Category: Book of Mormon Project

1 Nephi 1:1-6

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

——————————————-
FOOTNOTES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Testimony of Sarah Conrad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Angels Helped Joseph Translate

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

{10} Juvenile Instructor, 27:303-04.

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

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

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

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

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

{16} Journal of Discourses, 23:363.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

{1} Oxford English Dictionary, definition 3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

———————————
FOOTNOTES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1 Nephi 1:1

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

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

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

Another example is the beginning of Zeniff’s autobiography:

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

Another example is this exchange of official correspondence:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

——————————–
FOOTNOTE

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

3 Nephi 26:13-16

13 Therefore, I would that ye should behold that the Lord truly did teach the people, for the space of three days; and after that he did show himself unto them oft, and did break bread oft, and bless it, and give it unto them.
14 And it came to pass that he did teach and minister unto the children of the multitude of whom hath been spoken, and he did loose their tongues, and they did speak unto their fathers great and marvelous things, even greater than he had revealed unto the people; and he loosed their tongues that they could utter.
15 And it came to pass that after he had ascended into heaven—the second time that he showed himself unto them, and had gone unto the Father, after having healed all their sick, and their lame, and opened the eyes of their blind and unstopped the ears of the deaf, and even had done all manner of cures among them, and raised a man from the dead, and had shown forth his power unto them, and had ascended unto the Father—
16 Behold, it came to pass on the morrow that the multitude gathered themselves together, and they both saw and heard these children; yea, even babes did open their mouths and utter marvelous things; and the things which they did utter were forbidden that there should not any man write them.

The scriptures are replete with the idea that there are things we must know, but which they (the scriptures) will not tell us. Even though they assure us that those things are hidden, they also clearly teach that we are responsible to know those hidden things. Consequently, much of certain parts of the scriptures are written in double-speech. Their surface text is wonderful and true, their subtext is written in code and is about those hidden things. {1}

There is a wonderful story about J. Golden Kimball that may or may not be true— if it isn’t true it certainly should be. While he was speaking to a sleepy stake conference in southern Utah, he suddenly said, “Brothers and Sisters, The Lord has said he is going to give us the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon. How many of you will read it?” Everyone in the congregation raised their hand, some out of habit, and others with enthusiasm. When the hands went down, he chided, “Then why the hell don’t you read the part you now have, so he can give us the rest?”

As usual, Elder J. Golden’s words were simple and profound. The truths of the gospel are to be taught in an intelligible sequence. (That is why the missionary lessons work so well.) If we try to jump ahead to learn the “mysteries” (using that word the way the world uses it) we will only be confused. Consequently, the Book of Mormon teaches us individually only what we each permit it to teach. {2}

The authors of the gospels in the New Testament were keenly aware that the most important things could not be written. But repeatedly say that we must know them. It is ironic that we sometimes credit Jesus with being a great teacher because he taught in parables that everyone could understand. But he told his Apostles that the reason he taught in parables was so the people would NOT understand. He explains that in several places, for example:

8 And other fell on good ground, and did yield fruit that sprang up and increased; and brought forth, some thirty, and some sixty, and some an hundred.
9 And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them (Mark 4:8-12). {3}

“Mystery” is the operative word in those verses. In the New Testament it is translated from the Greek word mysterion. There, it refers to the secrets disclosed during one’s initiation into sacred religious rites, {4} and usually refers to the early Christian temple rites. However in some places, like Ephesians 1, it is a reference to premortal temple rites. In the Book of Mormon it may mean either, or sometimes more probably means both, as in 1 Nephi and Alma 12.

In the course of First and Second Nephi it becomes clear that Nephi is very conversant with the ancient Israelite temple rites and that he has had a sode experience that gave him a full understanding of his own premortal world. In First Nephi, which he wrote when he was about 45 or 50, he introduces himself by saying that he has a “great knowledge of the … mysteries of God.” (1 Nephi 1:1)

Alma says that “the chains of hell” means one’s not knowing those mysteries:

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

Paul understood this. His letter to the Ephesians is an excellent encoded example. He desired that those who had a right to know might understand, and described those people as “the fellowship of the mystery.” He wrote that it was his mission to bring people into that fellowship.

7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God (Ephesians 3:7-10). {5}

The reason these things are not explicitly written in the scriptures is that are hidden from the world. They are hidden now; they have always been hidden, even from the foundation of the world; and they will always be hidden.

The reason they are hidden is because they can only be revealed to those who are “authorized to believe.” That is an intriguing phrase. It comes from a statement published in a Melchizedek Priesthood manual and is attributed to the Prophet Joseph:

George A. Smith, while serving in the First Presidency, re- ported: “Joseph Smith taught that every man and woman should seek the Lord for wisdom, that they might get knowledge from Him who is the fountain of knowledge; and the promises of the gospel, as revealed, were such as to authorize us to believe, that by taking this course we should gain the object of our pursuit.” {6}

In Doctrine and Covenants 124 the Lord explained the nature of these mysteries and how and why they are revealed:

38 For, for this cause I commanded Moses that he should build a tabernacle, that they should bear it with them in the wilderness, and to build a house in the land of promise, that those ordinances might be revealed which had been hid from before the world was.
39 Therefore, verily I say unto you, that your anointings, and your washings, and your baptisms for the dead, and your solemn assemblies, and your memorials for your sacrifices by the sons of Levi, and for your oracles in your most holy places wherein you receive conversations, and your statutes and judgments, for the beginning of the revelations and foundation of Zion, and for the glory, honor, and endowment of all her municipals, are ordained by the ordinance of my holy house, which my people are always commanded to build unto my holy name.
40 And verily I say unto you, let this house be built unto my name, that I may reveal mine ordinances therein unto my people;
41 For I deign to reveal unto my church things which have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to the dispensation of the fulness of times.
42 And I will show unto my servant Joseph all things pertaining to this house, and the priesthood thereof, and the place whereon it shall be built (D&C 124:38-42).

I am now told that much of the LDS endowment can be found on the internet. If one finds it there, he still cannot “know,” so it doesn’t matter. One can virtually memorize the words but unless their meaning is taught by the Holy Ghost, their truths remain hidden from the world in the same way they have always been hidden, and they always will hidden, except from those who are “authorized to believe.” For that reason, even though the words of the ancient and modern temple rites may be discoverable (as they are in the Psalms), knowing the words does not constitute knowing the mysteries.

Like the New Testament writers, the authors of the Book of Mormon also understood that the most beautiful principles of the gospel are the things that cannot be taught. An evidence of that is that the prophets really did want their readers to know. Nephi and Mormon each say that they wish to tell us more, but they can not. In the last chapter of 1 Nephi, he uses the phrase “shall dwell safely in the Holy One of Israel,” but he cannot explain what that means. He writs:

28 But, behold, all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people shall dwell safely in the Holy One of Israel if it so be that they will repent.
29 And now I, Nephi, make an end; for I durst not speak further as yet concerning these things (1 Nephi 22:28-31).

Again, at the conclusion of 2 Nephi, in the context of an encoded message, he begins to explain what he wishes us to understand, but can only go so far then writes:

7 And now I, Nephi, cannot say more; the Spirit stoppeth mine utterance, and I am left to mourn because of the unbelief, and the wickedness, and the ignorance, and the stiffneckedness of men; for they will not search knowledge, nor understand great knowledge, when it is given unto them in plainness, even as plain as word can be (2 Nephi 32: 7). {7}

Mormon also wanted to spell it all out for us, but then quotes the Lord as saying that was not permitted:

11 Behold, I was about to write them, all which were engraven upon the plates of Nephi, but the Lord forbade it, saying: I will try the faith of my people.
12 Therefore I, Mormon, do write the things which have been commanded me of the Lord. And now I, Mormon, make an end of my sayings, and proceed to write the things which have been commanded me (3 Nephi 26:11-13).

Even though there are strict restraints on what we can teach, there is also the command that we must teach those whom the Spirit instructs us to teach. (The Savior explained that in 3 Nephi 14:1-12.)

Ammon and his brethren are a splendid example of those who were permitted to tell—but only permitted to tell a specific group of people. Ammon understood both his responsibility and he rejoiced in his opportunity. He said to his brothers:

21 And now behold, my brethren, what natural man is there that knoweth these things? I say unto you, there is none that knoweth these things, save it be the penitent.
22 Yea, he that repenteth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing—unto such it is given to know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, and it shall be given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance, even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance (Alma 26:21-22).

How much of the mysteries one can know in this life? I suppose it depends on three things: His need to know; his worthiness to know; and his opportunity to know. Some of the greatest men who have lived in this world lived in a time and place where this information was simply not available. Nevertheless, in the end, we are assured that everyone who is worthy to know will know. For example, these two statements from the Doctrine and Covenants:

26 The Spirit of truth is of God. I am the Spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fulness of truth, yea, even of all truth;
27 And no man receiveth a fulness unless he keepeth his commandments.
28 He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things (D&C 93:26-28).

5 For thus saith the Lord—I, the Lord, am merciful and gracious unto those who fear me, and delight to honor those who serve me in righteousness and in truth unto the end.
6 Great shall be their reward and eternal shall be their glory.
7 And to them will I reveal all mysteries, yea, all the hidden mysteries of my kingdom from days of old, and for ages to come, will I make known unto them the good pleasure of my will concerning all things pertaining to my kingdom.
8 Yea, even the wonders of eternity shall they know, and things to come will I show them, even the things of many generations.
9 And their wisdom shall be great, and their understanding reach to heaven; and before them the wisdom of the wise shall perish, and the understanding of the prudent shall come to naught (D&C 76:5-9).

That promise was reiterated again by the Prophet Joseph Smith. About the same time the Prophet was introducing the endowment to the Saints in Nauvoo he wrote and published a poem that follows the same pattern as D&C 76. (You can find the entire poem on this website under “Favorite Quotes.”) A portion of that poem reads:

A Vision
by The Prophet Joseph Smith

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

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

From the council in Kolob, to time on the earth,
And for ages to come unto them I will show
My pleasure and will, what the kingdom will do
Eternity’s wonders they truly shall know {8}.

——————————

FOOTNOTES

{1} In our book Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, Stephen and I have tried to point out the code words in the Psalms, but have carefully avoided saying what ought not to be said. I personally did a word search on the word “temple” to make sure that was so. Every sentence that uses “temple” says Israelite temple,” Solomon’s Temple,” Nephite temple,” or some other phrase to referent “ancient temples.” So no sentence can be taken out of context and be seen to be discussing LDS temples or their teachings.

{2} I had my own wake-up call when I was a student at BYU. I was taking a class from Truman G. Madsen. One day I went to his office and brazenly told him I had studied and understood the “mysteries” and I asked him to teach me the things he wouldn’t teach in class. He responded, “Explain the Atonement to me.” I gave a half-cocked Sunday School answer and then he said. “After you understand the Atonement, then come back and talk to me.”

{3} Other examples are Matthew 11:13-17, 13:7-17; Mark 7:15-18; Luke 8:7-11; and Revelation chapters 2and 3. John wrote those chapters of Revelation as a colophon to teach the initiated that he was a prophet, just as Nephi did in 1 Nephi chapter 1. If one reads the code in the first half of each of John’s letters he will teach the mysteries. If one reads uses that code to read the second half, he teaches what it means.

{4} Strong 3466: “the idea of silence imposed by initiation into religious rites.” Raymond E. Brown, The Semitic Background of the Term “Mystery” in the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968), 2-6).

{5} Other places where we are told the mysteries have been hidden “from the foundation of the world” are Ether 4:15; D&C 76:5-8, 128:18.

{6} Joseph Smith [Melchizedek Priesthood manual], (Salt Lake City, Utah, published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2007), 266.

{7} For Nephi, “great knowledge” is code. He uses it here the same way he does in 1 Nephi 1:1.

{8} In February 1843, at the request of W.W. Phelps, the Prophet re-wrote the vision which is like the 76th section of the Doctrine and Covenants in poetry form. It was published in the Times and Seasons, February 1, 1843, and republished in the Millennial Star, August, 1843.

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

3 Nephi 26:6-12

6 And now there cannot be written in this book even a hundredth part of the things which Jesus did truly teach unto the people;
7 But behold the plates of Nephi do contain the more part of the things which he taught the people.
8 And these things have I written, which are a lesser part of the things which he taught the people; and I have written them to the intent that they may be brought again unto this people, from the Gentiles, according to the words which Jesus hath spoken.
9 And when they shall have received this, which is expedient that they should have first, to try their faith, and if it shall so be that they shall believe these things then shall the greater things be made manifest unto them.
10 And if it so be that they will not believe these things, then shall the greater things be withheld from them, unto their condemnation.
11 Behold, I was about to write them, all which were engraven upon the plates of Nephi, but the Lord forbade it, saying: I will try the faith of my people.
12 Therefore I, Mormon, do write the things which have been commanded me of the Lord. And now I, Mormon, make an end of my sayings, and proceed to write the things which have been commanded me.
——————

My experience, both personal and through watching other people, is that a testimony is like a three legged stool. That is, there are three kinds of testimonies and each is necessary in order to keep the other two upright and stable. (1) There is a spiritual testimony that is taught by the Holy Ghost, (2) an academic testimony that comes from a careful study non-doctrinal subjects presented by the scriptures, (3) and an academic testimony that comes from a careful study of the doctrines taught in the scriptures.

The Book of Mormon provides examples of all three.

(1) A spiritual testimony is rather simple but very real: the Holy Ghost testifies that the book contains pure truth. That I know, and there are millions of other people who know it as well.

There is an interesting statement in Moroni’s introduction, published on the title page of the Book of Mormon. The concluding sentence reads:

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.

He does not say whether the men in question are the authors or the readers. However, the way I read that statement is:

And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men [that is, the failure of the readers to understand the intent of the authors]; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.

A simple example is the “absurd” statement in the Book of Mormon that the Nephites built with cement. Joseph Smith’s critics said that was impossible because, as everyone knew, cement was invented by the Romans. That argument seemed to work well until archaeologists found cement buildings in central America. Then that “mistake” by the author of the Book of Mormon was not a mistake any more. It is my belief that when we find a mistake in the Book of Mormon we should look to ourselves, not to the authors of the book as the source of the problem.

(2) A study of the non-doctrinal content of the scriptures. The thousand year history in the Book of Mormon is a very complex weaving of geography, historical sequences, and language differences. A careful study of these elements in the book shows that the Book of Mormon is internally consistent throughout. And the more closely those details are examined, the more convincing is that evidence is.

The language of the Book of Mormon is an excellent example. Stephen Ricks and some of his colleagues are doing a study of proper names in the Book of Mormon. This is important because our “original” text of the book is in English and the only access we have to the real original languages is in the names. Stephen and his friends can trace the roots of the Nephite personal and geographic names back to their Hebrew—or sometimes Egyptian or other Near Eastern language—origins. This shows that the Nephite language had both Hebrew and Egyptian elements, just as the book says it does. However, after Mosiah I goes to Zarahemla (but not before that) there is a new kind of name introduced that does not have recognizable ancient Near Eastern roots, but they do have similarities with each other. These are probably Jaredite names. (Stephen and I are working on a commentary of First Nephi and he will include an analysis of some of the names in that commentary.)

(3) Doctrinal consistencies are even more remarkable. For example, the Book of Mormon seems to quote the Sermon on the Mount, but it makes many not-so-subtle changes that turns the Savior’s sermon into a temple text. That temple text is consistent with other temple texts in the Book of Mormon. The frequency and accuracy of temple texts in the book would have been an amazing accomplishment if Joseph had written it because when Joseph translated the Book of Mormon there was no scholar in the world who knew that there was any kind of ancient Israelite temple drama other than the system of sacrifices described in the Old Testament.

There are so many of these internally consistent intricacies that are so perfect that I, for one, must conclude that the Book of Mormon is an ancient text that was translated by a master scholar who had access to many then unknown texts from the ancient Israelite world—or else translated by an 18 year old boy who had a great deal of supernatural help. Since the first is demonstrably impossible, that leaves the only option to be that the Book of Mormon was translated by Joseph Smith “by the gift and power of God.”

The point is that not only the spiritual, but also both kinds academic testimonies are necessary and valid. However, neither is complete without the other two because each, on its own, invites potential problems.

(1) A spiritual testimony without academic support can easily be counterfeited by enthusiasm or emotion. Then, when the emotion cools or the enthusiasm fades, the “testimony” cannot be sustained.

(2) Similarly, an in-depth academic study of the historicity and geographical setting of the scriptures can be great fun but without the moderating influence of the Holy Ghost it can lead the scholar, or the scholar wannabe, to all sorts of strange and conflicting conclusions.

(3) An academic testimony based on an in-depth study of the doctrines taught in the scriptures gives a very important kind of stability. However, it also brings potential difficulties. Without the Holy Ghost, an academic study of the “doctrines” can lead one into some really weird places.

I believe that all three kinds of testimony are mutually important and that the stabilizing power that keeps all three alive and real within us is for one to know what he really knows, and to also know what he does not know.

All right, that last bit sounds confusing so let me try again:

It is vital for Latter-day Saints to be able to identify with clarity the things one actually knows to be true. However, it is no less vital that one be able to identify with equal clarity the things that one does not know to be true. That is because one’s belief that unsubstantiated “doctrines” are true can undermine one’s belief in true doctrine. And quite frankly, sometimes it takes a more careful study of the scriptures to identify the reasons why some of the “Sunday School answers” are not true than it takes to identify the ones that are true.

In that same category is the ability to recognize the difference between gospel doctrine and church policy. Sometimes church policy is so well established that it is accepted as doctrine. Then when the policy is changed some get upset because they see it as a change in doctrine. A prime example was whether all worthy men should have the priesthood. Another more recent example is whether chaste “out” gay boys can belong to in LDS-sponsored scout troops.

Church policy changes to fit the times. It is significant that Mormon tells us almost nothing about the Nephite church organization or its policies. Before 3 Nephi we are told Alma organized a church with priests and teachers. In 3 Nephi we learn that the Savior organized a church with twelve disciples. That’s it! Mormon does not impose upon us and our culture the church organization and policies that worked in his time and for his culture.

The “church” never exists in a cultural vacuum and the “true church” must be true in its own time and place. For example, in LDS Church history, the organization, practices, and policies were different in Nauvoo, early Utah, and in the present. But it is always “true” within its situation.

An amazing example is the Seventy. The organization that Joseph established by revelation included quorums of Seventy, but the Church did not know what to do with them until it grew so large that it needed “area general authorities” who could work under the direction of the Apostles. In other words, the organization of the Church described in the revelation to the Prophet Joseph could not be fully realized until it became a “world wide church.” However, the church was true back in the years when there was no First Quorum of Seventy, but only stake seventies quorums. It is still true today when there is a First Quorum of Seventy but no stake seventies quorums.

My testimony is this: Jesus is the Christ, the gospel is truth, the priesthood is real, and the Church is as correct as its cultural environment will allow. Because that is so, I follow the prophet.

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

3 Nephi 26:4-5

4 And even unto the great and last day, when all people, and all kindreds, and all nations and tongues shall stand before God, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil—
5 If they be good, to the resurrection of everlasting life; and if they be evil, to the resurrection of damnation; being on a parallel, the one on the one hand and the other on the other hand, according to the mercy, and the justice, and the holiness which is in Christ, who was before the world began.

Philosophers often argue about the origin of good and evil. My view about that may be a bit simplistic, but I think it works. It is based on my understanding of these verses.

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.
30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.
31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light (D&C 93:29-31).

The point is this: agency is an integral part of what we are, “otherwise there is no existence.”

To understand the origins of good and evil we have to take our minds back to our own origins, and seek to understand our progression through linear time from intelligences, to spirit children of our Heavenly Father, to time on this earth, to the post-earth-life spirit world, to our resurrection, to our final judgement, then to become the celestial persons we all hope to become.

In each moment of our lives, we are perpetually confronted with the most primal and important decision of our existence. That decision is the answer to the great question: “What is in my best interest?”

I believe that throughout our premortal world, way back to when we were intelligences at the very beginning of our cognizance, that same great question had to be asked and answered, just as frequently as it is now.

I believe that neither good nor evil were ever imposed upon us, but both are the consequence of our own sense of Self — how we define our Self in terms of our most fundamental needs; and how we define other people’s relationship to that Self as we seek to satisfy those needs. The needs I am talking about are not the basic physical needs we have in this world, but rather the more fundamental needs that persist throughout our existence. They are all about our sense of Self, our relationships with other people and with our God.

In our defining those relationships, there have always been two basic options, but they are spread along a very long continuum. At one end is pure good, at the other pure evil, with many gradations of good and evil in between.

In the beginnings of our beginning there were the Savior and the Noble and Great Ones whose consistent response to that great question was that it was in their best interest to bless others, and to accept blessings from them, that all might be glorified. That kind of self gratification is love, and was the beginning and is the continuation of good.

On the other extreme was Satan and his minions who believed that it was in their best interest to use and control others to satisfy their own selfish desires. That kind of self gratification was the beginning and is the continuation of evil.

On a continuum between those two extremes were, and still are, the great masses of individuals. Most people make some decisions based on one kind of values, and other decisions based on the other kind of values. We see it in this world where most people vacillate between good and evil. But even here there are some people who adhere much more closely to good, while others seek to achieve self glory through evil means.

Each time we ask and answer that great question we also pronounce a judgement upon ourselves. That judgment evokes a blessing or a punishment. I am convinced God does not now, has never, and never will punish any of his children. Alma explained the process to his son:

22 But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflictet h the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would be destroyed, and God would cease to be God.
23 But God ceaseth not to be God, and mercy claimeth the penitent, and mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice.
24 For behold, justice exerciseth all his demands, and also mercy claimeth all which is her own; and thus, none but the truly penitent are saved.
25 What, do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you, Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God.
26 And thus God bringeth about his great and eternal purposes, which were prepared from the foundation of the world. And thus cometh about the salvation and the redemption of men, and also their destruction and misery (Alma 42:22-26).

Because we move through linear time from intelligences to the final judgment, we are bound by that time to living only in the moment. Each moment is unique. We cannot hurry into a future event, nor can we go back to revisit a past occurrence. We can remember and sometimes seek to replicate a past experiences that brought us pleasure, but each repetition is a new and separate event. For example if you eat a new kind of candy bar and really like it. You can never eat it again. You can get a similar bar and enjoy that one as much as the first, but the first will forever be a past pleasure. It can be remembered, and sometimes replicated, but not re-visited and re-experienced.

That is equally true of things we regret. We can never not-have-done them, but we can refuse to replicate them again. That refusal is repentance. The Savior’s Atonement cannot remove the event from our past, but he can remove its hurt and even its memory from our present. We can be washed clean from our sins so the sins will leave no stain upon our souls.

The Savior’s mercy accomplishes that cleansing. Through his Atonement he absorbs the full consequence of our sin and lets us feel only a taste of the hurt. That taste is sufficient to cause us to understand its pain and seek to not experience its likeness again. Therefore, we seek to not replicate the sin. Fortunately, sometimes we can vicariously experience a bit of the consequences of a sin by watching other people. Then we can altogether avoid doing the sin ourselves.

Or, if we opt to not repent, mercy still withholds the full power of justice. If we choose to do so, we can use that taste to titillate our Self and to seek to duplicate the thrill or sense of power we had when we did the sin. In either case, the decision to repent or not is entirely our own. The Savior’s mercy only guarantees that the option is ours.

Thus, because of mercy, we move through linear time, learn through experience, choose what we wish to replicate and keep as part of our being, or what we wish to discard so that it is no longer a part of our Self.

The plan of salvation guaranteed that as we move through linear time — from intelligences, spirit persons, earth life, spirit world, resurrection, and the final judgment — we will be confronted with enough challenges to enable us to make enough choices so that we can perfectly define the attitudes and actions that gives us happiness. Therefore, when we stand before the Savior on judgement day we will have become precisely who and what we have chosen to become.

Throughout this whole odyssey the powers of justice have been kept in abeyance. We have tasted its jurisdiction, but its full consequences have been absorbed by the Savior’s mercy. If we lived in a world where justice had its full sway, the consequences of our sins would have long since destroyed us, or the consequences of our righteousness would have bribed us to avoid sin. In either case we would have lost our agency and our Self would have become a Nothing. But because of the Savior’s Atonement the full powers of justice are held at bay until the resurrection when we are judged by our works and receive a body that is perfectly compatible with the person we have caused our Self to be.

This introduces us to the critical question: By what works will we be judged? The answer is: those actions and attitudes by which we answered the great question, which is largely about our perceptions of our Self in relationship to the value of other people. The quality of our spirit will determine the quality of our resurrected body. The Lord explained that very simply:

28 They who are [now – present tense] of a celestial spirit shall [future] receive the same body which was [past tense from the future, so back to the present] a natural body; even ye shall receive [future] your bodies, and your glory shall be [future] that glory by which your bodies are [present] quickened.
29 Ye who are [now – in the present] quickened by a portion of the celestial glory shall then [future] receive of the same, even a fulness (D&C 88:28-29).

To define “celestial spirit” we may go to the Doctrine and Covenants and elsewhere, where the high point to which we reach is to live the Law of Consecration, which means blessing the lives of others by our kindness and “good works.”

However, in the Book of Mormon the high point to which we reach is to be a person of charity. Charity and the Law of Consecration are two sides of the same coin. Living the Law of Consecration is what we do when charity is what we are.

Whether we have or have not charity defines the quality of our spirits and will ultimately define the quality of our resurrected body. Therefore, at the judgement that precedes our resurrection we are, as the Savior said, judged by our works. Mormon further explains:

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.
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).

The time of our resurrection will not be the first time we are judged by our works, neither will it be our last. After the resurrection we will stand before the Savior, clothed in our resurrected bodies, to be judged according to our works. Mormon explains that sequence very succinctly when he writes:

6 And he bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead, whereby man must be raised to stand before his judgment-seat (Mormon 7:5-7).

Mormon also explained it with more detail:

13 And because of the redemption of man, which came by Jesus Christ, they are brought back into the presence of the Lord; yea, this is wherein all men are redeemed, because the death of Christ bringeth to pass the resurrection, which bringeth to pass a redemption from an endless sleep, from which sleep all men shall be awakened by the power of God when the trump shall sound; and they shall come forth, both small and great, and all shall stand before his bar, being redeemed and loosed from this eternal band of death, which death is a temporal death.
14 And then cometh the judgment of the Holy One upon them; and then cometh the time that he that is filthy shall be filthy still; and he that is righteous shall be righteous still; he that is happy shall be happy still; and he that is unhappy shall be unhappy still (Mormon 9:13-14).

In Alma’s conversation quoted above, he taught that same principle to his son, and shows us the relationship between mercy, justice, resurrection, and the final judgment:

23 But God ceaseth not to be God, and mercy claimeth the penitent, and mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice (Alma 42:22-26).

The Savior’s mercy gives us the option of defining our Self and guarantees that each of us would receive a resurrected body compatible with that Self.

Now we have a different question: If we have already been judged by our works to receive a resurrected body, by what works are we judged after the resurrection at the final judgment? The scriptures answer that question as well.

In that final judgment when we stand before the Savior, he will judge us by our “works.” But since we were judged by our works before, this judgement is either a kind of redundancy or else the word “works” refers to something different. The latter is true, and we can the new referent by reading Alma in the Book of Mormon and James in the New Testament.

In a review of the Nephite temple rites, Alma says we are taught by our faith (pistis = covenants), repentance, and “holy works” (Alma 12:28-34). In that context I understand “holy works” to refer to the covenants we make and to the ordinances that validate them.

James teaches us the same concept in his famous statement that “faith without works is dead. The Greek word translated “faith” is pistis.

Pistis was a legal commercial term that might better be translated as “covenant” or “contract.” Contracts require a validation, usually a signature, to make them legal. Covenants in the ancient temples required ordinances as that validation. The ordinances must be performed with exactness and with proper authority just as a signature on a contract must represent someone who has the right to make the contract binding. What James wrote was that without the binding ordinances the ancient priesthood and temple covenants had no value.

The Prophet Joseph wrote the same thing, but he explained the gravity of the concept more fully.

7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead (D&C 132:7).

Ordinances are the works without which the covenants have no validity. God’s house is a house of order and there can be nothing capricious about his administration of the final judgment. We will stand before the Savior in the resurrected body that already defines the quality of our spirit. There, we will receive a final judgment based on our “holy works.” That judgment must be established by hard, unchallengeable fact. The final judgment will rest upon whether we have accepted and kept our eternal covenants, and whether those covenants have been validated by the appropriate ordinances. Since that question must be answered by fact and rather than by a subjective decision, that final judgment will be absolutely just and true.

So, as Alma taught, through the power of the Savior’s Atonement mercy enables us to become what we choose to become, but it is justice that dictates our final destiny. Thus God is perfectly merciful and perfectly just.

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

3 Nephi 26:1-5 

1 And now it came to pass that when Jesus had told these things he expounded them unto the multitude; and he did expound all things unto them, both great and small.

It is significant that the children would be included in the remarkable conversation that was to follow. Those same children had been blessed “one by one” by the Savior. Then “angels descending out of heaven as it were in the midst of fire; and they came down and encircled those little ones about, and they were encircled about with fire; and the angels did minister unto them.” (3 Nephi 17:19-25)

There is no sure evidence that, at that time, each of those children had a sode experience in which they were taught their own eternal identity and their individual responsibilities while here in mortality. But then, “the angels did minister unto them.” To minister means to bless and/or to teach. So the children must have learned something, and the most important things they could have learned would have been about themselves, their relationship with each other and with the Savior, and their assignments while in this world.

With the instructions those children had already received, it is quite reasonable that they should have been included in the conversation in which Jesus “expound all things unto them.”

2 And he saith: These scriptures, which ye had not with you, the Father commanded that I should give unto you; for it was wisdom in him that they should be given unto future generations.

One wonders what “future generations” tells us here. Clearly he wanted the Nephites to have them in their record for their own sakes. But why Mormon included them in what he was preparing for us is a different matter altogether. He knew us well, as he says:

35 Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing (Mormon 8:35).

From his distant perspective and seeing the full sweep of our history and culture, he probably understood our needs better than we understand them ourselves. He also probably knew that we already have those chapters of Isaiah and Malachi, and that they are buried deep in our Old Testament where few of us will dig to find them. That very likely explains why Mormon included them in the record he was writing for us. He wanted to call our attention to them and to emphasize their importance.

3 And he did expound all things, even from the beginning until the time that he should come in his glory—yea, even all things which should come upon the face of the earth, even until the elements should melt with fervent heat, and the earth should be wrapt together as a scroll, and the heavens and the earth should pass away;
4 And even unto the great and last day, when all people, and all kindreds, and all nations and tongues shall stand before God, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil—
5 If they be good, to the resurrection of everlasting life; and if they be evil, to the resurrection of damnation; being on a parallel, the one on the one hand and the other on the other hand, according to the mercy, and the justice, and the holiness which is in Christ, who was before the world began.

“And he did expound all things, even from the beginning until …. the heavens and the earth should pass away;.” The phrase “from the beginning” in the scriptures has a great variety of meanings depending on its context. If the context is an historical narrative, then “the beginning” is whenever the story starts. So, for example, it might refer to the time of Adam, or Abraham, or the exodus from Egypt. However, when its context is within the temple rites, or about the plan of salvation, or, as in this instance, about the Savior’s mission and ultimate triumph, then the “beginning” almost always is a reference to the creation sequence that began at the Council in Heaven (Abraham 3:22-26). I believe that is what it means here. If that is correct, then the Savior had chronicled and explained to the Nephites almost our entire journey through linear time.

However, Mormon wants us to understand that the full panorama of the Savior’s teachings did not start or end with linear time. He projects our thinking beyond the time when “the heavens and the earth should pass away” by describing the resurrection as an introduction to “everlasting life,” but he also wants our minds to try to reach to before the Council in Heaven.

Just as Enoch., during his sode experience, was taught about the Savior’s mission from “even before the very beginning,” {1} so Mormon wants us to get that same sense of the Savior’s infinity. To do that, Mormon describes the resurrection in terms of a continuation of the power of the Savior’s Atonement “according to the mercy, and the justice, and the holiness which is in Christ, who was before the world began.”

Like Enoch, Mormon testifies of the Savior’s dominion and authority “before” the events of the Council in Heaven — laterally “infinite and eternal.” Pushing our understanding of the Savior’s role “from eternity to all eternity.”

—————————-
FOOTNOTE

{1} Book of the Secrets of Enoch, In The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, 2 vols. Translated and edited by R. H. Charles. Oxford: Clarendon, 1976. vol 2: 431-69, ch. 24:2.

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

3 Nephi 23:1-14

9 Verily I say unto you, I commanded my servant Samuel, the Lamanite, that he should testify unto this people, that at the day that the Father should glorify his name in me that there were many saints who should arise from the dead, and should appear unto many, and should minister unto them. And he said unto them: Was it not so?
10 And his disciples answered him and said: Yea, Lord, Samuel did prophesy according to thy words, and they were all fulfilled.
11 And Jesus said unto them: How be it that ye have not written this thing, that many saints did arise and appear unto many and did minister unto them?
12 And it came to pass that Nephi remembered that this thing had not been written.
13 And it came to pass that Jesus commanded that it should be written; therefore it was written according as he commanded.

This exchange between Jesus and the Twelve asks some intriguing questions, but does not supply the answers. When did it happen? The answer to that is probably immediately after the Savior’s resurrection. That would be consistent with this account in Matthew:

51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. [ JST Matthew 27:56 reads: “And the graves were opened; and the bodies of the saints which slept, arose, who were many.”]
54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God (Matthew 27:51-54).

If the timing of the multiple resurrections on both continents happened at the same time, then the people in America were aware of the Savior’s resurrection a full year before he appeared at the Bountiful temple. {1}

The account of these resurrections were were added to the Nephite history, but Mormon did not include it in his abridgement for us, nor did he tell us about them until he recorded this conversation. Why?

I think I know the answer, but it is, of course, only my opinion:

In Who shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, Stephen Ricks and I have shown that Mormon wrote his account of 3 Nephi in much the same sequence as the final scenes of the ancient Israelite temple drama. It concludes, as does the drama, with the coronation of the king (in this case it was the Savior) and the beginning of a new age as reported in 4 Nephi. The more nearly he approached the Savior’s enthronement ceremony, the more closely he adhered to the pattern of the temple rites. The reason he did this seems quite obvious: His intent was to show that the Savior was the legitimate Priest and King, and that in following the rites of the temple, he had fulfilled all of that important part of the Law.

So the answer to why Mormon left it out of his abridgement is simple: If he had told about the resurrection before he told about the Savior’s coming to Bountiful, it would have messed up the sequence of the events of the story he wanted to tell. And it was important to him that we understand that the Savior’s coronation was performed with perfect correctness — righteousness — zedek.

————————–
FOOTNOTE

{1} Mormon was very careful to let the record show that a year had passed he wrote:

5 And it came to pass in the thirty and fourth year, in the first month, on the fourth day of the month, there arose a great storm, such an one as never had been known in all the land (3 Nephi 8:5).

18 And it came to pass that in the ending of the thirty and fourth year, ……. that soon after the ascension of Christ into heaven he did truly manifest himself unto them (3 Nephi 10:18).