Category: Alma

Alma 7:1 — LeGrand Baker — Alma’s ‘language’

Alma 7:1
1    Behold my beloved brethren, seeing that I have been permitted to come unto you, therefore I attempt to address you in my language; yea, by my own mouth, seeing that it is the first time that I have spoken unto you by the words of my mouth, I having been wholly confined to the judgment-seat, having had much business that I could not come unto you. (Alma 7:1)

Every once in a while, one bumps into a statement in the Book of Mormon that seem to make no sense. The way we usually handle it is to superimpose our own preconceptions upon it, and read on without ever noticing that we have come head-on with an incredibly meaningful insight. This verse contains one of those. The words say: “therefore I attempt to address you in my language; yea, by my own mouth, seeing that it is the first time that I have spoken unto you by the words of my mouth.” That sounds funny, but we can read it as, “I’m glad to be here so I speak to you personally.” It works, so we read on, not noticing the bump.

The truth is, it doesn’t make much sense the way Alma said it, unless we assume the people of Zarahemla and the people of Gideon spoke different languages. Historically there was some possible truth to that. The people of Zarahemla did speak a different Hebrew dialect when they were discovered by Mosiah I. Then he taught them to speak, read and write his kind of Hebrew. But that was four generations before Alma II came to Gideon. By that time it is extremely unlikely that there was actually a language barrier between the two communities.

So one might ask, “If Alma didn’t mean that, why did he say it?” I suspect the answer is not found in the words he used, so much as in the way he used them—and probably not so much in his ability to speak, but rather in his audience’s ability to listen.

This audience is markedly different from the one to whom he spoke in Zarahemla. There were members and non-members of his church in that audience. But the one at Gideon is a priesthood meeting. That is made clear by his addressing them as “my beloved brethren.” In the Book of Mormon that phrase is almost always used referring to a priesthood congregation and the sermon is almost always temple-covenant setting. This is a temple covenant audience. That is clarified in the last verse where Alma says, “may the peace of God rest upon you, and upon… your women and your children, according to your faith and good works, from this time forth and forever.” (v. 27) (A fun exercise is to collect all the places in the Book of Mormon that refer to temple marriage.)

More about Alma’s audience can be found in v. 17-19 & 26. Those verses also help one understand what Alma meant by “my language.” And again the definition of the language is found in the identification of the audience. While the following verses do not actually talk about the language itself, they do say why Alma is so comfortable in speaking that language in the company of those men.

17  And now my beloved brethren, do you believe these things? Behold, I say unto you, yea, I know that ye believe them; and the way that I know that ye believe them is by the manifestation of the Spirit which is in me. And now because your faith is strong concerning that, yea, concerning the things which I have spoken, great is my joy.
18  For as I said unto you from the beginning, that I had much desire that ye were not in the state of dilemma like your brethren, even so I have found that my desires have been gratified.
19  For I perceive that ye are in the paths of righteousness; I perceive that ye are in the path which leads to the kingdom of God; yea, I perceive that ye are making his paths straight.….
26  And now my beloved brethren, I have spoken these words unto you according to the Spirit which testifieth in me; and my soul doth exceedingly rejoice, because of the exceeding diligence and heed which ye have given unto my word (Alma 3:17-19 & 26).

So we have in these two sermons expressing two contrasting sentiments, spoken to two different kinds of audiences. The question is: Why did Mormon select these two sermons, and why are their differences important for us to know?

I am not privy to Mormon’s thinking, but I would like to venture a guess.

The undergirding fact of the Book of Mormon is that Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni know us. They know our opportunities and our challenges, and above all else, they knew that we have the fulness of the gospel with all of its requisite priesthood ordinances, covenants, and blessings. Knowing that probably answers our question.

Mormon selected stories and sermons from primary sources that stretched over a thousand years of Nephite history. He used only the stories that fit into his sub-textual order that was patterned after the ancient Israelite temple rites of the New Year’s festival. But he arranged those stories in their obvious chronological order to create a wonderfully profound history for anyone to read. He inserted sermons into that history to fit correctly in the sub-textual order.

In the chronology by the time we get to the book of Alma, Mormon has brought the people out of the wilderness where the first generation of church members had covenanted to live the law of consecration. Now their children and grandchildren are living comfortably and peacefully in Zarahemla and its environs. That is the context of Alma 5 and 7. It seems to me that the two sermons he chose to insert into the history at this point fit perfect into its sub-textual context — especially if the story and the sermons are addressed to us. For those of us who try to get by and believe that the Lord will somehow let us into the Celestial Kingdom because we keep enough of the commandments to have a current temple recommend, Alma 5 is very applicable. For those of us who seek to live all the covenants made and understood by the fathers, Alma 7 is a statement of hope.

I suspect that’s why Mormon placed these contrasting sermons for us to read side by side.

Alma 5:61-61 — LeGrand Baker — Book of Life in John’s Revelation

We begin with Alma 5:61-21.There are three things in these verses that strike me as especially important. One is Alma’s conclusion where he reiterates the authority with which he speaks to the members of the Church, but does not impose himself upon those who are not members of the Church:

61 And now I, Alma, do command you in the language of him who hath commanded me, that ye observe to do the words which I have spoken unto you.
62 I speak by way of command unto you that belong to the church; and unto those who do not belong to the church I speak by way of invitation, saying: Come and be baptized unto repentance, that ye also may be partakers of the fruit of the tree of life.

The other two are: (1 ) his references to the temple text in Isaiah 52, and (2) these words: “For the names of the righteous shall be written in the book of life, and unto them will I grant an inheritance at my right hand.” This is the only place in the Book of Mormon where the phrase “book of life” is used.

I would like to discuss both of those last two.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

(1 ) ALMA’S REFERENCES TO THE TEMPLE TEXT IN ISAIAH 52,

Alma’s charge: “be ye separate, and touch not their unclean things,” is a paraphrase of Isaiah’s

Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the LORD.(Isaiah 52:11)

Isaiah 52 is probably the most frequently quoted scriptures in the scriptures. It is quoted in every one of the standard works except the Pearl of Great Price whose Old Testament portions pre-date Isaiah. (Lamentations 4:15; 2 Corinthians 6:16-18; 1 Nephi 13:37; Mosiah 12:20-23, 15:14-18; 3 Nephi 20:29-46; Moroni 10:28-34; D&C 128:19.) The most recognizable phrase from that chapter is, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings.” Abinadi equates the persons described here to the Saviour, the prophets, and those who follow the prophets. I believe it is the promise of sacral kingship to the righteous. The mountain would of course be the mount in Jerusalem where the Temple stood. The feet probably refer to the king’s using the Ark of the Covenant as his footstool when he sat upon the throne of Jehovah in the Holy of Holies after his coronation at the conclusion of the New Year festival. A related verse that is deleted from the Bible’s Isaiah chapter 49, but is restored in the First Nephi version reads:

13 Sing, O heavens; and be joyful, O earth; for the feet of those who are in the east shall be established; and break forth into singing, O mountains; for they shall be smitten no more; for the Lord hath comforted his people, and will have mercy upon his afflicted. (1 Nephi 21:13)

So, it is apparent to me that Isaiah 52 is about the ordinances that consecrate priests and sacral kings. If that is correct, then Alma’s using Isaiah’s temple text in the context of his own speech consists perfectly with the message he is delivering:

57 And now I say unto you, all you that are desirous to follow the voice of the good shepherd, come ye out from the wicked, and be ye separate, and touch not their unclean things; and behold, their names shall be blotted out, that the names of the wicked shall not be numbered among the names of the righteous, that the word of God may be fulfilled, which saith: The names of the wicked shall not be mingled with the names of my people;
58 For the names of the righteous shall be written in the book of life, and unto them will I grant an inheritance at my right hand. And now, my brethren, what have ye to say against this? I say unto you, if ye speak against it, it matters not, for the word of God must be fulfilled. (Alma 5:57-58)

The Good Shepherd is the Saviour, and following him suggests both ritual and personal attitudes and actions. “Be ye separate” is an invitation to become Zion—notwithstanding the “real world” that is all around us. “Touch not their unclean things” is part of Isaiah’s temple text.” “Name” has a covenant referent because new covenants always have new names. “For the names of the righteous shall be written in the book of life, and unto them will I grant an inheritance at my right hand,” is the conclusion of his sermon, and carries the whole burden of what has gone before it.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – –

(2) THE BOOK OF LIFE

The major source of information about the book of life is found in Revelation. About that, the Prophet wrote:

6 And further, I want you to remember that John the Revelator was contemplating this very subject in relation to the dead, when he declared, as you will find recorded in Revelation 20:12—And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged out of those things which werewritten in the books, according to their works.
7 You will discover in this quotation that the books were opened; and another book was opened, which was the book of life; but the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works; consequently, the books spoken of must be the books which contained the record of their works, and refer to the records which are kept on the earth. And the book which was the book of life is the record which is kept in heaven; the principle agreeing precisely with the doctrine which is commanded you in the revelation contained in the letter which I wrote to you previous to my leaving my place—that in all your recordings it may be recorded in heaven. (D&C 128:8-7)

With that as a key, that is, knowing that “the book which was the book of life is the record which is kept in heaven,” one is now equipped to analyze what is written about it in Revelation. It is first mentioned as part of the seven letters the apostle John wrote to the seven churches.

Understanding that in the full context of all seven letters is important:

In the first letter, John commends the Ephesians for their obedience:

3 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name’s sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted. (Rev 2:2-3).

Then he promises:

7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. (v. 7)

The sacrificers of the Smymains is the subject of the second letter:

9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty….
10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.
11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death. (v. 9-11)

He accused the people of Pergamos of eating things sacrificed unto idols, and of committing fornication. Then he promised:

17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it. (v. 17)

To the church in Thyatira he wrote: wrote:

19  I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; (v. 19)

He promised them sacral kingship:

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.
28 And I will give him the morning star.
19 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (v26-29)

To the church in Sardis he wrote:

4 Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy. (Rev. 3: 4)

To them he promised:

5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (v. 5-6)

To the people in Philadelphia he defined the Saviour in terms of the sealing powers:

7 These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name. (v. 7-8)

To them he promised:

10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world….
12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
13 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (v. 10-13)

To the Laodiceans he wrote:

19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. (v. 19-20)

And he promised.

21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. (v. 21-22)

After this, the Book of Revelation frequently mentions that one’s inclusion in the book of life is a major criterion upon which one is judged. (Revelation 13: 8; 17:8; 20:11-15; 21:27; 22:19)

In D&C 132:19 the Lord uses the same criterion to define those who will go to the Celestial Kingdom. The Lord opens the revelation that is section 88 with different words, yet that difference seems to help to clarify the meaning of the book of life:

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. (D&C 88:1-2.)

Alma’s words are perfectly consistent with what the other scriptures say about the book of life.

58  For the names of the righteous shall be written in the book of life, and unto them will I grant an inheritance at my right hand. And now, my brethren, what have ye to say against this? I say unto you, if ye speak against it, it matters not, for the word of God must be fulfilled. (Alma 5:58)

It is interesting, perhaps significant, that there is no reference to the book of life in our Old Testament. That makes Alma’s reference to the book of life the oldest we have in the scriptures. Yet, because he mentions it without describing what it is, it is apparent that both he and his listeners were well acquainted with its meaning. That is just one more evidence that the brass plates contained a much richer and more comprehensive understanding of the gospel than our Old Testament, and gives further credence to the notion that the earliest version of the Law of Moses focused on the Saviour and his atonement.

Alma 5:44 — LeGrand Baker — meaning of ‘Christ Jesus’

Alma 5:44
44 For I am called to speak after this manner, according to the holy order of God, which is in Christ Jesus; yea, I am commanded to stand and testify unto this people the things which have been spoken by our fathers concerning the things which are to come.

Two weeks ago, Kirt wrote:

       I have a question that maybe someone in the project can answer for me. The name of the Savior being presented in the scriptures as “Christ Jesus” instead of “Jesus Christ” has often subtly caught my attention. Following the Gospel Doctrine lesson on Alma 5, my curiosity was peaked because Alma uses the name of the Savior in this reverse order in verse 44. “For I am called to speak after this manner, according to the holy order of God, which is in Christ Jesus; yea, I am commanded to stand and testify unto this people the things which have been spoken by our fathers concerning the things which are to come.” This, in fact, is the only verse in the Book of Mormon that sequences the name Christ before the name Jesus. It is stated as such numerous times in the New Testament – In many places, the name “Christ Jesus” is mentioned in the same verse as the name “Jesus Christ,”
1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: (Ephesians 1:1-3.)
And
1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:
2 Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. (Philippians 1:1-2.)
The fact that the two sequences appear so close to each other in these verses seems to indicate that the writer has a purpose in differentiating between the two titles. One pattern I’’ve noticed is that the title “Christ Jesus” is often preceded by the word “in,” possibly identifying the Savior as the covenantal source. Beyond that, I’m at a loss. Any guidance would be appreciated.

– – – – – – – – – – – – My response:

“Jesus” is the Greek form of “Joshua” – a Hebrew word that means “Jehovah-saved” (Strong # 3091). So the name “Jesus” is a combination of his pre-mortal name (Jehovah) and his post-mortal title (“the one who saved,” or “Saviour”). Elis Rasmussen, my friend and neighbor, who is a former Dean of Religion at BYU, translates “Joshua” or “Jesus” as simply “Saviour,” and The LDS Bible dictionary gives the same definition.

From the New Testament, we learn that Jesus was given that name by the angel who spoke to Mary.

30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. (Luke 1:30-31.)

But from the Book of Mormon, we learn that this was his name or name-title before he was born.

A name-title is a name by which someone is known, but which is actually a title rather than a name. For example, “the President,” or “Mr. President” are name-titles of anyone who serves as president of the United States. “The Prophet Joseph” is a name-title. “Jehovah” is the covenant name that Abraham’s God taught Moses, and is used as a token of God’s covenantal relationship with the nation of Israel. After the Lord made that covenant with Moses, “Jehovah” was used in the Old Testament as the Saviour’s name-title. It is also the name-title we use to refer to the Saviour in his pre-mortal role at the Council in Heaven.

When the Saviour introduced himself to the Brother of Jared, he said,

14 Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have life, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters. (Ether 3:14.)

And Nephi learned that name from an angel.

19 For according to the words of the prophets, the Messiah cometh in six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem; and according to the words of the prophets, and also the word of the angel of God, his name shall be Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (2 Nephi 25:19.)

That statement by Nephi is very interesting because both the words “Messiah” and “Christ” are used together. That may be a clue to the answer to Kirt’s question. “Messiah” is the name-title used in the prophecies of the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon; while “Christ” is the New Testament name-title used to describe the Saviour’s fulfillment of those prophecies. It would be interesting to know if Nephi used the word “Messiah” twice in that passage and if the second one were translated “Christ” for the sake of modern readers.

“Christ” is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew “Messiah.” Both words mean “the anointed one,” and is a reference to an anointing with olive oil, which was the culmination of the coronation ceremonies of both kings and high priests in ancient Israel. (Isaiah 61:3; 2 Kings 11:12; Exodus 29:22; Exodus 40:13; Leviticus 21:10. In some of the psalms and other Old Testament passages the anointed king of Israel is referred to as the “messiah.”)

The scriptures testify of the Saviour’s having received such a royal anointing in the pre-mortal existence. (Psalm 45:7-8, quoted by Paul in Hebrews 1:9; Isaiah 61:1 clarified and quoted by Joseph F. Smith in D&C 138: 42). And Peter testifies that the Saviour received an anointing in this world at the time of his baptism. “…God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power…”(Acts 10:38)

There are a number of reasons to believe that “Jesus Christ” is a name-title, rather than a given name.

It is apparent from the gospels that “Jesus Christ” was not the name by which the Saviour was know when he walked on the earth as a man.

Matthew opens his gospel with the words, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” ( Matthew 1:1). Mark opens his with “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;” (Mark 1:1) but otherwise, the name-title “Jesus Christ” is not found in any of the synoptic gospels. Luke does not use it at all. John uses it only twice. Once as part of a very formal statement which is the testimony of John the Baptist.

15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. (John 1:15-17)

And the other as an equally formal statement by the Saviour himself.

1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. (John 17:1-5)

Before his resurrection, the name-title “Jesus Christ” is not used in the New Testament, except for the two instances in John. Rather, every time the Saviour is referred to by the authors of the gospels, they call him “Jesus.” Within the gospels others refer to him as the “son of David,” which is a reference to his inherited kingship, and may be roughly equivalent to “messiah”; and the Saviour refers to himself as the “Son of Man” – which appears also to have been equivalent to “Messiah” because it establishes his relationship to his Eternal Father, the Man of Holiness.” (Moses 6:57)

All that suggests that to his contemporaries in and around Jerusalem, his name was “Jesus,” and it was not until after his death and resurrection that the title “Christ” was added by his apostles as a name-title.

So it seems safe to assert that “Christ” (Messiah) was not a part of Jesus’ given name, but is his royal name-title that signifies that he is the Anointed Son of His Father and heir to his Father’s throne. From that, I assume that the words “Jesus Christ” means “Jesus the Anointed One,” and is thus an acknowledgment of his earthly, and eternal, kingship and priesthood.

What I am now going to suggest is that while “Jesus Christ” is his name plus his title, that when the words are reversed – “Christ Jesus” – that combination is actually a different name-title. That is, that in the reversed “Christ Jesus,” the word “Jesus” is intended to convey the actual meaning of the word Joshua – “Jehovah saves” – and therefore the phrase “Christ Jesus” means “the Anointed Jehovah who saved” – and I suppose that, in turn, should be understood to mean “The anointed King and High Priest, Jehovah who saves” or more simply, “the Anointed Saviour.”

Now, having made that assertion, let me demonstrate by showing the context in which Alma, Paul, and Peter used the words in that reversed order.

As Kirt mentioned, the phrase “Christ Jesus” is found only once in the Book of Mormon. It is spoken by Alma, and its context is his first address to the saints at Zarahemla after he had given the powers of government to another Chief Judge, and so is now acting only as Prophet and President of the Church. This statement is his formal claim to authority:

44 For I am called to speak after this manner, according to the holy order of God [a priesthood title that seems always to be associated with the pre-mortal Council, and therefore with a sode experience], which is in Christ Jesus [meaning “the anointed King and High Priest, Jehovah who saves”]; yea, I am commanded to stand and testify unto this people the things which have been spoken by our fathers concerning the things which are to come. (Alma 5:44.)

If I have read that correctly, “Christ Jesus” – a name-title which suggests eternal kingship and priesthood – would actually be more accurate than “Jesus Christ” because the latter is the name- title used to denote the resurrected Saviour.

At the beginning of Ephesians, Paul uses these name-titles the same way:

1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ [Jesus who is anointed] by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus [the anointed King and High Priest, Jehovah who saves.” Paul uses that name-title the same way Alma does, for, as the next verses show, Paul’s context is also the pre-mortal Council.] :
2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 1:1-2)

Here Paul uses still a third name-title. “Lord” in the New Testament is always translated from Strong 3962 which means “supreme in authority” (the same connotation as “Jehovah”). So it appears that “the Lord Jesus Christ” is meant to be an abbreviated history of the Saviour and his authority: “The Supreme authority at the Council – Jesus the man who saved – who is the anointed heir to his Father.” The correctness of that interpretation seems to be reinforced in the next verse where Paul uses the name-title again to designate the Saviour’s relationship with his Father:

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who [the Father] hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places [that is, at the Council in the temple on Kolob] in Christ [the Anointed One]:
4 According as he [the Father] hath chosen us in him [the Saviour] before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: (Ephesians 1: 1-4)

 If I have read that correctly, Paul’s giving the Saviour the series of four different name-titles (Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus, the Lord Jesus Christ, and Christ) is not just interesting, but the way Paul uses them is an important part of the message Paul has to convey.

Peter seems to be using the name-titles the same way, only we find his testimony at the conclusion of his letter rather than at the beginning.

10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.

One might be able to read the whole history of mankind in that sentence: “But the God of all grace [the Father], who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus [that call occurred at the Council where the Savour was “Christ Jesus”], after that ye have suffered a while [this lonely world], make you perfect, stablish, strengthen [all in this world], settle (“consolidate” – Strong 2311) you [next world].

11 To him [the Father] be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand.
13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.
14 Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity. Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen. (1 Peter 5:10-14.)

 In America, the President of the Church called a special assembly of extraordinary people and delivered a message about the eternal meaning of charity and its power to bind us to each other, to the Saviour, and to his Father. (Moroni 7) The way I read these words of Peter, they are written by the same authority, to the same audience, with the same message – illuminating that message by the words “Christ Jesus” at its beginning – and at its conclusion also.

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

There are three main themes in these verses:

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

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

v. 44-48: Alma’s powerful testimony.

I would like to discuss them in that order.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Definition of “good works”

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

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

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

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

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

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

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

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

When I sent this to Bruce Cowser, he responded:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Isaiah 40 shows Jehovah’s compassion.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Lord promised the Prophet Joseph,

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

Alma’s words are scarey and uncompromising.

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

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

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

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

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

1. The arms of mercy are extended towards them

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

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

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

1.} The arms of mercy are extended towards them

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

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

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

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

and

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

And the Lord commands Job

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

Another psalm describes one way Job might have responded.

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

That brings us to the next idea:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Alma 5: 24-30

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Job does not distinguish between his actions and his clothing:

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

Nephi prays to receive that clothing.

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

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

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

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

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

Jacob does the same thing.

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

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

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

There seems to be 4 dominant themes in these verses.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Alma asks:

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

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

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

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

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

In sharp contrast to that imagery, Alma asks,

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

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

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

President McKay wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

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

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

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

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

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

ON WHAT CONDITIONS ARE THEY SAVED?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Then he draws a conclusion.

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

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

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

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

YEA, WHAT GROUNDS HAD THEY TO HOPE FOR SALVATION?

What does he mean by “hope.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Similarly, charity means just what Mormon says that means:

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

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

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

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

In that chapter, and elsewhere, I understand:

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

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

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

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

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

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