with the heavenly “sod” in biblical references to the heavenly council of God and his angels….Amos (3:7) announces almost as a proverb that God will surely not do anything until he has revealed his ‘sod’ to his servants the prophets.{2}

What Amos says is that the Lord will not do anything until after the prophet has returned, in vision, to the premortal Council in Heaven. During that vision, he will be shown the deliberations of the Council and the covenants and assignments he made and accepted in conjunction with those decisions—as they related to that prophet’s time and place on the earth. In other words, a true prophet is one who does and says on earth what he covenanted he would do and say while he was at the Council.

The Savior called attention to this principle in the Beatitudes when he said, “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.” He was quoting Psalm 37 and paraphrasing Psalm 25. Both psalms define the meek as those who keep their eternal covenants. Psalm 37 is not so explicit, but it equates “ those who wait on the Lord” with those who are “meek,” promising that they “shall inherit the earth”(Psalm 37:8-11).

However, Psalm 25 is very explicit. It defines the meek as those whom God will “teach his way,” who “keep his covenant,” whom God will “teach in the way that he [God] shall choose,” because “the secret [sode] of the Lord is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.” The psalm reminds the meek that the Lord will bless them according to the covenants he made with them at the Council and that those blessings will reach into the eternities: “His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth.”{3}

Joseph Smith gave us a key to understanding the importance of a sode experience,{4} and of the Council in Heaven when he wrote that the Council took place in Kolob. In February 1843, at the request of W.W. Phelps, the Prophet re-wrote the vision in poetic form. It was published in the Times and Seasons, February 1, 1843, and republished in the Millennial Star the following August. In the poem, Joseph equates the Doctrine and Covenants phrase “of old” with the time and place of the Council “in Kolob.” In the preceding quote, Nephi seems to be using that phrase the same way. The poem reads:

For thus saith the Lord, in the spirit of truth,
I am merciful, gracious, and good unto those
That fear me, and live for the life that’s to come:
My delight is to honour the Saints with repose,

That serve me in righteousness true to the end;
Eternal’s their glory and great their reward.
I’ll surely reveal all my myst’ries to them —
The great hidden myst’ries in my kingdom stor’d;

From the council in Kolob, to time on the earth,
And for ages to come unto them I will show
My pleasure and will, what the kingdom will do
Eternity’s wonders they truly shall know.{5}

Notwithstanding the initial importance of the activities of the Council in Kolob, throughout the Bible and the Book of Mormon the most significant role of the members of the Council was not so much what they did in their premortal lives but what they did on the earth after they returned to the Council and re-affirmed their covenants regarding the responsibilities they had on this earth. The scriptures teach us that the significance of the premortal covenants each of us made before we came to this earth is as relevant to our present earthly responsibilities—and to our ultimate salvation—as the covenants God made with the prophets at the Council are relevant to their earthly responsibilities and ultimate salvation.

Paul carefully explains that in his letter to the Ephesians. He uses most of chapter one to discuss the covenants made at the Council. Then, in the rest of the letter, he teaches what one must do to fulfil those covenants. Implicit in that and in other scriptures is the principle that the covenants we make in this world are reaffirmations of the covenants we made before we came here. In short, the experience we have in remaking those covenants and ordinances is a kind of this-world representation of a sode experience, and carries with it much of the same responsibility.

Jeremiah established the standard in the Old Testament for knowing the difference between a true prophet and a false one (Jeremiah 23:18-22).{6} There, the Lord condemns false prophets for presuming to speak for God without authority from him. A true prophet is one is one who has the authority to speak on behalf of God.

Nephi was very aware of that standard; therefore, he clearly identified both his own and his father’s prophetic authority in those terms.

In his discussion of the meaning of the Hebrew word sode and the Greek word mysterion in the Old and New Testaments,{7} Brown shows that both words have essentially the same meaning. That is, they both refer to the decisions made at the Heavenly Council.

The Book of Mormon uses biblical words the same way the Bible does. So when Nephi writes in the very first verse that he has “a great knowledge of the goodness and the mysteries of God,” he is declaring that he has had a sode experience (which he will later describe to us in much detail) and that therefore he has met the qualifications of being a true prophet.

Almost immediately after that, Nephi identifies his father as being a true prophet by showing that Lehi was transported to heaven where he heard the angels singing (members of the Council), he saw God sitting upon his throne, and he received his assignment by reading it in the heavenly book that was given him by Jehovah.

In terms of the ancient Israelite religion, if the Book of Mormon is to be understood as scripture that was written by true prophets of God, then it must begin at the Council in Heaven with a sode experience—which is precisely what it does.

The ancient Israelite temple drama was a generic enactment of the sode, because in it each person in the audience remade the covenants they had once made at the Council. But even though it was generic, it was very personal. It was about each person’s relationship with God. Even though the room might have been full of people, the Spirit taught each one individually about its personal meaning to that person.

When the Spirit teaches us about who we are or about what we should be doing just then, he is opening a window for us. So, even though few of us actually see the vision, we are each taught as much about the sode as we need to know to enable us to keep our covenants, without imposing so much upon us that it impedes our agency.

—————————————

FOOTNOTES

{1} Sode is pronounced with a long “O” as in “over.” Some scholars spell it in all caps: SOD. Other scholars spell it differently. It is spelled “sode” in the dictionary at the back of James Strong, ed., The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #5475.

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

{3} That last phrase is one of many places in the scriptures that quietly teach the doctrines of eternal marriage and eternal increase. The Savior called attention to those doctrines at least twice in the Beatitudes: First, where he paraphrases Isaiah 61 (“Blessed are they that mourn from they shall be comforted” in which the new name and the final two verses contain those same eternal promises. Then again when the Savior called attention to the promises in Psalms 25 and 37 (“Blessed are the meek”).
The meaning of “inherit the earth” is clarified in D&C 88:17-20:

17 And the redemption of the soul is through him that quickeneth all things, in whose bosom it is decreed that the poor and the meek of the earth shall inherit it.
18 Therefore, it must needs be sanctified from all unrighteousness, that it may be prepared for the celestial glory;
19 For after it hath filled the measure of its creation, it shall be crowned with glory, even with the presence of God the Father;
20 That bodies who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever; for, for this intent was it made and created, and for this intent are they sanctified.

{4} For a discussion of sode see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 195-208; Second edition, p. 139-148.

{5} “A Vision,” by the Prophet Joseph Smith. In February 1843, at the request of W.W. Phelps, the Prophet rewrote the vision, which is now the 76th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, in poetry form. It was published in the Times and Seasons, February 1, 1843, and republished in the Millennial Star, August, 1843.

{6} In these verses the word sode is translated as “counsel” rather than as “council” or “secret.”

{7} Raymond E. Brown, The Semitic Background of the Term “Mystery” in the New Testament (Fortress Press, Philadelphia, 1968).

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

1 Nephi 1:4

… 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.

We know so little about the Israelite religion before the Babylonian captivity. Actually, the Book of Mormon is a much better source of pre-exilic Israelite theology than anything we find in the Bible. The reason is that all the history books in Old Testament were written or edited after the destruction of Jerusalem and end of the Melchizedek Priesthood rites of Solomon’s Temple. After the Babylonian captivity, the five books of Moses were so severely edited that most scholars believe that they were actually written as late as the fourth century B.C.{1}

The Jewish apostasy began before the Babylonian captivity and was the reason Lehi and the other prophets were persecuted. Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord has a chapter called “Evidences of Ancient Jewish Apostasy.” It helps explain why the prophets in Lehi’s time were in such trouble.{2} By then, there were two competing “priesthood groups.” The prophets such as Elijah, Elisha, and Lehi had the Melchizedek Priesthood. However, for the most part they were disdained by the authors of the Old Testament who told stories about bears eating children and that sort of thing. The competing group was the priests who had control of the Temple and the temple treasury. From the time of King Josiah the priests either dominated, or at least were in cahoots with the apostate kings. After the Babylonian captivity the priests were in almost complete control. One of the authors of Chronicles gives us a hint of the conflict between the priests and the prophets, but there are no real details:

14 Moreover all the chief of the priests, and the people, transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the house of the Lord which he had hallowed in Jerusalem.
15 And the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place:
16 But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against his people, till there was no remedy (2 Chronicles 36:14-16).

—————————————-
FOOTNOTES

{1} Their editorial policy was apparently to remove evidences of such ideas as the Atonement, priesthood, and temple rites from the text. For an example see the contrast between the accounts of Noah and the ark as recorded in Genesis and in the Book of Moses in Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord: 2009 edition pages 64-67; 2010 edition pages 59-61.

{2} Two works that discuss the pre-exilic Jewish apostasy are: Margaret Barker, The Great High Priest, The Temple Roots of Christian Liturgy (London and New York, T&T Clark, 2003); and G. W. Ahlstrom, Joel and the Temple Cult of Jerusalem, (Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1971).

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Sometimes the best way to understand what is going on in the Book of Mormon is to relate it to the history, religion, or culture of the Old Testament. That is certainly true of the beginning of First Nephi. What follows is a brief attempt to provide an historical context for Nephi’s story. It seems appropriate to begin about 130 years earlier, in 728 B.C., with the reign of Hezekiah and conclude in 587 when Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians.

I am using as sources for the dates the chronology in the LDS Bible Dictionary and various articles from the Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, 5 vols. (Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1991

Briefly, the chronology of that period is this:

740 — Isaiah chapter 6 begins in the year that King Uzziah died
728 – 697 — Hezekiah, king of Judah
721 or 722 — End of the northern kingdom of Israel; Assyrians deported the Ten Tribes to northern Mesopotamia.
697 – 642 — Manasseh, king of Judah
642 – 640 — Amon, king of Judah
640 – 609 — Josiah, king of Judah.
628 — Jeremiah began to prophesy during the time of Josiah
609 — Jehoahaz, king of Judah, removed by Necho king of Egypt
609 – 598 — Jehoiakim made king of Judah by Necho
598 – 597 — Jehoiachin, king of Judah
597 — Nebuchadnezzar conquers Jerusalem; Jehoiachin taken as a captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar; Daniel and Ezekiel also taken to Babylon
597 — Zedekiah made king of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar
597 — Nephi begins his narrative in the first year of the reign of Zedekiah. Soon after that, Lehi and his family leave Jerusalem
587 – Babylonians capture Jerusalem a second time, They destroy the city and the Temple; They deport all but the poorest Jews; Zedekiah taken as a captive to Babylon

There are two reasons to begin with the reign of Hezekiah. First, it was during his time that the Ten Tribes became “lost.” Second, Isaiah’s writings play a major role in the Book of Mormon. Hezekiah and Isaiah were contemporaries and good friends. Together they played a pivotal role in the history of Judah. Knowing Isaiah’s place in history helps us understand the Isaiah passages in the Book of Mormon.

In the days of Hezekiah and Isaiah, the Assyrian empire was the most aggressively expansive that the ancient Near Eastern world had ever known.

The meaning of empire had been redefined in 745 when Tiglath-pileser III (called Pul in the Bible) seized the Assyrian throne. Before his time, wars usually had been fought to obtain slaves, plunder, tribute, and commercial advantage; but now, Tiglath-pileser began aggressive wars with the intent of expanding his administrative territory. From Nineveh, his capital (located on the east side of the Tigris river, about halfway between the river’s headwaters to the north and the city of Babylon to the south), his empire reached to the south beyond Babylon and on to the mouths of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers; eventually, it stretched southwest to include the lands of Syria, Israel, and Egypt. To guarantee the success of their empire, the Assyrians developed a policy of deporting conquered people to distant territories and then repopulating the vacated land with conquered people imported from other lands. It was assumed that people who were separated from their homes, their traditions, and their local gods, would not have the patriotic cohesion to start a rebellion in their strange new surroundings.

By 734 the Assyrian empire had covered much of the northern and eastern part of the fertile crescent and was beginning to threaten the western side along the Mediterranean and toward Egypt. In response, Israel and Syria formed a defensive coalition against Assyria, and tried to force Ahaz, king of Judah, to join them. They threatened to invade Judah and replace the king if he did not meet their demands. Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser for help. He responded with vigor, and, in 732, conquered Syria, deported much of its population, and made it part of his empire.

Nine years later, in 721, the Assyrians conquered Israel and deported most of its inhabitants to northern Mesopotamia and Media. The northern kingdom of Israel, the “Ten Tribes,” had lasted about two centuries after they separated from Judah following Solomon’s death. The Assyrians left only the poorest people in the land, and then brought in other peoples whom they had conquered. In time, these foreigners merged with the remaining Israelites to become the Samaritans whom we know from the New Testament.

A few years before the defeat of the ten northern tribes of Israel, Hezekiah became king at Jerusalem.

As the Assyrians became more aggressive, it became apparent that they would try to extend their empire along the east coast of the Mediterranean Sea and to Egypt. As that time approached, Hezekiah made preparations for war. He made other preparations also. The people of Israel, the ten tribes, were mostly apostate, but some still worshiped Jehovah. Hezekiah provided an excuse for those faithful to flee from the impending Assyrian invasion by sending messangers through Israel to invite them to come to Jerusalem for Passover (2 Chronicles 30:1-11). The Bible says many responded and came.

Against the advice of Isaiah, Hezekiah allied himself with Egypt in defense against further Assyrian encroachments, then he prepared for war. His engineers cut a tunnel 1,750 feet long through the solid rock under Jerusalem from the Gihon spring in the Kidron valley to bring water into the city. It would also deprive an invading army of water during a siege. Even though Isaiah opposed the alliance with Egypt, he prophesied that Jerusalem would be saved from the Assyrian invaders (2 Kings 19:1-34).

As expected, Sennacherib, the new king of Assyria, brought an army south along the Mediterranean coast. They soundly defeated an Egyptian force, then turned on Jerusalem. A large contingent of the Assyrian army surrounded the city and prepared for a long siege. An account of what happened next was found by archaeologists excavating in Nineveh. Sennacherib had boasted that he had shut up Hezekiah “like a bird in a cage,” but that was his face-saving version of the story.

The prophet had promised, “Jerusalem shall not be delivered into the hand of the king of Assyria.” The Assyrians had mockingly quoted that prophecy (2 Kings 19:10), but later the Bible description of what happened to the besieging Assyrian army tells how the promise was fulfilled.

35 And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses.
36 So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh.
37 And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword: and they escaped into the land of Armenia. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his stead (2 Kings 19:35-37).

The sudden deaths in that part of the Assyrian army spared Jerusalem and prevented its people from being scattered, but did not keep Judah out of the grip of the Assyrian empire.

Hezekiah is reported to have been the best of all the kings of Judea. He and Isaiah successfully reformed the religious practices of the Jews and brought them back into conformity with the laws of Jehovah. But Manasseh, his son and successor, turned away from Jehovah and made Baal worship the state religion. Manasseh seized Isaiah, then offered to spare him if he would worship Baal. When Isaiah refused, the king had him stretched out and “sawed him asunder with a wood-saw.”{1}

Manasseh ruled for 45 years, the longest reign in Judah’s history (687-42). After that, the Jews never fully recovered from the apostasy he had begun. When he died (only about 50 years before Lehi left Jerusalem), he was succeeded by his son who was soon assassinated. His grandson Josiah was proclaimed king when he was only eight years old. During his minority, the regents and real rulers of Judah were the temple priests.

Because the Assyrian empire had begun to crumble from internal weakness, by 628 when Josiah was 20 years old, his kingdom had become politically and financially independent. There were small temples scattered throughout Judea. Menahem Haran explains:

In addition to the twelve or thirteen temples listed so far, ancient Israel may have known some other temples which have left no trace whatsoever in the Old Testament. Nevertheless, it is a reasonable assumption that any addition to this list (which would have to be based on new, extra-biblical evidence) would be insignificant, and that the total number of Israelite temples can not have been much greater than that which emerges from the biblical records.{2}

Josiah and his priests closed the local small temples{3} and sanctuaries that were dedicated to Jehovah, and centralized the collecting of tithes and offerings under the control of the priestly bureaucracy at the Jerusalem Temple.{4}

Beginning with the reign of Josiah and the priests, the most important religious practices of the worship of Jehovah were also changed. One of the strongest evidences of that change is that Josiah ordered that the Ark should no more be carried outside the Temple. The record simply says:

3 And said unto the Levites that taught all Israel, which were holy unto the Lord, Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David king of Israel did build; it shall not be a burden upon your shoulders: serve now the Lord your God, and his people Israel (2 Chronicles 35:3)

If the Ark could no longer be taken from the Temple, then those ceremonies conducted annually outside the Temple—probably including most or all of the Feast of Tabemacles temple drama{5} —were abandoned.{6} Josiah replaced the temple drama with a prolonged Feast of the Passover and seems to have sought to validate the change in the minds of the people by providing great amounts of food for everybody for seven days (2 Chronicles 35:3-19).

Josiah ruled for 31 years, until 609 B.C.— Ezekiel and Jeremiah lived most of their early adult lives during the reign of Josiah. Their attitude toward the decreasing righteousness of the Jewish people is a very good gauge by which to judge the changes that were being made in Josiah’s new state religion and carried out by his successors. The near-culmination of this apostasy in Judah was described by Nephi: “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” (1 Nephi 1:4).

Lehi may have been several years younger than Josiah. It is rather easy to calculate Lehi’s approximate age at the time he left Jerusalem. In Jewish tradition, the ages when boys did important things was pretty well established by custom. At age 8 days a boy was circumcised. Age 13 was his bar mitzvah. At age 18 to 20 years he married. At age 31 he became a “young man” and could sit in the ruling councils of the synagogue or the Sanhedrin. So the “rich young man” who went away in sorrow when Jesus told him to sell everything was about Jesus’ own age.)

Laman, Lehi’s oldest son, was not yet married, so Laman was not older than 20.
If there had been about 2 years between the births of the sons, Lemuel would not have been older than about 18,
Sam would have been about16.
Nephi would have been about 14. (He describes himself as being “exceedingly young” in 1 Nephi 2:16.)
Lehi and Sariah also had at least one daughter, but we do not have any evidence about when she might have been born.
Lehi was married by about age 20, so if Laman had been the oldest child, that would make Lehi about 40 when he left Jerusalem. (It is possible, however, that Sariah was Lehi’s second marriage.)

If those calculations are correct, then all of Lehi’s four oldest sons had been born during Josiah’s reign. Lehi was a wealthy man whose children would have associated with the aristocracy. That is, if Lehi lived in, or frequented, Jerusalem, his older sons would have known and probably associated with the young men who followed Josiah to the throne.

As the Assyrians had grown weaker, Babylon had grown stronger. Nineveh fell to the Babylonians in 612, but the Assyrian army was not completely destroyed until three years after that.

In 609, as the Medes and Babylonians gathered for the kill, the Egyptians, who feared a strong Babylon, rushed to assist the Assyrians. Josiah tried to intercede and was mortally wounded during the battle in which the Egyptians routed his army. He died a short time later in Jerusalem.

After Josiah’s death, the Jewish monarchy slowly melted into chaos. Pharaoh Necho was defeated by the Babylonians but his ambition for empire was not diminished. On his way back to Egypt, he stopped at Jerusalem and deposed Josiah’s son Jehoahaz, who had been on the throne only three months. In his place, Necho installed Jehoiakim, another of Josiah’s sons, as king of Judah.

Now that the Assyrians were no longer in the game, the struggle for supremacy was between Babylon and Egypt. Their armies met at Carchemish in 605. There Nebuchadnezzar{7} soundly defeated the Egyptians, but the next day he learned that his father had died, so rather than pursue the Egyptians, Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylon to secure his place on the throne.

Diplomatically, Jehoiakim was forced to try to keep his balance between these two strong enemies. Geographically, Judah was on the road that the armies of both would have to travel in order to challenge the other. Egypt was the closest, and therefore had been the first to claim dominion over its Jewish neighbor.

When Nebuchadnezzar defeated Necho, Jehoikim tried to avoid trouble by pledging his support to Babylon, but then switched back to Egypt again in 601 when Necho and Nebuchadnezzar fought to a draw. Because of his vacillations, Jehoikim was distrusted by both of his more powerful neighbors, and he was left without a firm ally.

By this time, the prophet Jeremiah was deeply involved in Jewish politics and urged his king to return to the Babylonian fold and stay there, saying that Egypt was too weak to be counted on. Since Lehi was apparently a friend and associate of Jeremiah, one can assume that he and the other prophets Nephi mentions were also taking the same political side. Nephi described the events of only a year later when he reported, “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.” The connotations of that warning seem to be as much about national politics and international relations as they are about religious righteousness. Jeremiah’s history certainly suggests that was so. The prophets were arguing that bad political decisions had been based on bad moral choices. Given the climate of the times, it is not unlikely that Lehi’s political stance as well as his cry for repentance had alienated the people who conspired to take his life.

Late in 598 Jehoiakim died, and his 18-year-old son Jehoiachin came to the throne. Even then, Nebuchadnezzar had already begun his march toward Jerusalem. After he had been king for only three months and 10 days, in the spring of 597, Jehoiachin surrendered Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar. The Jewish king and most of the aristocracy were then transported to Babylon, apparently more as hostages than as slaves, for archaeologists have found records that show that Jehoiachin was well treated while he was there. Other members of the landed and merchant classes were left behind. We know of two specific examples: Lehi, whose estates were not plundered by the Babylonian armies (the boys were able to go back and gather up a good deal of treasure to take to Laban); neither was Laban’s home in Jerusalem. His royal and sacred regalia (including clothing and the sword), and also the brass plates that contained his genealogies and were the official evidence of his aristocratic birth, all remained undisturbed.

Nebuchadnezzar installed Jehoiachin’s 21-year-old uncle Mattaniah on the Jewish throne. He gave the young king the new covenant name of Zedekiah{8} (2 Kings 24:17-19), so that name, Zedekiah, represented the covenant relationship between Mattaniah and Nebuchadnezzar. If Zedekiah were to break the treaty his kingship would be forfeited. He did break the treaty and reigned only eleven years, 597-587. He was destined to be Judah’s last king.

Nephi began his father’s history “in the commencement of the first year of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah.” If the above chronology is correct, that would have been in 597 B.C. when Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem and installed Zedekiah as king.

During that year that Lehi received a commission from the Lord to warn the people of Jerusalem of their impending doom. That is especially interesting in view of the fact that Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion had already passed, and he had made an alliance with Jerusalem’s new king, so Judah’s situation appeared to be stable. In fact, it would prove to be on the edge of disaster. Lehi and his family left sometime after that, but not so late that they did not have time to return twice before Nebuchadnezzar’s final and fatal attack.

The closing act in the complex drama of Judah’s last hundred years was a kind of replay of the previous calamities. Caught in the tensions between Babylon and Egypt, the weak king repeatedly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but then always rejected it. Zedekiah vacillated between keeping his covenants with Nebuchadnezzar and allying himself with Necho, until 589. Then, hanging his hopes on Egyptian promises, Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar had toyed with the Jewish kings too long, and this time when he came to Jerusalem with an army to remove Zedekiah from his throne, he would leave the city broken and uninhabitable.

With siege works, Nebuchadnezzar sealed Jerusalem off from the rest of Judah. Then, while the people in the city starved, the Babylonian army systematically decimated the rest of the country (see 2 Kings 25:1-21; Jeremiah 37:21, 39:1-10, 52:1-30; Lamentations 2, 4). The siege of Jerusalem began in 589 B.C., in the ninth year of Zedekiah’s reign. The city’s walls were breached in July, 587. That would account for why Lehi’s party did not know about the fall of Jerusalem. It took them eight years to get to Bountiful, so they would have been in the new world before Jerusalem was destroyed.

After his first successful invasion, Nebuchadnezzar had taken golden vessels and other treasures from the temple, but otherwise had not damaged the building. After his second invasion, however, his attitude completely changed. The city and the temple were plundered, then the temple was burned along with most of the rest of the city.

Zedekiah and his family tried to escape but were captured and taken before the king of Babylon. There Zedekiah’s sons were killed before his eyes, after which he was blinded so their deaths would be the last thing he ever saw. “Zedekiah” had ceased to exist when he broke his covenant with Nebuchadnezzar.{9} Now Mattaniah, the one-time king, was only a blind slave. He was bound in chains and forced to walk across the desert to Babylon. There he spent the rest of his life climbing the endless stairs of a treadmill—lifting water from a canal into an irrigation ditch. The prophecies of Lehi, Ezekiel (12:13), and Jeremiah (34:2-5) had all been fulfilled.
———————————–

FOOTNOTES

{1} The Martyrdom of Isaiah, in R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913),155-62.

{2} Menahem Haran, Temples and Temple Service in Ancient Israel: An Inquiry into Biblical Cult Phenomena and the Historical Setting of the Priestly School (Oxford: Clarendon, 1978; reprinted with corrections: Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1985), 39.

{3} For further information on additional Israelite temples, see “Temples,” in Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 4 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962),4:560- 68; Beth Alpert Nakhai, “What’s a Bamah? How Sacred Space Functioned in Ancient Israel,” Biblical Archaeology Review 20, 3 (May/June, 1994): 18-29, 77- 78. On page 26 there are two photographs of the remains of a small Israelite temple that was probably destroyed as part of Josiah’s crusade against the small temples.

{4} W. Eugene Clabum, “The Fiscal Basis of Josiah’s Reforms,” Journal of Biblical Literature 92, 1 (March 1973): 11-22. For a discussion of other Israelite temples, see Haran, Temples and Temple-service, especially chapter 2, “The Israelite Temples,” and chapter 7, “The Centralizations of the Cult”; Zeev Herzog, “Israelite Sanctuaries at Arad and Beer-Sheba,” Temples and High Places in Biblical Times, 120-22.

{5} See Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord? the chapter titled “Evidences of Ancient Jewish Apostasy,” first edition, 57-74; 2011(paperback) edition, 55-65. For further discussion, see Albertson, “Reflections on the Emergence of a Standard Text”; G. W. Ahlstrom, Joel and the Temple Cult of Jerusalem (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971), 77 -78, fn. 3; Klaus Baltzer, “Considerations Regarding the Office and Calling of the Prophet,” Harvard Theological Review 61, 4 (1968): 567-82; George A. Barton, The Religion of Ancient Israel (New York: A. S. Barnes, 1961),158-64.

{6} See Margaret Barker, Great High Priest, The Temple Roots of Christian Liturgy (London: T&T Clark, 2003), 149.

{7} His name was officially Nebuchadrezzar and is spelled that way in Jeremiah. However, his name Nebuchadnezzar was used in certain accounts and is usually spelled that way in our Bible.

{8} It is almost universally accepted that this is the Zedekiah Nephi mentions. However there is apparently another possibility. Jeremiah 27:1-4 speaks of Jehoiakim as “Zedekiah.”

{9} For a discussion of the significance of new names see Bruce H. Porter and Stephen D. Ricks, “Names in Antiquity: Old, New, and Hidden,” in John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks, eds., Essays in Honor of Hugh W. Nibley (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 1990).

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

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.”
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

(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.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

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

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

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 11:22-25 — LeGrand Baker — “The representation of the love of God.”

1 Nephi 11:22-25
22 And I answered him, saying: Yea, it is the love of God, which sheddeth itself abroad in the hearts of the children of men; wherefore, it is the most desirable above all things.
23 And he spake unto me, saying: Yea, and the most joyous to the soul.
24 And after he had said these words, he said unto me: Look! And I looked, and I beheld the Son of God going forth among the children of men; and I saw many fall down at his feet and worship him.
25 And it came to pass that I beheld that the rod of iron, which my father had seen, was the word of God, which led to the fountain of living waters, or to the tree of life; which waters are a representation of the love of God; and I also beheld that the tree of life was a representation of the love of God.

In that scripture the phrase, “the most joyous to the soul” is bracketed with “the love of God. Each is a necessary component of the other. To know joy is to love others and to be worthy of being a recipient of their love—to love and to be loved as the Saviour loves, and as he accepts our love.

The Saviour and his friends

No expanse of friendships is documented more thoroughly in the scriptures than those of the Saviour himself. He extends his friendship to his children and invites us to be his friends. Such a friendship is most sacred—it is neither casual nor nonchalant. There are clearly defined conditions to that friendship—the same conditions for our being able to be where he is. Thus, in extending the invitation, he seeks to teach us how we can qualify, and help others to qualify, to be where he is. Evidence of the Saviour’s desire to be a friend can be found as early as the story of Abraham. When King Jehoshaphat, stood in the Temple at Jerusalem, he prayed, “Art not thou our God, who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham thy friend for ever?” (2 Chronicles 20:5-7) In the New Testament, James affirmed Jehovah’s relationship with Abraham, when he wrote,

22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. (James 2:22)

Similarly, Moses was also regarded as Jehovah’s friend.

9 And it came to pass, as Moses entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar descended, and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the LORD talked with Moses.
10 And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door.
11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. (Exodus 33:9-11)

One of the New Testament’s repeated evidences of Jesus’s divine nature is its many references to his devotion to his friends. The Apostle John never speaks in the first person, but always refers to himself as the disciple “whom Jesus loved.” (John 13:23, 20: 2, 21:7) But John does not imply that it was only he whom Jesus loved. The story of Lazarus is a shining example of others whom Jesus loved very dearly.

5 Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus.
6 When he had heard therefore that he was sick, he abode two days still in the same place where he was. …
11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep….
32 Then when Mary was come where Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.
33 When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled,
34 And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.
35 Jesus wept.
36 Then said the Jews, Behold how he loved him!…
38 Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave….

43 And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.
44 And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go. (John 11:5-44)

That same love is expressed by Mark, when he tells the story of the rich young man.

20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions. (Mark 10:20-22)

The Saviour’s deepest personal feelings—the love he showed for his mother and his friend— are revealed in the very conclusion of the story of his life on the earth:

25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.
26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! (John 19:25-26)

Now long before that, when Jesus spoke his High-Priestly Prayer, he showed that same concern for all of the Twelve— all of us. (John 17:1-26 It is too long to quote here, but please read it.)

Luke also shows that Jesus called his apostles his friends, not so much in a casual, but in a very caring and affectionate way.

4 And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him. (Luke 12:4-5)

In this last dispensation, Jesus spoke the same way to the Prophet Joseph and others. To his modern apostles he said,

63  And as I said unto mine apostles, even so I say unto you, for you are mine apostles, even God’s high priests; ye are they whom my Father hath given me; ye are my friends. (D&C 84:63)

To those present when the Prophet received section 88, he said,

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you who have assembled yourselves together to receive his will concerning you:
2 Behold, this is pleasing unto your Lord, and the angels rejoice over you; the alms of your prayers have come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, and are recorded in the book of the names of the sanctified, even them of the celestial world.
3 Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.
4 This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom;
5 Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son— ….
62 And again, verily I say unto you, my friends, I leave these sayings with you to ponder in your hearts, with this commandment which I give unto you, that ye shall call upon me while I am near—
63 Draw near unto me and I will draw near unto you; seek me diligently and ye shall find me; ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
64 Whatsoever ye ask the Father in my name it shall be given unto you, that is expedient for you;
65 And if ye ask anything that is not expedient for you, it shall turn unto your condemnation.
66 Behold, that which you hear is as the voice of one crying in the wilderness—in the wilderness, because you cannot see him—my voice, because my voice is Spirit; my Spirit is truth; truth abideth and hath no end; and if it be in you it shall abound. (D&C 88:1-5, 62-66)

To those present when the Prophet received section 93, he said:

45 Verily, I say unto my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., or in other words, I will call you friends, for you are my friends, and ye shall have an inheritance with me—
46 I called you servants for the world’s sake, and ye are their servants for my sake. (D&C 93:45-46)

It was not only the apostles and the church leaders whom the Saviour called his friends. At the beginning of a revelation addressed to all the Saints in Missouri, the Saviour said,

1 Verily I say unto you my friends, fear not, let your hearts be comforted; yea, rejoice evermore, and in everything give thanks. (D&C 98:1)

This revelation is not unique. There are five other revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants where the Saviour begins with a salutation were he refers to “my friends.”2 In most of these he gives them council and commandments, making it clear that even though he calls them “friends” they must keep his commandments or they cannot be where he is. The Saviour taught that principle to his apostles,

1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. ….
34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. (John 13:1, 34-35)

The Prophet Joseph explained,

1 When the Savior shall appear we shall see him as he is. We shall see that he is a man like ourselves.
2 And that same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy. (D&C 130:1-2)

The other places where the Saviour refers to his followers as his friends are: D&C 94:1, 97:1, 100:1, 103:1, 104:1 .