Category: 1 Nephi

  • 1 Nephi 10:11 — LeGrand Baker — To “dwindle in unbelief.”

    1 Nephi 10:11 

    11. And it came to pass after my father had spoken these words he spake unto my brethren concerning the gospel that should be preached among the Jews, and also concerning the dwindling of the Jews in unbelief. And after they had slain the Messiah, who should come, and after he had been slain he should rise from the dead, and should make himself manifest, by the Holy Ghost, unto the Gentiles.

    A phrase that is frequently used in the Book of Mormon that means to be in the state of apostasy is “dwindle in unbelief.” Since “dwindle” is a word that is not much used in our culture, the impact of the phrase is often overlooked. The Oxford English Dictionary definition of “to dwindle” is: “to become smaller and smaller; to shrink, waste away, decline; to decline in quality, value, or estimation; to degenerate; to reduce gradually in size, cause to shrink into small dimensions.” So dwindling in unbelief is not a static state of apostasy. Rather, it is a state of ever diminishing understanding of what is truth. Alma uses that same concept to describe individual apostasy and to define the “chains of hell” (Alma 12:9-11). An example of this type of apostasy being widespread over an entire culture is found in 4 Nephi. That example is followed almost immediately by a description of a different kind of apostasy: “they did not dwindle in unbelief, but they did wilfully rebel” (4 Nephi 1:34, 38).
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

  • 1 Nephi 10:8-10 — LeGrand Baker — Prophecy about John the Baptist.

    1 Nephi 10:8-10 

    7 And he spake also concerning a prophet who should come before the Messiah, to prepare the way of the Lord—
    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.
    9 And my father said he should baptize in Bethabara, beyond Jordan; and he also said he should baptize with water; even that he should baptize the Messiah with water.
    10 And after he had baptized the Messiah with water, he should behold and bear record that he had baptized the Lamb of God, who should take away the sins of the world.

    Lehi is quoting Isaiah 40:3. The context of Isaiah’s prophecy about John the Baptist is the Council in Heaven (sode)where John was given his earthly assignment. The first two verses of that chapter are a review of the entire ancient Israelite temple drama in the setting of the Council in Heaven (sode).

    The key word in Isaiah 40:1-2 is comfort, which means to empower. The “comfort” is Isaiah 61 is a coronation ceremony: to wash, anoint, clothe, crown, and give a new name. {1}
    —————–
    FOOTNOTE

    {1} For a discussion of the Hebrew word translated as “comfort” see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 467-71; Second edition, p. 340-42.

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

  • 1 Nephi 9:5-6 — LeGrand Baker – “The Most Correct Book.”

    1 Nephi 9:5-6  

    5 Wherefore, the Lord hath commanded me to make these plates for a wise purpose in him, which purpose I know not.
    6 But the Lord knoweth all things from the beginning; wherefore, he prepareth a way to accomplish all his works among the children of men; for behold, he hath all power unto the fulfilling of all his words. And thus it is. Amen.

    The instructions to create the small plates came 30 years after Lehi and his family left Jerusalem. Nephi apparently spent the next ten years writing and polishing the book that we call First Nephi.{1} If, as we suggested above,{2} Nephi was about 14 when he left Jerusalem, he would have been about 44 when he received the instructions to begin, and about 54 when he finished engraving the finished work into the sheets of gold.

    His age is relevant, because First Nephi is clearly the work of a mature mind—one who knew first hand the beauties and dangers of this world, and the goodness and power of God.

    Fifteen years later, when Nephi was almost 70, he gave the plates to his brother Jacob, with the instructions that he was to add only “a few of the things which I considered to be most precious” (Jacob 1:1-4). Jacob’s descendants kept them until they came into the possession of Amaleki, who gave them to King Benjamin (Omni 1:24-25). They remained in the royal archives until Mormon searched and found them there. Mormon did not abridge them, but bound them with the gold plates that Moroni would entrust to Joseph Smith (Words of Mormon:1:6-7).

    It is an important part of the story that Nephi did not know why he had been instructed to write them, and Mormon did not know why he was including them in his own bound record, but both testified that it was for a wise purpose that was known to God.

    About 2,300 years after the Lord instructed Nephi to write them, he explained his reasoning to the Prophet Joseph. Martin Harris had lost 116 manuscript pages Joseph had translated. Thereafter, the Lord explained to the Prophet why he was not to re-translate the lost portion (D&C 10:38-45).

    In that explanation, the phrase, “until you come to that which you have translated, which you have retained” tells us that of the parts Joseph had already translated. He had unknowingly given Martin only the pages that could be replaced by the small plates.

    Mormon’s decision to include the original small plates of Nephi presents an interesting problem when we analyze the prophet Joseph’s translating skills. Mormon tells us that he is writing in “reformed Egyptian,”which may be an amalgamation of Egyptian (quite possibly the script) and Hebrew (possibly the underlying language, perhaps in the way that Yiddish is an amalgamation of Hebrew script and a Middle Germanic dialect or Persian or Urdu is an amalgamation of Arabic script and an Indoeuropean dialect. A written language retains its integrity over the years better than one that is not written. (For example, the Mulekites, who did not have a written language, were no longer speaking a Hebrew that was intelligible to the Nephites.) But during a period of the thousand years even written languages change a great deal. Computerized wordprint study of the Book of Mormon shows that different authors had distinctive writing styles.{3}

    The retention of those different styles in the Book of Mormon is evidence that Joseph Smith did not compose the book, but it is also evidence that Mormon did not rewrite the earlier sermons and records in his own reformed Egyptian. Implicitly, what he did was include the sermons and letters just as King Benjamin, Alma, and Helaman and others had written them, and the words of the Savior just as Nephi III had recorded them. That is, on Mormon’s plates, Alma’s sermons were written in Alma’s dialect, and the Savior’s words were written in the dialect of the Nephites in the meridian of time. To get a notion of what that means, we might compare it with English. If we assume Mormon’s reformed Egyptian was in about the same stage of development as twenty-first century English, then, in this analogy, it was as though Alma had written in Elizabethan English, and King Benjamin might have spoken in the archaic language of Chaucer.

    For Joseph to have translated such diverse dialects into the English of the King James Bible so that his translation not only retained the profound surface-text meanings, but it also retained the sacred subtextual code words that are also found in the Bible, and the same encoded temple language spoken by the prophets on both continents. When Joseph found the small plates, he was confronted with an altogether different linguistic problem. That is, the small plates were written in Egyptian, so it would not be a stretch to say that Joseph was working with variants of three separate languages —classical Egyptian, 6th century B.C. Hebrew, and Reformed Egyptian, including the whole spectrum of evolutionary changes that eventually developed into the latter.

    Given those challenges, and knowing how perfectly Joseph performed his task, it seems that Joseph’s appraisal of his work and of the Book of Mormon might be a bit of an understatement. “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man could get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”{4}

    Even before he received the plates, Joseph probably had some knowledge of the Nephite language.
    His mother reports that during the evening conversations with his family, Joseph told them about the culture of the people whose history was in the book that still lay buried in the box on the hill. She wrote:

    He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of traveling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them.”{5}

    For Joseph to have known the ancient Americans that well, his tutorials with Moroni and perhaps others must have been as vivid as movements through time.

    One might enquire, “Who, besides Joseph Smith, was responsible for translating the Book of Mormon into the English language?” The quick and easy answer is, “Moroni, he taught him how to use the Urim and Thummim”; but a full answer might also include Nephi, Alma, another Nephi, Mormon, Moroni, and others of the ancient prophets who were the original authors of the Book of Mormon.{6}

    One can hardly 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.{7} 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.

    If it were that important that the words in the Book of Mormon say precisely what they were intended to say, then it is just as important that when one reads the book, one reads to learn—with real accuracy—what it says.

    —————————————

    FOOTNOTES

    {1} See Nephi’s explanation in 2 Nephi 5:28-34.

    {2} See above: 1 Nephi 1:4, reign of Zedekiah.

    {3} “Who Wrote the Book of Mormon? an Analysis of Wordprints by Wayne A. Larsen, Alvin C. Rencher, and Tim Layton,” BYU Studies, vol. 20 (1979-1980), Number 2 – Winter 1980.

    {4} Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 4:461.

    {5} Lucy Mack Smith, History of Joseph Smith by His Mother (Salt Lake City, Bookcraft,1954), 83.

    {6} For a discussion of Nephi and other’s possible personal involvement in the English translation see Baker, Joseph and Moroni, 91-98.

    {7} 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 8:35-37 — LeGrand Baker – “with all the feeling of a tender parent.”

    1 Nephi 8:35-37 

    35 And Laman and Lemuel partook not of the fruit, said my father. …
    37 And he did exhort them then with all the feeling of a tender parent, that they would hearken to his words….

    Nephi was probably in his early or mid-fifties{1} when he put the final editorial touches on First Nephi. By then, he reports, “we had already had wars and contentions with our brethren” (2 Nephi 5:34), We often stop and ponder Nephi’s comment about his father. “He did exhort them then with all the feeling of a tender parent.” We wonder if he really understood it that clearly when he saw it as a young teenager, or if he came to understand it later, when, as a father, he had experienced and recognized the feelings his father felt back then. If the latter, then the words present us not only with a window into Lehi’s personality, but also a larger window into the depths of Nephi’s soul.

    —————————————

    FOOTNOTE

    {1} See above: 1 Nephi 1:4, reign of Zedekiah.

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

  • 1 Nephi 8:33-34 — LeGrand Baker — The Strange Building.

    1 Nephi 8:33-34 

    33 And great was the multitude that did enter into that strange building. And after they did enter into that building they did point the finger of scorn at me and those that were partaking of the fruit also; but we heeded them not.
    34 These are the words of my father: For as many as heeded them, had fallen away.

    Elder Neal A. Maxwell described that situation in our own day:

    Church members will live in this wheat-and-tares situation until the Millennium. Some real tares even masquerade as wheat, including the few eager individuals who lecture the rest of us about Church doctrines in which they no longer believe. They criticize the use of Church resources to which they no longer contribute. They condescendingly seek to counsel the Brethren whom they no longer sustain. Confrontive, except of themselves of course, they leave the Church but they cannot leave the Church alone.{1}

    —————————————

    FOOTNOTES

    {1} Ensign, May 1996, 68, quoted in Cory H. Maxwell, ed., The Neal A. Maxwell Quote Book (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997), 68.

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

  • 1 Nephi 8:31-32 — LeGrand Baker — The Depths of the Fountain.

    1 Nephi 8:31-32 

    31 And he also saw other multitudes feeling their way towards that great and spacious building.
    32 And it came to pass that many were drowned in the depths of the fountain; and many were lost from his view, wandering in strange roads.

    There are only two paths, but the second has many forks, and as many destinations as one might set his soul to discover. Some lead to the treacherous brink of the river of filthy water. They thirst and seek to drink from a river that is not the waters of life, and many were drowned in its depths. Later, Nephi explained:

    26 And they said unto me: What meaneth the river of water which our father saw?
    27 And I said unto them that the water which my father saw was filthiness; and so much was his mind swallowed up in other things that he beheld not the filthiness of the water.
    28 And I said unto them that it was an awful gulf, which separated the wicked from the tree of life, and also from the saints of God.
    29 And I said unto them that it was a representation of that awful hell, which the angel said unto me was prepared for the wicked (1 Nephi 15:26-29).

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

  • 1 Nephi 8:29-30 — LeGrand Baker — They “fell down and partook of the fruit of the tree.”

    1 Nephi 8:29-30 

    29 And now I, Nephi, do not speak all the words of my father.
    30 But, to be short in writing, behold, he saw other multitudes pressing forward; and they came and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press their way forward, continually holding fast to the rod of iron, until they came forth and fell down and partook of the fruit of the tree.

    We know only one way to interpret what is meant by that, and it would have been very familiar to Lehi and Nephi. It is, as described in the 95th Psalm:

    1 O come, let us sing unto the Lord: let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation.
    2 Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving, and make a joyful noise unto him with psalms.
    3 For the Lord is a great God, and a great King above all gods.
    4 In his hand are the deep places of the earth: the strength of the hills is his also.
    5 The sea is his, and he made it: and his hands formed the dry land.
    6 O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the Lord our maker.
    7 For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand (Psalm 95:1-7).

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

  • 1 Nephi 8:24-28 — LeGrand Baker — The Great and Spacious Building.

    1 Nephi 8:24-28  

    24 And it came to pass that I beheld others pressing forward, and they came forth and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press forward through the mist of darkness, clinging to the rod of iron, even until they did come forth and partake of the fruit of the tree.
    25 And after they had partaken of the fruit of the tree they did cast their eyes about as if they were ashamed.
    26. And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building; and it stood as it were in the air, high above the earth.
    27 And it was filled with people, both old and young, both male and female; and their manner of dress was exceedingly fine; and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit.
    28 And after they had tasted of the fruit they were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.

    Later, the angel explained to Nephi,

    18 And the large and spacious building, which thy father saw, is vain imaginations and the pride of the children of men. And a great and a terrible gulf divideth them; yea, even the word of the justice of the Eternal God, and the Messiah who is the Lamb of God, of whom the Holy Ghost beareth record, from the beginning of the world until this time, and from this time henceforth and forever (1 Nephi 12:18).

    The question might be asked: After tasting the fruit of the tree of life, why would people turn away and take the path that they had earlier chosen not to take? There are as many answers as there are individual choices, but they all fall under two great umbrellas. One is the nature of the persons who choose to leave the tree, and the other is the nature of the persons in the building to whom the drifters look for guidance.

    There is an ancient, and very insightful, document that purports to be a description of what happened in the Garden of Eden. It describes this world as a place of “great distractions and pains in life, so that their men should be preoccupied with life, and not have time to attend on the Holy Spirit.”{1}

    That is the first umbrella under which so many of the answers can be found: People let themselves get so busy attending to the perceived traumas and advantages of this world that they do “not have time to attend on the Holy Spirit.” Some who are at the tree recognize the weight of this message as it comes from the people in the building, and they become ashamed that they are not spending their time, energy—and their lives—being successful enough that they can also get in the building and wear the beautiful clothes. They do not have enough time to continue to enjoy the fruit of the tree and also achieve the goals that are requisite to becoming a part of the society that the building houses. “They were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.”

    The second is the description of the attitudes—but more especially of the clothing—of the people in the building. Again we find that the key may be in the story of Adam and Eve. As we observed above, when God asked, “Who told you, you are naked,” he was not seeking information, he was asking them to consider the source of their nakedness and of the instruction to clothe themselves as they were then dressed.

    As there are two paths on which to walk, so there are two ways to dress. One is in the pattern of the garment God gave to Adam and Eve as a temporary representation of their garment of light. The other is in the pattern of worldly prominence—which, like the fig leaf, will eventually dry up and turn to dust. Those folks who are in the building, who are dressed so well in their own sorts of clothes, have accepted the proposition that one ought to be preoccupied with the things of this world, and are laughing because they think the folks at the tree have missed the point and do not know how to find success in this world.
    —————————————

    FOOTNOTE

    {1} The Hypostasis of the Archons, The Coptic Text with Translation and Commentary by Roger Aubrey Bullard (Berlin, Walter De Gruyter & Co., 1970), 28-29.

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

  • 1 Nephi 8:20 — LeGrand Baker — The Path with Two Ways

    1 Nephi 8:20 

    20 And I also beheld a strait and narrow path, which came along by the rod of iron, even to the tree by which I stood; and it also led by the head of the fountain, unto a large and spacious field, as if it had been a world.

    This is a perfect description of the uncompromising necessity to hang on to the rod of iron with all our might. The path which leads to the tree of life forks along the way, and the only way one can know which fork to take, is by holding on to the rod. The rod will direct us along the path leading to the tree. The alternative leads by the filthy river—to the world and all the advantages the world can contrive. The following are three quotes from Hugh Nibley. He was not discussing Lehi’s vision of tree of life,{1} but his analysis of the doctrine of the Two Ways is a perfect description of fork in the path that Lehi saw.

    You come to the crossroads of the way of light and the way of darkness. It’s universal, the doctrine of the two ways. But the reason he [the gatekeeper] is weeping is that some people get by and go halfway to heaven. Why is he weeping? Because a lot of them must go to hell.{2}

    About the two ways, Nibley wrote:

    One may well ask if it is necessary to choose between such absolute extremes, and wonder if there is not some more moderate approach to the problems. By the very nature of things, there is no third way—as the early Jewish and Christian writers remind us repeatedly in their doctrine of the Two Ways. According to this oldest and best-established of teachings (though quite unpopular with the conventional Christianity and Judaism of our time), there are Two Ways lying before every person in this life, the Way of Light and the Way of Darkness, the Way of Life and the Way of Death; and every mortal every day of his life is required to make a choice between them. Unfortunately for our peace of mind, any compromise between the Two Ways is out of the question, since they lead in opposite directions.{3}

    Satan’s masterpiece of counterfeiting is the doctrine that there are only two choices, and he will show us what they are. It is true that there are only two ways, but by pointing us the way he wants us to take and then showing us a fork in that road, he convinces us that we are making the vital choice, when actually we are choosing between branches in his road. Which one we take makes little difference to him, for both lead to destruction.{4}

    In Lehi’s vision he saw that there are only two ways, and that when we come to the fork that separates them, the only way we can identify the right one is to hold on to the rod of iron, and go the direction it leads us. Even in doing that there always remain only two ways—we may continue to hold to the rod, or we may try to find our way without it. Lehi tells us that those who tried to find the correct path without holding on to the rod of iron were lost. Nephi tells us that the mist of darkness is the same as the second path Nibley described (1 Nephi 12:16-17).
    —————————————

    FOOTNOTES

    {1} See: 1 Nephi 8:10-12, Lehi’s description of the tree, the water, and the fruit.

    {2} Hugh Nibley, Ancient Documents and the Pearl of Great Price, edited by Robert Smith and Robert Smythe (n.p., n.d.), 3 .

    {3} Hugh Nibley, Approaching Zion, edited by Don E. Norton (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 1989), 30.

    {4} Nibley, Approaching Zion, , 112 – 113.

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

  • 1 Nephi 8:19 — LeGrand Baker — The Iron Rod.

    1 Nephi 8:19 

    19 And I beheld a rod of iron, and it extended along the bank of the river, and led to the tree by which I stood.

    Nephi later describes the iron rod as “the word of God”:

    23 And they said unto me: What meaneth the rod of iron which our father saw, that led to the tree?
    24 And I said unto them that it was the word of God; and whoso would hearken unto the word of God, and would hold fast unto it, they would never perish; neither could the temptations and the fiery darts of the adversary overpower them unto blindness, to lead them away to destruction.
    25 Wherefore, I, Nephi, did exhort them to give heed unto the word of the Lord; yea, I did exhort them with all the energies of my soul, and with all the faculty which I possessed, that they would give heed to the word of God and remember to keep his commandments always in all things(1 Nephi 15:23-25).

    The rod, as “the word of God,” is frequently equated with the scriptures and the words of the prophet. Because the iron rod extends alone the bank of the river, and because holding on to it is such a vivid and effective analogy for keeping God’s commandments, the rod is almost always represented as a sturdy banister—a handrail that can keep one from straying off onto forbidden paths. Describing it that way is a powerful teaching tool.

    While the ideas of a banister or of the scriptures are easiest to visualize and often the most applicable, there is another possible interpretation that may be more in keeping with the covenant-related subtextual context of Nephi’s writings. It is best expressed by the Hebrew word hesed.{1}

    The reality of covenants made at the Council in Heaven and to be fulfilled in this world is one of the central themes of the ancient Israelite temple drama. It is expressed most beautifully in Psalm 25,{2} and reiterated by every prophet who writes of his sode experience.{3} In the Council in Heaven we received assignments (as described in Isaiah 6) and we accepted those assignments by covenants. In this life we walk in the darkness of our forgetfulness, sometimes stumbling as we go, moving through the fog that clouds our memory of who we were, and thereby obscures the reality of who we are. Nevertheless, as the 23rd Psalm assures us,

    4 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 (Psalms 23:4).{4}

    There, the rod is a scepter, the symbol of sacral kingship. The staff is a shepherd’s crook, a symbol of priesthood. The Hebrew word translated comfort means the power to transcend sorrow.{5} So that line in the 23rd Psalm might be understood as saying, “I am empowered by the symbols of priesthood and kingship.”

    Psalm 2 also shows that the iron rod is a scepter. Psalm 2 is the coronation psalm where the king quotes the Lord’s covenant:

    7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
    8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
    9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel (Psalms 2:7-9).

    That the rod of iron in this psalm is the king’s royal scepter is affirmed by John the Beloved who paraphrased the psalm when he wrote:

    26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
    27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father (Revelation 2:26-27).

    The Prophet Joseph clarified the meaning when he wrote:

    26 And to him who overcometh, and keepeth my commandments unto the end, will I give power over many kingdoms;
    27 And he shall rule them with the word of God; and they shall be in his hands as the vessels of clay in the hands of a potter; and he shall govern them by faith, with equity and justice, even as I received of my Father (JST Revelation 1:24-28).{6}

    That brings us back to Nephi’s statement that the iron rod is the word of God.

    We walk in this world in relative darkness as we were picking our way through a labyrinth of options and ideas. We know neither our destination nor how to get there. Yet our innate sense of Self teaches us we must be true to the law of our eternal being. Listening to the promptings of the Holy Ghost—the clearly understood, yet unspoken word of God— slowly brings to our remembrance shadows of who we are were—teaching us when and how to fulfill the covenants we made before we came here (See D&C 84:42-48).

    Holding tightly to the powers and covenants of priesthood and kingship we may seem to wonder through the vicissitudes of life, but the promise is that we will arrive safely, as Nephi observed,

    30 But, to be short in writing, behold, he saw other multitudes pressing forward; and they came and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron;{7} and they did press their way forward, continually holding fast to the rod of iron, until they came forth and fell down and partook of the fruit of the tree (1 Nephi 8:30).

    If the iron rod does represent the powers of sacral kingship, then that must also presuppose the powers of priesthood, for while one can be a priest without being a king, one cannot be a king without first being a priest. It seems possible that the rod of iron seen by Lehi was a symbol of sacral kingship that is a function of legitimate priesthood. “King” is a name/title that connotes eternal covenants along with their attendant responsibilities. A possible interpretation of Lehi’s rod of iron might be this: that the way one comes to the tree of life is to hold tenaciously to the covenants one has made, and to fulfill the responsibilities they impose. As we approach the unknown with faith, fear, and hope we echo Romeo’s sentiment when he said:

    But He, that hath steerage the of my course,
    Directs my sail!{8}

    —————————————

    FOOTNOTES

    {1} For a discussion of hesed see below: 1 Nephi 19:9, Testimony of the Savior. For a discussion of hesed in Psalm 25 see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 527-43; Second edition, p. 373-90.

    {2} For a discussion of the 25th Psalm see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 527-43; Second edition, p. 379-90.

    {3} For a discussion of the sode Experience see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 195-209; Second edition, p. 139-48.

    {4} For a discussion of the 23rd Psalm see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 619-40; Second edition, p. 441-57.

    {5} For a discussion of the Hebrew word translated as “comfort” see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, First edition, p. 467-71; Second edition, p. 340-42.

    {6} For another example see Revelation 19:12-16 compared with JST Revelation 19:11.
    In these places the “rod of iron” is neither a banister nor a weapon, but it is a royal scepter. It is not unusual that the scepter should be made of iron. Iron was very strong, and when it was polished, it gleamed like silver.

    {7} Nephi’s observation that “caught hold of the end of the rod of iron,” may refer to the end of a banister or it may refer to that end of the scepter which one grasps with one’s hand.

    {8} William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, Act 1 Scene 4.

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