Category: Book of Mormon Project

  • 3 Nephi 20: 30-46 — LeGrand Baker — Latter-day history of temple building

    3 Nephi 20: 30-46 — LeGrand Baker — Latter-day history of temple building

    When the Saviour was in America, on his second day (which corresponds to the Great Feast or final day of the New Year festival coronation rites) he delivered an address to the multitude in which he paraphrased the same Isaiah text that Abinadi used here. If one wishes to understand what Abinadi is trying to say, it seems to me that one must begin by examining the Saviour’s rearrangement of that text, and his commentary on it. His words read:

    29 And I will remember the covenant which I have made with my people; and I have covenanted with them that I would gather them together in mine own due time, that I would give unto them again the land of their fathers for their inheritance, which is the land of Jerusalem, which is the promised land unto them forever, saith the Father.
    30 And it shall come to pass that the time cometh, when the fulness of my gospel shall be preached unto them;
    31 And they shall believe in me, that I am Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and shall pray unto the Father in my name.
    32 Then shall their watchmen lift up their voice, and with the voice together shall they sing; for they shall see eye to eye.
    33 Then will the Father gather them together again, and give unto them Jerusalem for the land of their inheritance.
    34 Then shall they break forth into joy – Sing together, ye waste places of Jerusalem; for the Father hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem.
    35 The Father hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of the Father; and the Father and I are one.
    36 And then shall be brought to pass that which is written: Awake, awake again, and put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city, for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.
    37 Shake thyself from the dust; arise, sit down, O Jerusalem; loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O captive daughter of Zion.
    38 For thus saith the Lord: Ye have sold yourselves for naught, and ye shall be redeemed without money.
    39 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that my people shall know my name; yea, in that day they shall know that I am he that doth speak.
    40 And then shall they say: How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings unto them, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings unto them of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion: Thy God reigneth!
    41 And then shall a cry go forth: Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch not that which is unclean; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord.
    42 For ye shall not go out with haste nor go by flight; for the Lord will go before you, and the God of Israel shall be your rearward.
    43 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high.
    44 As many were astonished at thee – his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men –
    45 So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.
    46 Verily, verily, I say unto you, all these things shall surely come, even as the Father hath commanded me. Then shall this covenant which the Father hath covenanted with his people be fulfilled; and then shall Jerusalem be inhabited again with my people, and it shall be the land of their inheritance. (3 Nephi 20:29-46)

    The story and message told in the sacred sub-text of the Book of Mormon is its sacred space. There is a linguistic veil which separates the surface story which can be read by any literate person, from its temple sub-text. But while everything about that surface story invites one to discover its veil and learn its sacred language, the encoded story and message can only be read within the context of the legitimate functions of a ancient Israelite temple. I would like to go through that statement by the Saviour again – not to interpret the sub-test – but to point out some keys by which it may be read.

    v. 30 And it shall come to pass that the time cometh, when the fullness of my gospel shall be preached unto them;

    “Fullness” is a key word. It means “fullness,” so must be read literally. As I have tried to point out before, I believe the surest and easiest way to read the sub-text of the scriptures is to assume the prophets knew all that the reader himself knows and a good deal more besides, so when one seeks to discover the temple context in which the prophet was writing, one must reach out to the very edge of his own understanding. Since there can be no “fullness” of the gospel where there is not also a knowledge of the temple, the phrase “fullness of the gospel” immediately tells one he has entered the sacred space of the Book of Mormon.

    v. 31 And they shall believe in me, that I am Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and shall pray unto the Father in my name.

    The key word is “pray.” “In” is also important. “In my name” means what it says. One of the characteristics of the sacred language is that words we often read only casually speak with all their power, and by so doing, give great depth of meaning to what we habitually pigeon hole as “I already understand that, so I don’t have to think about it any more.”

    The next verse begins with the word “then.” “Then” creates a causal relationship between the prayer in verse 31 and what follows in verse 32. So the “then” tells us that the words which follow must either describe the results of the prayer, or else they must describe the method by which the prayer is said. In this case it appears to be the method.

    v. 32a Then shall their watchmen lift up their voice, and with the voice together shall they sing;

    The watchmen sing in unison. Now, given the context of the “fullness of the gospel” and “pray” one can easily recognize their song “together” as the ancient, sacred prayer circle, where words are spoken or sung in unison and where the movements of their dance are also in unison.1

    Those key words, “fullness,” “pray,” and “together” are enough to give the initiated reader all one needs to know in order to understand the exact context into which the Saviour’s words have taken him, and thereby the key to understand the plain, but sub-textual meaning of this paraphrasing of Isaiah.

    So who are the “watchmen”? They are, of course, those who are engaged in the sacred dance and prayer of the ancient prayer circle. They are those engaged in “mighty prayer,” as in the following two examples:

    6   Nevertheless the children of God were commanded that they should gather themselves together oft, and join in fasting and mighty prayer in behalf of the welfare of the souls of those who knew not God (Alma 6:6).

    1   And it came to pass that as the disciples of Jesus were journeying and were preaching the things which they had both heard and seen, and were baptizing in the name of Jesus, it came to pass that the disciples were gathered together and were united in mighty prayer and fasting.
    2     And Jesus again showed himself unto them, for they were praying unto the Father in his name; and Jesus came and stood in the midst [“midst” means center, as in the center of a circle] of them, and said unto them: What will ye that I shall give unto you? (3 Nephi 27:1-2).

    Psalm 17 seems to be such a prayer. It asserts three times that the Lord will listen to one’s voice.

    I have called upon thee, for thou wilt hear me,
    O God: incline thine ear unto me,
    and hear my speech. (Psalms 17:6)

    Elder McConkie commented on those verses this way,

         The Nephite Twelve ‘were united in mighty prayer and fasting…They were praying unto the Father in the name of Jesus.’ This is the perfect pattern for gaining revelation or whatever is needed. In this setting, the record says: “And Jesus came and stood in the midst of them, and said to them: What will ye that I shall give you?” (The Promised Messiah, p. 557-8.)

    32b. for they shall see eye to eye.

    Seeing “Eye to eye” may mean there is no hard feelings or disagreements among the participants. It may mean that they can look across the circle and see into each other’s faces. It may mean what it meant to Alma.

    26   For because of the word which he has imparted unto me, behold, many have been born of God, and have tasted as I have tasted, and have seen eye to eye as I have seen; therefore they do know of these things of which I have spoken, as I do know; and the knowledge which I have is of God (Alma 36:26).

    The Saviour’s paraphrase of Isaiah continues:

    v. 33 Then will the Father gather them [the watchmen who participate in the prayer] together again, and give unto them Jerusalem for the land of their inheritance.
    v. 34a Then shall they break forth into joy – Sing together [same idea], ye waste places [sacred spaces which had become profane, but now are sacred again] of Jerusalem; for the Father hath comforted his people, [“comfort” in Isaiah 61 references the coronation rites: wash, anoint, clothe, crown, and give a new name.]
    34b. he hath redeemed Jerusalem. [To redeem is to bring back into the presence of God]
    v. 35 The Father hath made bare his holy arm [That means exactly what it says]in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of the Father; and the Father and I are one.
    v. 36 And then shall be brought to pass that which is written: Awake, awake [You have heard those words spoken before] again, and put on thy strength [“Strength” connotes royal clothing], O Zion [Zion is the pure in heart]; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city [“Holy” means complete, nothing lacking], for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean [those who are not ceremonially cleansed].
    v. 37 Shake thyself from the dust [In the creation story, man is made from the dust of the earth.]; arise [One stands to make a covenant, as in 2 Kings 23:1-3], sit down, O Jerusalem; loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O captive daughter of Zion.[A covenant with God is an enabling power.]
    v. 38 For thus saith the Lord: Ye have sold yourselves for naught, and ye shall be redeemed [brought into the presence of God] without money.
    v. 39a Verily, verily, I say unto you, that my people shall know my name;

    Sometimes, as in the story of King Benjamin and his people, when one learns the name of Christ they also take that name upon themselves. In the scriptures, new names are so closely associated with new covenants, that the words “name” and “covenant” can often be interchanged without changing the meaning of the sentence, as I suppose in this instance, the phrase would carry a double meaning, and one of them would be the same concept as if it read, “that my people shall know my covenant.”

    39b. yea, in that day they shall know that I am he that doth speak.

    As was true with Moses when he stood in the presence of God with and the fire of the burning bush separating them.3 One can only really know the name of God when he tells it himself. Only in sacred space, either symbolically or in fact, can one learn, first hand, the name of God.

    v. 40 And then[“then” is the key word. Here it suggests after they are clothed and know the name]shall they say: How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings unto them, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings unto them of good, that publisheth salvation; [as in: “And they did all, both they who had been healed and they who were whole, bow down at his feet, and did worship him; and as many as could come for the multitude did kiss his feet, insomuch that they did bathe his feet with their tears.” (3 Nephi 17:10).] that saith unto Zion: Thy God reigneth!

    There is only one way and in one place (either symbolically or in fact) where one can know that “Thy God reigneth!” That declaration can only be made with certainty by one who has been where God is.

    v. 41 And then shall a cry go forth: Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch not that which is unclean; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord. [“The vessels of the Lord” are the cups, horns, and other implements used in the temple ordinances.]
    v. 42 For ye shall not go out with haste nor go by flight; for the Lord will go before you, and the God of Israel shall be your rearward.
    v. 43 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high.
    v. 44 As many were astonished at thee–his visage was so marred, more than any man [as in Psalms 22], and his form more than the sons of men–
    v. 45a So shall he sprinkle many nations;

    In the temple ceremonies of ancient Israel, the High Priest would sprinkle the blood of the sacrificial offering on the Tabernacle altar, the congregation, and on himself. This sprinkling with blood was a symbolic cleansing and was a necessary prerequisite to the other temple ordinances.

    v. 45b. the kings [sacral kings] shall shut their mouths at him, [This could mean to stand in awe, listen rather than talk, or know how to keep a secret, probably the latter.]for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.
    v. 46a Verily, verily, I say unto you, all these things shall surely come, even as the Father hath commanded me. Then shall this covenant which the Father hath covenanted with his people be fulfilled [see Moroni 10:28-34]; and then shall Jerusalem be inhabited again with my people, [italics added]

    “My people” are the covenant, initiated people who constitute Zion. “Zion are the pure in heart.” They are the one’s spoken of by the Saviour when he said, “Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.”

    v.46b. and it shall be the land of their inheritance. (3 Nephi 20:30-46).

  • 3 Nephi 14:1-12 — LeGrand Baker — How to teach the gospel

    3 Nephi 14:1-12 — LeGrand Baker — How to teach the gospel

    1 And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he turned again to the multitude, and did open his mouth unto them again, saying: Verily, verily, I say unto you, Judge not, that ye be not judged.

    The first key to missionary work: You don’t judge potential converts by the standards of the world.

    2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    “Mete” is measure —-the quantity that is measured. If you don’t teach those whom the Spirit tells you to teach, then you won’t learn any more good things.

    3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    A mote is a speck of dust. A beam is not a log. A log is a fallen tree, or part of one. A beam is a log that is part of the superstructure of a building. It isn’t the log he is talking about it is the superstructure —- the ideas that President McKay called “gospel hobbies.”

    4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother: Let me pull the mote out of thine eye—and behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

    Learn what is important. You can’t teach truth if your own understanding of what is true is clouded by a false superstructure of ideas.

    5 Thou hypocrite, first cast the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

    Even though the ideas might be true, the emphasis you place on them may be entirely out of balance with the rest of the other principles of the gospel. You can’t teach truth until you have the correct perspective of what truth is. For example, if you are so hung up on the idea that caffeine is against the Word of Wisdom (which the new handbook says it is not so, by the way), and anti-coke is the gospel you insist on teaching, then you cannot teach and you will not learn.

    6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

    Not only is it vital that you teach those who are worthy to learn, it is equally important that you do not teach those whose life or values make them unable to learn. This is explained in Alma 12:9-11:

    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.]

    7 Ask, and it shall be given unto you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
    8 For every one that asketh, receiveth; and he that seeketh, findeth; and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened.

    This is an encoded key. It is a reflection on the ancient veil ceremony. The implication is: That is the way you learned the mysteries, and is the key to how all may learn.

    9 Or what man is there of you, who, if his son ask bread, will give him a stone?
    10 Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?
    11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father who is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

    That is a restatement of the original premise: “ Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

    Conclusion: Therefore, if you wish to find exaltation through learning the principles of the of the gospel, you must teach as you would be taught, and always follow the promptings of the Spirit as you do teach or as you refrain from teaching]

    12 Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them, for this is the law and the prophets.

  • 3 Nephi 12: 4 — LeGrand Baker — blessed are all they that mourn

    3 Nephi 12: 4 — LeGrand Baker — blessed are all they that mourn

    3 Nephi 12: 4
    4  And again, blessed [enjoying “the state of the gods”] are all they that mourn, for they shall be comforted (3 Nephi 12:4).

    This is a paraphrase from Isaiah 61, which is a prophecy of the Lord’s visit to the Underworld during the period between his own death and his resurrection. President Joseph F. Smith saw in vision the fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecy. In recording his own vision, President Smith used much of Isaiah’s language:

    18  While this vast multitude waited and conversed, rejoicing in the hour of their deliverance from the chains of death, the Son of God appeared, declaring liberty to the captives who had been faithful (D&C 138:18; compare Isaiah 61:1).

    When President Smith identified the persons who were waiting to welcome the Savior, he included:

    42   Isaiah. … who declared by prophecy that the Redeemer was anointed to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that were bound (D&C 138:42).

    Knowing that, we have the key to understanding what non-LDS scholars consider to be one of the most perplexing chapters in the Old Testament. One of the things they cannot understand is why verse 3 contains the entire ancient priestly and royal coronation ceremony, then concludes with a wedding ceremony in verse 10.

    Isaiah 61 appears to be a commentary on the last third of Psalm 22, which is also a prophecy that the Savior will enter the Underworld and conquer death and hell. Isaiah begins by recalling the Savior’s anointing at the Council in Heaven:

    1  The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives [those in the spirit prison], and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
    2  To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord (Isaiah 61:1-2a).

    In the Old Testament, that which is “acceptable” is performed in righteousness—zedek—with the proper authority, in the right place and the right way, using the right words, and dressed the right way:

    and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn (Isaiah 61:2b).

    This second verse is the one that was paraphrased by the Savior in the Beatitudes. The Isaiah version, which is still speaking of the spirits of the dead, reads, “to comfort all that mourn.” The Savior said, “Blessed are all they that mourn, for they shall be comforted” (3 Nephi 12:4, Matthew 5:4), There, as in the 23rd Psalm, comfort means to bring about the cessation of sorrow. In this context, to comfort does not mean to give someone an aspirin, a hug, and a warm blanket. It means to empower, and the empowerment causes one to be able to transcend suffering and sorrow.

    From President Smith, we learn that they, the spirits of the dead, mourned because they “looked upon the long absence of their spirits from their bodies as a bondage” (D&C 138:50). And from Isaiah we learn that empowerment is accomplished by the ancient royal coronation rites. The third verse of Isaiah 61 reads:

    3   To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion [to make the dead a part of Zion], to give unto them beauty for ashes [a ceremonial washing to remove the ashes], the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called [new name] trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified (Isaiah 61:3).

    This new name represents two important ideas. The first is the Tree of Life, and second is the principle of eternal family. Trees make fruit, fruit make seeds, seeds make trees, ad infinitum. Thus, it continues forever. The symbolic eternal repetition of this process is what Isaiah calls “the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified.” The new name given to those who are “comforted” contains the blessings of eternal family, but this new name is not the only part of Isaiah’s prophecy that conveys that promise.

    The symbolism in the next six verses of Isaiah chapter 61 describes the relationship between the dead and those who will do genealogical and temple work, sealing families together.

    Then the last two verses of the chapter bring us back to the coronation scene. It is a sacred marriage ceremony. From the relationship between Isaiah 61 and D&C 138, we know that this wedding is also part of the temple work for the dead. In Isaiah, the bride and groom sing a hymn of thanksgiving:

    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).

    The last part of their wedding hymn is a testimony of the promised resurrection. They sing:

    11   For as the earth bringeth forth her bud, and as the garden causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth; so the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the nations (Isaiah 61:11).

    The Book of Mormon lays specific emphasis on the fact that in this Beatitude the Savior is quoting Isaiah 61, for as it is given in 3 Nephi, it is a more exact quote of Isaiah than the way it is recorded in Matthew (Isaiah 61:3 and Nephi 12:4 each have the word “all,” but Matthew 5:4 does not). Thus it is apparent that the Savior’s intent when he said, “Blessed are all they that mourn, for they shall be comforted” is that those few words were an encapsulation of the ordinances and blessing associated with salvation for the dead and the promise to them of the blessings of eternal family relationships.

    The Coronation Ceremony in Isaiah 61

    Even though the Old Testament historical books give no full account of a royal coronation ceremony, Isaiah 61 does contain all five of the most essential elements of any coronation. These rites are so fundamental to human society that they have retained their basic integrity for thousands of years. Fundamentally, the same ceremonies were used in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, medieval Europe, and modern Britain. For example, on the day of her coronation, the present Queen Elizabeth II was bathed, clothed, anointed, given a regal new name, and crowned. Then, as she sat upon her throne, she spoke to her subjects.

    Even though the non-Biblical ancient and modern coronation ceremonies are remarkably alike—and remarkably like the original Israelite coronation ceremony in Isaiah 61—there are striking differences in ritual and meaning. Nibley, while discussing the first chapter of Moses, painted a vivid picture of the significance of the ultimate coronation ceremony in the context of Moses’ sode experience. He began by citing these verses from the Book of Moses:

    23   And now of this thing Moses bore record; but because of wickedness it is not had among the children of men.
    24   And it came to pass that when Satan had departed from the presence of Moses, that Moses lifted up his eyes unto heaven, being filled with the Holy Ghost, which beareth record of the Father and the Son;
    25   And calling upon the name of God, he beheld his glory again, for it was upon him; and he heard a voice, saying: Blessed art thou, Moses, for I, the Almighty, have chosen thee, and thou shalt be made stronger than many waters; for they shall obey thy command as if thou wert God.
    26   And lo, I am with thee, even unto the end of thy days; for thou shalt deliver my people from bondage, even Israel my chosen.
    27   And it came to pass, as the voice was still speaking, Moses cast his eyes and beheld the earth, yea, even all of it; and there was not a particle of it which he did not behold, discerning it by the spirit of God.
    28   And he beheld also the inhabitants thereof, and there was not a soul which he beheld not; and he discerned them by the Spirit of God; and their numbers were great, even numberless as the sand upon the sea shore.
    29   And he beheld many lands; and each land was called earth, and there were inhabitants on the face thereof (Moses 1:23-29).

    Nibley then writes:

    And now the scene changes (verses 23 and 24 read like stage directions); the lights go up, the music soars and Moses, though remaining on earth, is again invested with glory and hears the voice of God proclaiming him victor, worthy and chosen to lead God’s people “as if thou wert God” — the type and model of the ancient Year King proclaimed after his victory over death as God’s ruler on earth. He is specifically told that he shall “be made stronger than many waters” — for he has just passed through the waters of death and rebirth, de profundis; and shown himself capable and worthy of the mission which is now entrusted to him. After this royal acclamation, reminiscent of combat and coronation episodes dramatized in the earliest year rites throughout the ancient world, after the coronation, the scene again changes, as Moses and the reader view the field of labor in which the prophet is to work; he receives a thorough briefing, an intimate knowledge of the earth in its cosmic setting, its physical makeup (“every particle” of it), and everything that lives upon it.

    The coronation ceremony in Isaiah 61 is less dramatic, but very significant for the people who experienced it. The Isaiah chapter is about vicarious work for the dead, but the ceremony was much the same as that used for living kings. We know that Isaiah 61 was a prophecy about salvation for the dead because its first verse is quoted in D&C 138:42. By identifying the “captives” as those in the spirit prison waiting to hear the gospel, it shows that the events described in Isaiah 61 are a prophecy, of which the events described in Section 138 are the fulfillment. The Isaiah prophecy reads:

    1  The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
    2  To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn (Isaiah 61:1-2).

    Bratcher made an interesting comment about the meaning of the first verse. Her observation fits perfectly into Joseph F. Smith’s revelation that this is about the Savior’s establishing missionary work among the dead. She wrote, “‘To proclaim liberty to the captives and release to the prisoners’ … Some difficulty exists in the translation of the phrase “release to the prisoners.” The Hebrew word translated “release” appears everywhere else in the Old Testament with the meaning “the opening of blind eyes.”

    The Meaning of “Comfort”

    In verse 2, “comfort” is an important word whose meaning is difficult for us to capture because it has changed since the King James Version was translated. In 1622, when the English word was nearer in time to its Latin origins, the first definition of “comfort” meant just exactly what the Latin said: “with strength,” to strengthen, or to empower. “Comfort” still meant that in 1787 when the American Constitution was written, and treason was defined as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.” (That did not mean it was treason to give the enemy an aspirin and a warm blanket. It meant that it is treason to empower an enemy.) The most extensive analysis of the Hebrew word is by Gary Anderson, who writes,

    This verb “to comfort” (n-h-m) does not connote a simple act of emotional identification. Comfort can imply either the symbolic action of assuming the state of mourning alongside the mourner, or it can have the nuance of bringing about the cessation of mourning. In grammatical terms, the former usage reflects a processual usage of the verb, while the latter usage would be resultative.” He goes on to explain, “The latter usage, to bring about the cessation of mourning, is very common in prophetic oracles of deliverance. The famous exhortation of Isaiah 40:1, ‘Comfort, comfort, my people,’ comes to mind immediately. As Westermann noted, the term conveys ‘God’s intervention to help and restore.’”

    Anderson’s definition can account for the way the English translators used the word “comfort” to mean the bestowal of authority or power—an empowerment—and it also adds substantial depth to the meaning of the 23rd Psalm and other scriptures where “comfort” might be read as “to give consolation,” they might also be read as “to give power and authority, thus enabling one to transcend sorrow.”

    The next verse, Isaiah 61:3, explains how the empowerment will happen by detailing the events of a rather standard coronation ceremony. The verse begins with the promise that the people will be made a part of Zion, then it describes the ceremony itself. (One thing to keep in mind, as we read Isaiah’s description of the ceremony, is that the word “for” does not mean “in consequence of,” but rather, it should be understood as “in exchange for,” or, as the Anchor Bible has it translated, “instead of.” For that reason we have used “instead of” in the headings below.) The words in the King James translation read:

    To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion,
    to give unto them beauty for ashes,
    the oil of joy for mourning,
    the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness;
    that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified (Isaiah 61:3).

    Each of those steps is as interesting as it was indispensable.

    to give unto them beauty instead of ashes

    The denotation of the Hebrew word translated as “beauty” is the beauty of a hat or turban, rather than a direct reference to the hat itself. The connotation is the glory of a crown. Some translations accept the connotation and use a word for the hat, often “diadem” or “crown,” rather than the more literal “beauty” as is found in the King James Version. In either case, the meaning is that the ashes were removed and then replaced by a crown. The removal of the ashes necessarily implies a ceremonial washing. The ashes would have been those of a red heifer, and the washing a ceremonial cleansing from sin.

    In ancient Israel, putting a mixture of water and the ashes of a red heifer on one’s head was a formal purification ordinance. A red heifer was sacrificed once each year and its ashes were kept to be used in an ordinance that made a person ritually clean. In Isaiah 61 it was used in preparation for other ordinances that would follow. Instructions for the preparation and use of the ashes are given in Numbers 19.

    Just as the sacred anointing oil was perfumed with a recipe that could not be legally duplicated, so there was also a sacred recipe for the ashes of the red heifer. The ashes contained “cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet” that were burned with the heifer. The instructions were:

    5    And one shall burn the heifer in his sight; her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung, shall he burn:
    6     And the priest shall take cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet, and cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer (Numbers 19:5-6).

    Cedar is a fragrant smelling wood. Hyssop is a small bush, a branch of which was used for daubing the lintels of the Israelite homes in the first Passover (Exodus 12:22). It was also used in the ritualistic cleansing of lepers (Leviticus 14). Scarlet was “a highly prized brilliant red color obtained from female bodies of certain insects and used for dying woven fabric, cloth, and leather.”

    Psalm 51 was sung in conjunction with a cleansing ordinance—the most likely and most appropriate would have been the occasion of the king’s purification that was preliminary to his being clothed and anointed as king:

    1 Have mercy upon me, O God,
    according to thy lovingkindness:
    according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot
    out my transgressions.
    2 Wash me throughly from mine iniquity,
    and cleanse me from my sin.
    3 For I acknowledge my transgressions:
    and my sin is ever before me.
    4 Against thee, thee only, have I sinned,
    and done this evil in thy sight:
    that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and
    be clear when thou judgest.
    5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity;
    and in sin did my mother conceive me.
    6 Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts:
    and in the hidden part thou shalt make me
    to know wisdom.
    7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean:
    wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
    8 Make me to hear joy and gladness;
    that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice.
    9 Hide thy face from my sins,
    and blot out all mine iniquities.
    10 Create in me a clean heart, O God;
    and renew a right spirit within me.
    11 Cast me not away from thy presence;
    and take not thy holy spirit from me.
    12 Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation
    [that is one of the connotations of “to comfort”];
    and uphold me with thy free spirit.
    13 Then will I teach transgressors thy ways;
    and sinners shall be converted unto thee.
    14 Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God,
    thou God of my salvation:
    and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness.
    15 O Lord, open thou my lips;
    and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise.
    16 For thou desirest not sacrifice;
    else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
    17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit:
    a broken and a contrite heart, O God,
    thou wilt not despise.
    18 Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion:
    build thou the walls of Jerusalem.
    19 Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices
    of righteousness,
    with burnt offering and whole burnt offering:
    then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar (Psalm 51:1-19).

    The phrase, “purge me with hyssop” necessarily implies a cleansing with the ashes of the red heifer, for (except for leprosy) that was the only ordinance where hyssop was used as part of a ceremonial cleansing agent—that is, the ashes of the red heifer also contained hyssop.

    It is important to observe that the purging he requested was not a physical cleansing but a spiritual one. Then, in verses 16 and 17, we find the words that are echoed in the Book of Mormon just before the Savior arrived:

    16 For thou desirest not sacrifice;
    else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
    17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit:
    a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise (Psalm 51:16-17).

    When the Savior came to America, he instructed the people that there would be no more blood sacrifices, but rather they should sacrifice a broken heart and a contrite spirit. This psalm foreshadows those instructions and shows that the pre-exilic Israelites also understood that the blood sacrifices of the Law would be fulfilled, and the sacrifices required in their place would be a broken heart and contrite spirit, as in the psalm uttered by the women at the cross:

    18 The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart;
    and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit (Psalm 34:18).

    the oil of joy instead of mourning”

    Inasmuch as the early scenes of the drama had already shown that the king had been foreordained at the Council in Heaven, this concluding anointing was a re-affirmation of that premortal ordinance. As Borsch believed, “ The ceremony is said to take place in the heavenly realms just as the royal ritual was often described as though it were taking place in heaven. Let us notice, too, that the anointing act here is not associated primarily with cleansing or healing, but rather with a rite like King David’s. It is said that the ceremony makes the pneumatic into a god as well, just like the one above. In other words he will be a royal god.”

    Widengren quoted Pseudo-Clement to show that the anointing oil was symbolically a product of the Tree of Life:

    This idea of an anointing with oil from the Tree of Life is found in a pregnant form in the Psalm Clementine writings, from which some quotations may be given. In the passage concerned, the author (or rather his original source) discusses the problem of the Primordial Man as Messiah. He is represented as stressing the fact that the Primordial Man is the Anointed One:

    But the reason of his being called the Messiah (the Anointed One) is that, being the Son of God, he was a man, and that, because he was the first beginning, his father in the beginning anointed him with oil which was from the Tree of Life.

    Primordial Man, who had received the anointing, thanks to which he had been installed in the threefold office of king, high priest, and prophet, is then paralleled with every man who has received such anointing:

    The same, however, is every man who has been anointed with the oil that has been prepared, so that he has been made a participant of that which is possessed of power, even being worth the royal office or the prophet’s office or the high priest’s office.

    The apocryphal Gospel of Philip, teaches the same. It reads, “But the tree of life stands in the midst of paradise. And indeed (it is) the olive-tree. From it came the chrism [anointing oil]. Through it came the resurrection.” On the nest page Philip added:

    The chrism [anointing oil] is superior to baptism. For from the chrism [anointing oil] we were called “Christians,” [that is, “anointed ones”] not from the baptism. Christ also was so called because of the anointing. For the Father anointed the Son. But the Son anointed the apostles. And the apostles anointed us. He who is anointed possesses all things. He has the resurrection, the light, the cross.

    Borsch mentioned other facets of the coronation ceremony that are not explicitly mentioned in the Isaiah passage, but which were very important. In the following, he wrote that the king was “initiated into heavenly secrets and given wisdom.” That initiation may have been part of what Johnson and Mowinckel understood to be an “endowment with the spirit.” It is what Nibley described in his analysis of Moses chapter one, quoted above. It was this spiritual empowerment—not just the physical ordinances—that qualified one to be king. Borsch writes,

    The king is anointed. The holy garment is put on him together with the crown and other royal regalia. He is said to be radiant, to shine like the sun just as does the king-god. He is initiated into heavenly secrets and given wisdom. He is permitted to sit upon the throne, often regarded as the very throne of the god. He rules and judges; all enemies are subservient. All do him obeisance.

    The New Year’s festival temple drama’s coronation ceremonies reached to both ends of linear time; beginning in the Council, then the Garden; and at the conclusion when the king became anew “a son of God.” Consequently, even though a king may have ruled for many years, at this point in the festival, after he had symbolically proven himself, and was escorted into the Temple—then he was again crowned and became again king in fact. The importance of anointing and its association with the king’s remarkable spiritual powers are described by Johnson:

    The fact that the king held office as Yahweh’s agent or vice-regent is shown quite clearly in the rite of anointing which marked him out as a sacral person endowed with such special responsibility for the well-being of his people as we have already described. Accordingly the king was not merely the Messiah or the ‘anointed’; he was the Messiah of Yahweh, i.e. the man who in thus being anointed was shown to be specially commissioned by Yahweh for this high office: and, in view of the language which is used elsewhere in the Old Testament with regard to the pouring out of Yahweh’s ‘Spirit’ and the symbolic action which figures so prominently in the work of the prophets, it seems likely that the rite in question was also held to be eloquent of the superhuman power with which this sacral individual was henceforth to be activated and by which his behavior might be governed. The thought of such a special endowment of the ‘Spirit’ is certainly implied by the statement that, when David was selected for this office, Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brethren; and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward.

    the garment of praise instead of the spirit of heaviness”

    Nibley translated this line a bit differently, and in doing so, he expanded its meaning by projecting its implications to the marriage ceremony that follows in verse 10. He writes:

    After you put off the old garments and put on those of spiritual white, you should keep them always thus spotless white. That is not to say that you must always go around in white clothes, but rather that you should be always clothed in what is really white and glorious, that you may say with the blessed Isaiah 61:10), “Let my soul exult in the Lord, for he hath clothed me in a robe of salvation and clothing of rejoicing.” (The word here used for “clothe” is endy, to place a garment on one, and is the ultimate source of our word “endowment,” derived in the Oxford English Dictionary from both induere, to invest with a garment, and inducere, to lead into or initiate.)

    The royal robes of the king are not described in detail in the Old Testament. However, some scholars believe that the descriptions of the High Priestly garments were originally descriptions of the royal robes, and the miter hat was the crown used by the king in the coronation ceremony. The implication is that the post-exilic editors who re-worked the books of Moses, allotted to the High Priest the royal garments that had once been worn by their kings. Widengren was among those who believed that all of the ceremonial clothing of the High Priest, including the breastplate which held the Urim and Thummim, was an adaptation of the earlier sacral clothing of the king.

    The coronation clothing is almost always described as two separate garments (as partially discussed earlier in connection with Psalm 45). The sacred clothing attributed to the Aaronic priesthood High Priests consisted of white linen undergarments and outer royal robes. The undergarments were a two part suit—a long sleeved white shirt and breeches “to cover their nakedness” (Exodus 28:42. see also Mosiah 10:5). Above that he wore a solid blue robe with a fringe of alternating golden bells and pomegranates. The pomegranates were made of blue, purple, and scarlet threads—the same colors as in the veil that separated the Holy of Holies from the rest of the Tabernacle (Exodus 28:4-42). Around the waist was a sash, also woven in the same colors as the fringe and the veil. His breastplate was a kind of pouch or pocket in which he placed the Urim and Thummim. It was supported by shoulder straps attached to an apron called the ephod. His crown was a miter, a flat hat made of fine linen, with a gold plate attached that was worn on his forehead. Engraved on the plate were the words “Holiness to the Lord.”

    This same ritual clothing—or something very much like it—was worn by the early Christians. Paul described the sacral garments as the protective “armor of God.”

    The scriptures often speak of the clothing in terms of their meaning rather than of their physical appearance. Thus, the outer one is usually called “majesty,” representing the powers of kingship, and the other “glory,” representing the authority of priesthood. For example, in Psalm 45, the king’s blessing from Elohim included the instructions to dress himself properly:

    3 Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O most mighty, with thy glory and thy majesty.
    4 And in thy majesty ride prosperously because of truth and meekness and righteousness;
    and thy right hand shall teach thee terrible thing. (Psalm 45:3-4).

    We find the same imagery in Job, only here two double sets of clothing are mentioned. (We have wondered if the reason is because, even though no woman is ever mentioned in the narrative, the second set might belong to his wife.) The Lord asks Job:

    9 Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him?
    10 Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty. …
    14 Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee (Job 40:9-14).

    Later, but in the same context, Job responds:

    4 Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
    5 I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee (Job 42:4-5).

    There is a fragment of an ancient text of the Book of Job that suggests the clothing is a replacement for something else that he must first “remove” (as in the Hymn of the Pearl). It reads:

    Or have you an arm like God?
    Or with voice like his can you thunder?
    Remove now pride and haughty spirit
    And with splendor, glory, and honor be clothed.

    There is a similar description in Psalm 21, and it was apparently sung during a similar ceremony to the one described in Job 40:1-17. After the coronation ceremony, before the king entered God’s presence, he was dressed in clothing called “honour and majesty” (Psalm 21:5). We will discuss this psalm more fully below.

    The important thing is that there are always two, and they always seem to represent royal and priestly authority, and with rare exceptions, they are always worn together. A similar idea is in the Doctrine and Covenants, where two ideas, “perfectness and peace,” are joined together as “charity:”

    125   And above all things, clothe yourselves with the bond of charity, as with a mantle, which is the bond of perfectness and peace.
    126   Pray always, that ye may not faint, until I come. Behold, and lo, I will come quickly, and receive you unto myself. Amen (D&C 88:125-126).

    It is significant that these sacred royal garments were patterned after those worn by Jehovah himself, as is shown in two of the psalms. One of those is Psalm 93:

    1 The Lord reigneth, he is clothed with majesty;
    the Lord is clothed with strength,
    wherewith he hath girded himself:
    the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.
    2 Thy throne is established of old:
    thou art from everlasting (Psalm 93:1-2).

    The other is Psalm 104 where Jehovah’s royal clothing is described as honor and majesty, only there Jehovah wears an additional garment of light:

    1 Bless the Lord, O my soul.
    O Lord my God, thou art very great;
    thou art clothed with honour and majesty.
    2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment:
    who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain.
    (Psalm 104:1-2).

    The interpretation of Figure 3 in Facsimile No. 2 in the Book of Abraham shows that the clothing given to earthly holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood is symbolic of the clothing worn by God. It reads:

    Fig. 3.      Is made to represent God, sitting upon his throne, clothed with power and authority; with a crown of eternal light upon his head; representing also the grand Key-words of the Holy Priesthood, as revealed to Adam in the Garden of Eden, as also to Seth, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, and all to whom the Priesthood was revealed.

    Nibley’s description of the High Priest’s garments—which, if the above quoted scholars are correct, were originally the king’s royal garments—emphasizes their sacred nature:

    The combination of the items that make up the full clothing comes from the description of the high priestly garments at the beginning of Exodus 28. Very recently in Jerusalem, a magnificent book was published based on an attempt to reconstruct the kelîm, the supellectila, the implements and equipment of the temple, and the priestly garments (fig. 17). A section at the end of the book describes them in detail. In this particular passage there is general assemblage, a listing, and then a description of what the articles are.

    Thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother,” the Lord tells Moses (cf. Exodus 28:2), lokabod ultip’eret, “both for glory and for magnificence”—to give an impression, to fill one with awe. And the Lord instructed Moses to say to all the people of “thoughtful-mindedness” and intelligence “that they shall do so, and make such garments for Aaron, for holiness, and for his priesthood, to represent his priesthood to me” (cf. Exodus 28:3). “And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ‘epod [the much disputed ephod!], and the mo’il,” a “cloak, a covering, a long garment”; “a kotonet,” the “shirt”; “a tashbe,” a thing elaborately woven in a checkerboard pattern, or something similar; “a mitre,” mi .z ne -p e -t, “a turban,” “a round cap”; “and a girdle” or “sash”; “and these garments they shall make holy for Aaron, thy brother, and for his sons, to serve me in the priesthood” (Exodus 28:4).

    The patriarch Levi reported that during his sode experience he was dressed in similar sacred robes. His account reads:

    And there again I saw a vision as the former, after we had spent there seventy days. And I saw seven men in white raiment saying unto me: Arise, put on the robe of the priesthood, and the crown of righteousness, and the breastplate of understanding, and the garment of truth, and the plate of faith, and the turban of the head, and the ephod of prophecy. And they severally carried (these things) and put (them) on me, and said unto me: From henceforth become a priest of the Lord, thou and thy seed forever. And the first anointed me with holy oil, and gave to me the staff of judgment. The second washed me with pure water, and fed me with bread and wine (even) the most holy things, and clad, me with a holy and glorious robe. The third clothed me with a linen vestment like an ephod. The, fourth put round me a girdle like unto purple. The fifth gave me a branch of rich olive. The sixth placed a crown on my head. The seventh placed on my head a diadem of priesthood, and filled my hands with incense, that I might serve as priest to the Lord God. And they said to me: Levi, thy seed shall be divided into three offices, for a sign of the glory of the Lord who is to come. And the first portion shall be great; yea, greater than it shall none be. The second shall be in the priesthood. And the third shall be called by a new name, because a king shall arise in Judah, and shall establish a new priesthood, after the fashion of the Gentiles [to all the Gentiles]. And His presence is beloved, as a prophet of the Most High, of the seed of Abraham our father:

    Therefore, every desirable thing in Israel shall be for thee and for thy seed,
    And ye shall eat everything fair to look upon,
    And the table of the Lord shall thy seed apportion.
    And some of them shall be high priests, and judges, and scribes;
    For by their mouth shall the holy place be guarded.,
    And when I awoke, I understood that this (dream) was like the first dream.

    Sacred garments are not unique to Hebrew literature. Ostler explains, “The idea of the garment is completely at home throughout the ancient world, always in connection with ordinances of initiation related to the “endowment of the Spirit.” The garment is usually mentioned in relation with other ordinances, especially the anointing.” Rubin and Kosman explain further:

    This clothing assumed special attributes of its own, independent of its wearer. Wearing regal clothing added authority and a dimension of the regal. The Bible also stressed the transfer of Aaron’s priestly garments to his son Eleazar. There were also garments unique to prophets, such as Samuel’s special coat and Elijah’s distinctive mantle. The holy garments of the Bible thus help link the world above to that below. Here the garment does not function for personal territorial separation and defense of selfhood, but for linking the worlds. This special quality requires the wearer to be ritually pure. Otherwise, the garment can have a deleterious effect. The garment represents the charisma of a formal position without a direct reference to the quality of the priest wearing it. As these garments denote a formal position, their design is also formal and unalterable.

    In the vision of Daniel (7:9), however, the clothing of God (the “ancient of days”) is as white snow, and is therefore not merely metaphorical. On angels being clothed, see for example, Ezek 9:2. The angels that appeared to humans were undoubtedly clothed. See for example, Judg 13:15; and regarding the “men” that appeared to Abraham, see Gen 19:1. Incidently, humans also occasionally wear metaphoric garments, as in, “I clothed myself in righteousness and it robed me; justice was my cloak and turban” (Job 29:14).

    In the pseudepigraphal account of the marriage of Joseph in Egypt, his clothing is described in terms that are reminiscent of the royal Hebrew garments:

    And Joseph was dressed in an exquisite white tunic, and the robe which he had thrown around him; was purple, made of linen interwoven with gold; and a golden crown (was) on his head, and around the crown were twelve chosen stones, and on top of the twelve stones were twelve golden rays. And a royal staff was in his left hand, and in his right hand he held outstretched an olive branch, and there was plenty of fruit on it, and in the fruits was a great wealth of oil.

    that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord that he might be glorified”

    One is “called” by one’s name. Similarly, here to be “called” is to be given a new name. One finds the same usage in the Beatitudes: “And blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God” (3 Nephi 12:9); and in Isaiah: “and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). A new name is a new covenantal identity. In our verse, it denotes one’s new relationship with God, much as Nibley writes, “In Egyptian initiation rites one puts off his former nature by discarding his name, after which he receives a new name.” Truman Madsen explains,

         “In antiquity, several ideas about names recur, among which are the following:
    1. In names, especially divine names, is concentrated divine power.
    2. Through ritual processes one may gain access to these names and take them upon oneself.
    3. These ritual processes are often explicitly temple-related.”

    The regal new name given to the enthroned dead in Isaiah 61 is “trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord that he might be glorified.” It is a promise of eternal lives. “Trees” suggests the tree of life. “Righteousness” is zedek—correctness and propriety in performing and receiving sacred ordinances. “The planting of the Lord” implies eternal increase (trees make fruit, fruit make seeds, seeds make trees, ad infinitum). And the words “that he [God] might be glorified” proclaim that the glory of God is inseparably connected with the continuation of the family (as in Moses 1:39). The importance of the family is again emphasized at the end of chapter 61 where we find “a song of rejoicing” in celebration of the sacred marriage. It is a hymn sung by the bride and groom:

    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).

    Nibley cited Assmann to give a version of the cosmic myth that concludes with a sacred marriage:

    Here is how Assmann puts it: (1) The hero is cast out of his happy home, his original condition of life, against his will, but for his own good as he realizes. (2) He must go forth to undergo a series of trials and tests, (3) symbolic of overcoming death by resurrection, and so (4) return to his former home as a changed person, (5) being received back when he identifies himself in a formal testing. (6) Transfiguration and exaltation go with coronation and marriage.

    For a discussion as “son” and the ancient Israelite new king-name, see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, chapter “Psalm 2, The Ancient Israelite Royal King-name.”

  • 3 Nephi 1:14 — LeGrand Baker — The Father and The Son

    3 Nephi 1:14 — LeGrand Baker — The Father and The Son

    3 Nephi 1:14
    14 …and to do the will, both of the Father and of the Son—of the Father because of me, and of the Son because of my flesh.

    This may seem strange, but it is not. He is making a distinction between “because of me” and “because of my flesh.” Remember, this was spoken by Jehovah—the premortal Savior. He would not have a physical body until the next day. Therefore, “me” is Jehovah, and “of the Father because of me” is a reference to Jehovah, the Creator God, ‘the Father of Heaven and Earth’ (those last words are from Abinadi as quoted below).

    Many, perhaps most of you are as familiar with these ideas as I am, so I ask your indulgence in this repetition. I am sending this for the sake of my friends who are not familiar with it. To me, this doctrine that is taught frequently in the Book of Mormon is one of the most beautiful and most significant. It is found many times in the Scriptures, but never explained better than by Abinadi to Alma.

    The following is an examination of Abinadi’s explanation to Alma. It is a quote from Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, 500-02.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    The first eight verses of Mosiah 15 are considered by many to be some of the most difficult to understand in the Book of Mormon, but they become easy to follow when one realizes that Abinadi was talking about Jehovah and Jesus and the tensions they had to overcome so that Jesus could accomplish the Atonement and keep the covenants made by Jehovah—for they are the same God:

    1 And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself [Jehovah] shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. [“Redeem” in this context means to bring his people back into the presence of God—that is, to completely undo the effects of the Fall of Adam, so that we can return to the presence of God. (See Mormon 9:13; Ether3:13; 2 Nephi 1:15, 2:1-4; Alma 58:41).]
    2 And because he [Jehovah] dwelleth in flesh [Jesus] he [Jesus] shall be called the Son of God [the Son of Elohim], and having subjected the flesh [Jesus] to the will of the Father [Jehovah], being the Father [Jehovah] and the Son [Jesus]—
    3 The Father [Jehovah], because he [first as Jehovah and then again as Jesus] was conceived by the power of God [Elohim]; and the Son [Jesus], because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father [Jehovah] and Son [Jesus]—
    4 And they [Jehovah-Jesus] are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth.
    5 And thus the flesh [Jesus] becoming subject to the Spirit [Jehovah], or the Son [Jesus] to the Father [Jehovah], being one God [Jehovah-Jesus], suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation, but suffereth himself [Jesus] to be mocked, and scourged, and cast out, and disowned by his people.
    6 And after all this, after working many mighty miracles among the children of men, he [Jesus] shall be led, yea, even as Isaiah said, as a sheep before the shearer is dumb, so he [Jesus] opened not his mouth.
    7 Yea, even so he [Jesus] shall be led, crucified, and slain, the flesh [Jesus] becoming subject even unto death, the will of the Son [Jesus] being swallowed up in the will of the Father [Jehovah] (Mosiah 15:1-7).

    There are few scriptures which touch the soul more deeply than that last verse. It exposes all the tensions: Jesus the man—with his natural aversion to physical pain and his desire to remain with the people he loved. Jehovah the God—whose covenantal love for his friends was even more powerful—informed and inspired Jesus’s determination to perform the Atonement. They are, as Abinadi said, one God, but it was Jesus—not just Jehovah—who had to decide.

    One of the reasons that scripture is so important to us—and the reason the words were so important to Alma—is that it throws a burning light on each one of us—but a light that only we ourselves can see. Perhaps the easiest way to describe that light is to try to conceptualize its effect on Alma. It was bringing into focus and personalizing the chiastic balance of the cosmic myth.

    Before he left his Heavenly Father’s presence, the premortal had made Alma covenants regarding his own mission here and what he would do to fulfill his mission. What Paul wrote to the Thessalonians was true of Alma and all of Heavenly Father’s other children also: “But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth” (2 Thessalonians 2:13). But now on this earth as a young, wealthy, demonstrably popular prince, Alma could no longer remember who he really was. His memory was darkened by the light his physical eyes could see. On earth, the expanse of his mind was limited by earthly things and his body limited through its knowledge of how to feel happiness, hunger, passion, weariness, pain, and exhilaration.

    There was a time, before his memory fogged and his eyes and ears were closed, that Alma could look forward to this life and see his own purpose—when he could clearly understand his own desires. It was then, when he was fully cognizant, that he had made covenants about what he would do here. Then he was in the company of the premortal Jehovah. But now he could not remember that any more, and had come on this occasion to King Noah’s court to sit in judgment against the prophet. Abinadi, for his part, had come to answer questions that young Alma may not yet have asked, and to give credence to the things the Spirit would teach him about himself. It was Abinadi’s task to help the physical and cultural Alma, who sat in King Noah’s council, to understand that he must seek to become subjugated to the Alma who once sat in the Council of the gods. Abinadi understood that if Alma could achieve that quality of understanding and freedom, then with the tutelage of the Holy Ghost he could acquire the power to fulfill the covenants he had made. In short, the will of Alma’s present Self must be swallowed up in the will of his premortal, fully cognizant Self.

    The author of the Hymn of the Pearl described that principle. In the poem this passage is about the boy’s recalling his eternal covenants:

    And even as it [the covenant] was engraven in my heart
    Were the words of my letter written.
    I remembered that I was a son of kings
    And my noble birth asserted itself. {1}.

    That is what Abinadi was explaining about Jesus: “the will of the Son [Jesus] being swallowed up in the will of the Father [Jehovah].” Alma heard. His premortal “noble birth asserted itself”; he listened to the prophet and put his own life on the line when he spoke out to defend the good old man. In doing so, Alma began to sever the ties that bound his eternal Self to his earthly environment, and he began to become the prophet he had covenanted to become. The next question Abinadi addressed was, “How is it to be done?”

    ENDNOTE

    {1}  For a discussion of the Hymn of the Pearl, see that chapter in Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord.

  • Alma 36:5 — LeGrand Baker — ‘Born of God’

    Alma 36:5 — LeGrand Baker  ‘Born of God’  

    Alma 36:5
    5     Now, behold, I say unto you, if I had not been born of God I should not have known these things; but God has, by the mouth of his holy angel, made these things known unto me, not of any worthiness of myself;

    This is an attempt to expand Alma’s statement in 36: 5 that says, “if I had not been born of God I should not have known these things.” We Latter-day Saints tend to overlook the importance of the concept of being “born of God,” or “born again.” The words have been taken over by the Protestants, so we don’t use them. Yet, the concept is one of the most important in the plan of salvation. The attachment is mostly a series of scriptures with very little commentary from me. The sequence of the scriptures tells a most extraordinary story. If you have time to read it carefully, I think it will be of some value to you.

     To be “born of God” is about ordinances and covenants—some performed by humans in this world, some not. In both cases its meaning is very different from the Protestant use of the phrase “born again.”

    The phrase, “born again” Is found in only two places in the New Testament. the first is in the Nicodemus story (John 3:3-7) which is usually understood to be talking about baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. The other is 1 Peter 1:21-23, which is in the context of faith, hope, and charity. Peter wrote:

    21   Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.
    22   Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:
    23   Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

    This concept seems to be more in line with what Alma said than the usual interpretation of John 3.

    For Paul, the idea of sonship had a legal connotation. That is, we are adopted and are therefore legal heirs. He wrote:

    14   For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
    15   For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
    16   The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
    17   And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together (Romans 8:14-17).

    To the Ephesians, Paul wrote that the adoption he spoke of was part of our foreordination “before the foundation of the world.” Therefore it was a part of the covenant we made that would enable us to return to our Father after we have completed what we came to this world to do. He wrote:

    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:
    4   According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
    5   [the Father] Having predestinated [foreordained] us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
    6   To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved (Ephesians 1:3-6).

    The Savior explained that principle to the brother of Jared:

    11   And the Lord said unto him: Believest thou the words which I shall speak?
    12   And he answered: Yea, Lord, I know that thou speakest the truth, for thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.
    13   And when he had said these words, behold, the Lord showed himself unto him, and said: Because thou knowest these things ye are redeemed from the fall; therefore ye are brought back into my presence; therefore I show myself unto you.
    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 3:11-14).

    That adoption, to be a child of Jehovah, was the crowning ceremony of the ancient Israelite temple service. At the king was anointed, he spoke these words:

    7   I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee (Psalms 2:7).

    The king’s anointing was a two-part ceremony. He was anointed king and adopted as son. In this case “son” of God is the royal new name (For a discussion of Psalm 2 and the new name see Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, 499-516.)

    The Savior explained this principle even further. In the Beatitudes he said:

    9   And blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called [new covenant name] the children of God (3 Nephi 12:9).

    John, the Beloved Apostle, taught the early Saints that same principle. He wrote:

    1   Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
    2   Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is (1 John 3:1-2).

    In that same letter John tied adopted sonship to charity, as they are each necessary to the other:

    7   Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
    8   He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
    9   In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.(1 John 4:7-9)

    That same doctrine was taught by Mormon in his great sermon. While most of the Beatitudes are short synopsis of sections of Isaiah or the Psalms, verse 9, which concludes with “they shall be called the children of God” seems not to be. However, we can find a complete discussion of its meaning in Moroni 7.

    25   Wherefore, by the ministering of angels, and by every word which proceeded forth out of the mouth of God, men began to exercise faith in Christ; and thus by faith, they did lay hold upon every good thing; and thus it was until the coming of Christ.
    26   And after that he came men also were saved by faith in his name; and by faith, they become the sons of God. And as surely as Christ liveth he spake these words unto our fathers, saying: Whatsoever thing ye shall ask the Father in my name, which is good, in faith believing that ye shall receive, behold, it shall be done unto you. …

    46   Wherefore, my beloved brethren, if ye have not charity, ye are nothing, for charity never faileth. Wherefore, cleave unto charity, which is the greatest of all, for all things must fail—
    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 7:25-26, 46-48.)

    The conclusion of all this is that becoming—actually becoming—a child of God is a gift from the Father through his Only Begotten Son. But like all gifts, it is one for which we must be fully worthy. The Savior explained:

    8  I came unto mine own, and mine own received me not; but unto as many as received me gave I power to do many miracles, and to become the sons of God; and even unto them that believed on my name gave I power to obtain eternal life (D&C 45:8).

    The Lord himself put the capstone on this principle when he described those who will inherit the Celestial Kingdom. I have italicized some of the words that are very important.

    50  And again we bear record—for we saw and heard, and this is the testimony of the gospel of Christ concerning them who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just
    51  They are they who received the testimony of Jesus, and believed on his name and were baptized after the manner of his burial, being buried in the water in his name, and this according to the commandment which he has given—
    52  That by keeping the commandments they might be washed and cleansed from all their sins, and receive the Holy Spirit by the laying on of the hands of him who is ordained and sealed unto this power;
    53  And who overcome by faith [pistis], and are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, which the Father sheds forth upon all those who are just and true.
    54  They are they who are the church of the Firstborn.
    55  They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things—
    56  They are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fulness, and of his glory;
    57  And are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son.
    58  Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God
    59  Wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.
    60  And they shall overcome all things.
    61  Wherefore, let no man glory in man, but rather let him glory in God, who shall subdue all enemies under his feet.
    62  These shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever.
    63  These are they whom he shall bring with him, when he shall come in the clouds of heaven to reign on the earth over his people.
    64  These are they who shall have part in the first resurrection.
    65  These are they who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just.
    66  These are they who are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly place, the holiest of all.
    67  These are they who have come to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of Enoch, and of the Firstborn.
    68  These are they whose names are written in heaven, where God and Christ are the judge of all.
    69  These are they who are just men made perfect through Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, who wrought out this perfect atonement through the shedding of his own blood.
    70  These are they whose bodies are celestial, whose glory is that of the sun, even the glory of God, the highest of all, whose glory the sun of the firmament is written of as being typical (D&C 76:50-70).

    So, when Alma declared, “ if I had not been born of God I should not have known these things,” he was telling us more than he used words to say.

  • Mosiah 27:34-35 — LeGrand Baker — problems of royal succession

    Mosiah 27:34-35 — LeGrand Baker — problems of royal succession

    Mosiah 27:34-35
    34   And four of them were the sons of Mosiah; and their names were Ammon, and Aaron, and Omner, and Himni; these were the names of the sons of Mosiah.
    35  And they traveled throughout all the land of Zarahemla, and among all the people who were under the reign of king Mosiah, zealously striving to repair all the injuries which they had done to the church, confessing all their sins, and publishing all the things which they had seen, and explaining the prophecies and the scriptures to all who desired to hear them.

    After that, they asked their father for permission to go and preach to the Lamanites.

    This is a more remarkable story that our 21st century culture is apt to see readily. A more typical account of the four sons of any king would conclude with one of them murdering the other three. Here are some examples of what I mean.

    When Solomon became king, he promptly killed everyone who might have challenged his right to the throne. (1 Kings 1&2)

    Nebuchadnezzar, the crown prince of Babylon, had just defeated the Egyptians at Carchemish when he learned his father had died. Consequently he could not follow up his victory by wiping out the Egyptian army. Rather, he had to return to Babylon, where he spent three years hunting down and killing all of his brothers, then, when his throne was secure, he and his army resumed the war.

    One of the consequences of his victories was that he placed Zedekiah on the Jewish throne to rule as his underling. But Zedekiah later made an alliance with Egypt, so Nebuchadnezzar came back again, destroyed Jerusalem, captured Zedekiah, “And they slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, and put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him with fetters of brass, and carried him to Babylon.” (2 Kings 25:7)

    One does not kill just the king, but also anyone that might claim his throne. As a footnote to that story as it is told by Josephus, Whiston observed,

    Burder remarks, this was done with the intention of rendering the king incapable of ever re-ascending the throne. Thus it was a law in Persia, down to the latest time, that no blind person could mount the throne. Hence the barbarous custom of depriving the sons and the male relatives of a Persian king, who are not to be allowed to attain the government, of their sight. Down to the time of Abbas, in 1642, this was done by only passing a red-hot copper plate before the eyes, by which the power of vision was not entirely destroyed, and person blinded still retained a glimmer of sight.  (William Whiston, trans., The Complete Works of Flavious Josephus [London, The London Pringing and Publishing Company, Limited, 1876], p. 213 footnote. )

    The point of those stories is this: A throne was a very dangerous kind of chair to sit on. And the simplest way to make sure one did not fall off of it, was to kill or disable anyone else who might want to be there.

    Our Mosiah’s grandfather, Mosiah I, may have been in that same sort of situation. We have no detail except this:

    … [Mosiah,] being warned of the Lord that he should flee out of the land of Nephi, and as many as would hearken unto the voice of the Lord should also depart out of the land with him, into the wilderness— And it came to pass that he did according as the Lord had commanded him. And they departed out of the land into the wilderness, as many as would hearken unto the voice of the Lord….(Omni 1: 12b-13a)

    We are not told what he was running away from, but there seems to be only two likely possibilities: Either the Lamanites were about to attack, or else he had an elder brother who was out to kill all the other boys in the family. (We know Mosiah was not the legal heir to the throne, because all the kings were named Nephi, and that was not his name.)

    Mosiah II was very aware of this traditional way of salving the problems of succession. He later justified his new constitution by warning his people:

    “And now if there should be another appointed in his stead, behold I fear there would rise contentions among you. And who knoweth but what my son, to whom the kingdom doth belong, should turn to be angry, and claim his right to the kingdom, and draw away a part of this people after him, which would cause wars and contentions among you, which would be the cause of shedding much blood.” (Mosiah 29, 7&9. I have constructed the statement using words in both verses.)

    It is reasonable to believe that while his sons were going about to destroy the Church, they were keeping an eye on each other, knowing that when dad died, at least three of them would not live long, and each probably plotting the deaths of the others.

    It that was true, and it is not at all unreasonable to believe it was true, then their conversions, and their desires leave their royal status and to go on missions together, would have been the least likely of all the expected conclusions to their story.

  • 3 Nephi 14:1-12 — LeGrand Baker — How to Teach the Gospel

    3 Nephi 14:1-12 — LeGrand Baker — How to Teach the Gospel

    This is a discussion of how one should teach the gospel.

    1   And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he turned again to the multitude, and did open his mouth unto them again, saying: Verily, verily, I say unto you, Judge not, that ye be not judged.

    The first key to missionary work: You don’t judge potential converts by the standards of the world.

    2   For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

    “Mete” is measure —-the quantity that is measured. If you don’t teach those whom the Spirit tells you to teach, then you won’t learn any more good things.

    3   And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    A mote is a speck of dust. A beam is not a log. A log is a fallen tree, or part of one. A beam is a log that is part of the superstructure of a building. It isn’t the log he is talking about it is the superstructure —- the ideas that President McKay called “gospel hobbies.”

    4   Or how wilt thou say to thy brother: Let me pull the mote out of thine eye—and behold, a beam is in thine own eye? [Learn what is important. You can’t teach truth if your own understanding of what is true is clouded by a false superstructure of ideas.]

    5   Thou hypocrite, first cast the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

    Even though the ideas might be true, the emphasis you place on them may be entirely out of balance with the rest of the other principles of the gospel. You can’t teach truth until you have the correct perspective of what truth is. For example, if you are so hung up on the idea that caffeine is against the Word of Wisdom (which the new handbook says it is not so, by the way), and anti-coke is the gospel you insist on teaching, then you cannot teach and you will not learn.

    6  Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

    Not only is it vital that you teach those who are worthy to learn, it is equally important that you do not teach those whose life or values make them unable to learn. Alma 12:9-11

    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.]

    7  Ask, and it shall be given unto you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
    8  For every one that asketh, receiveth; and he that seeketh, findeth; and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened.

    This is an encoded key. It is a reflection on the ancient veil ceremony. The implication is: this is the way you learned. and is the key to how all may learn.

    9   Or what man is there of you, who, if his son ask bread, will give him a stone?
    10  Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?
    11  If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father who is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

    This is a restatement of the original premise: “ Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

    Conclusion: Therefore, if you wish to find exaltation through learning the principles of the of the gospel, you must teach as you would be taught, and always follow the promptings of the Spirit as you do teach or as you refrain from teaching]

    12  Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them, for this is the law and the prophets.

    I think that is what it means.

  • 2 Nephi 1:15 — LeGrand Baker — Lehi’s embrace

    2 Nephi 1:15 — LeGrand Baker — Lehi’s embrace

    2 Nephi 1:15
    15 The Lord hath redeemed my soul from hell; I have beheld his glory, and I am encircled about eternally in the arms of his love.

    Nibley ties the meaning of Lehi’s testimony to the power of the Saviour’s Atonement. He writes:

    This is the imagery of the Atonement, the embrace: “The Lord hath redeemed my soul from hell; I have beheld his glory, and I am encircled about eternally in the arms of his love” (“2 Ne. 1:152 Nephi 1:15). “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!” (“2 Ne. 4:33). “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” (“Alma 5:33).

    This is the hpet, the ritual embrace that consummates the final escape from death in the Egyptian funerary texts and reliefs, where the son Horus is received into the arms of his father Osiris. {1}

    Earlier, Nibley had quoted Mayassis that “The ritual embrace is ‘the culminating rite of the initiation”; it is “an initiatory gesture weighted with meaning … the goal of all consecration.” {2}

    Todd M. Compton explains further:

    The relevance of this sort of adoptive ritual —— defined by the specific act of embracing —— to recognition drama should be clear. In recognition drama, the embrace is the immediate seal of recognition and love when the identity of the tested party has been proved. This is not exactly the same as adoption; it is more a re-adoption.

    The embrace is the renewed outward token reflecting the renewed inward token of knowledge and love. {3}

    In a footnote he adds:

    In Egypt the embrace was closely tied to kingship succession: it was a paternal, father/son interchange, and also a means of transferring divine power. {4}

    Sonship, coronation, consecration, and “transfer of divine power” are all tied so closely in meaning that it is difficult to make a hard distinction between them. Again it is Nibley who explains the ultimate meaning of the sacral embrace.

    One of the most puzzling episodes in the Bible has always been the story of Jacob’s wrestling with the Lord. When one considers that the word conventionally translated by “wrestled” (yeaveq) can just as well mean “embrace,” and that it was in this ritual embrace that Jacob received a new name and the bestowal of priestly and kingly power at sunrise (Gen. 32:24ff), the parallel to the Egyptian coronation embrace becomes at once apparent.

    One retained his identity after the ritual embrace, yet that embrace was nothing less than a “Wesensverschmelzung,” a fusing of identities, of mortal with immortal, of father with son, and as such marked “the highpoint of the whole mystery-drama” (Spiegel, An. Serv., 53:392). {5}

    In another place, Nibley adds this significant bit of information, “This same gesture of the upraised arms, the Ka symbol, also represents the sacred embrace.” {6}

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    ENDNOTES

    1   Hugh Nibley, Approaching Zion, edited by Don E. Norton [Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1989], 559-60.)

    2   Hugh Nibley, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1975], 241.

    3   Todd M. Compton, “The Handclasp and Embrace as Tokens of Recognition,” 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], 1: 611 – 631.

    Quote is on page 1: 627 – 628.)

    4   Todd M. Compton, “The Handclasp and Embrace as Tokens of Recognition,” 1:630-31.

    5   Hugh Nibley, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri, 243-244.

    6   Hugh Nibley, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri, 240.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Similarly, George Q. Cannon once assured his listeners,

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

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

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

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

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

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

    ———— END NOTES

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

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

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

    (End of this week’ comments)

  • Mosiah 26:1-14 — LeGrand Baker — enforcing goodness

    Mosiah 26:1-14 — LeGrand Baker — enforcing goodness

    There is an untold story here that I think is very sad. It is a profoundly insightful look into human nature, where the authority of one group to impose “goodness” collides with the desire of another group to be independent.

    King Benjamin seems to have foreseen the coming problems, for when he laid out what appears to have been a new economic system for his government, he said,

    And now, for the sake of these things which I have spoken unto you—that is, for the sake of retaining a remission of your sins from day to day, that ye may walk guiltless before God—I would that ye should impart of your substance to the poor, every man according to that which he hath, such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally, according to their wants. (Mosiah 4: 26)

    He required that everyone who was old enough that they would covenant to implement these instructions. That suggests to me that he may have been establishing something like the law of consecration. But in doing so he also gave this important charge:

    And see that all these things are done in wisdom and order; for it is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength. And again, it is expedient that he should be diligent, that thereby he might win the prize; therefore, all things must be done in order. (Mosiah 4: 27)

    To ensure that his instructions would be carried out, he also made another innovation in the kingdom’s hierarchy. He made his son king, even before his own death, and also,

    …appointed priests to teach the people, that thereby they might hear and know the commandments of God, and to stir them up in remembrance of the oath which they had made… (Mosiah 6: 3)

    That is an interesting description of the authority of these new priests. It implies that they had some power to enforce the goodness they had accepted by covenant.
    One wonders why Mosiah was made king before his father died. There seem to be two likely reasons: (1) Benjamin was ill and wanted to be relieved of the responsibilities. (2) Benjamin wanted to make sure his son got it right before the old king died. Apparently It worked for a while.

    6 And it came to pass that king Mosiah did walk in the ways of the Lord, and did observe his judgments and his statutes, and did keep his commandments in all things whatsoever he commanded him.
    7 And king Mosiah did cause his people that they should till the earth. And he also, himself, did till the earth, that thereby he might not become burdensome to his people, that he might do according to that which his father had done in all things. And there was no contention among all his people for the space of three years.

    So his father’s system lasted only three years after the king died. Mormon tells nothing at all about the nature of the contention. All we know is that Benjamin had given the authority to enforce the system to a new group of priests (as in the story of King Noah, the word “priests” probably denotes a the members of the King’s Council. If that is so, then these men would have had the authority to make laws to help “stir them up in remembrance of the oath.” Mosiah may not have been very active in the government, for he “did till the earth, that thereby he might not become burdensome to his people.”

    Rather than telling us about the contentions, Mormon tells something else that happened at the same time.

    1   And now, it came to pass that after king Mosiah had had continual peace for the space of three years, he was desirous to know concerning the people who went up to dwell in the land of Lehi-Nephi, or in the city of Lehi-Nephi; for his people had heard nothing from them from the time they left the land of Zarahemla; therefore, they wearied him with their teasings.
    2   And it came to pass that king Mosiah granted that sixteen of their strong men might go up to the land of Lehi-Nephi, to inquire concerning their brethren. (Mosiah 7:1-2.)

    That is the last we hear of Mosiah or the happenings in his kingdom until the people of Limhi arrived, and “ Mosiah received them with joy.” (Mosiah 22:14) After that, still nothing until Alma and his people arrived, “and king Mosiah did also receive them with joy.” (Mosiah 24:25.)

    After Alma arrived, “Mosiah did read, and caused to be read, the records of Zeniff …And he also read the account of Alma and his brethren…” (Mosiah 25:5-6)

    14     And now it came to pass that when Mosiah had made an end of speaking and reading to the people, he desired that Alma should also speak to the people.
    15     And Alma did speak unto them, when they were assembled together in large bodies, and he went from one body to another, preaching unto the people repentance and faith on the Lord.
    16     And he did exhort the people of Limhi and his brethren, all those that had been delivered out of bondage, that they should remember that it was the Lord that did deliver them.
    17     And it came to pass that after Alma had taught the people many things, and had made an end of speaking to them, that king Limhi was desirous that he might be baptized; and all his people were desirous that they might be baptized also.
    18 Therefore, Alma did go forth into the water and did baptize them… (Mosiah 25: 14- 18a)

    There is a strange matter of protocol here. In the ancient Near East (and it is evident by what Mosiah does next that it holds true in this American offshoot of that culture) the King is the official mediator between man and God. Yet in this instance a king who is a guest of Mosiah, seeks baptism from someone other than Mosiah. This happens before Mosiah divides his authority between himself and Alma, so at this point Mosiah is still the one who ought to have been acknowledged as the religious leader. After that,

    19     And it came to pass that king Mosiah granted unto Alma that he might establish churches throughout all the land of Zarahemla; and gave him power to ordain priests and teachers over every church.
    20     Now this was done because there were so many people that they could not all be governed by one teacher; neither could they all hear the word of God in one assembly;
    21     Therefore they did assemble themselves together in different bodies, being called churches; every church having their priests and their teachers, and every priest preaching the word according as it was delivered to him by the mouth of Alma.
    22     And thus, notwithstanding there being many churches they were all one church, yea, even the church of God; for there was nothing preached in all the churches except it were repentance and faith in God.
    23     And now there were seven churches in the land of Zarahemla. And it came to pass that whosoever were desirous to take upon them the name of Christ, or of God, they did join the churches of God;
    24     And they were called the people of God. And the Lord did pour out his Spirit upon them, and they were blessed, and prospered in the land. Mosiah 25: 19-24)

    Mosiah has by these acts completely departed from the system established by his father. Not only had he given Alma part of his own royal authority, but he had also stripped his father’s priests of their authority by giving Alma “ power to ordain priests and teachers over every church.” The extent of this political revolution is emphisized by the fact that Alma’s followers made a new covenant, and again took “upon them the name of Christ” when they joined Alma’s church.

    It is not until we get to chapter 26 that we learn something about what those contentions were, and what had been going on in the kingdom to convince Mosiah that he must literally abandon half of his royal prerogatives as king. For one thing, the children who were subjected to the enforcing authority of Benjamin’s priests rebelled.

    Now it came to pass that there were many of the rising generation that could not understand the words of king Benjamin, being little children at the time he spake unto his people; and they did not believe the tradition of their fathers. (Mosiah 26: 1)

    By the time our story picks up again, these children were adults, just as Alma was. Not only had they refused to conform to the rules of Benjamin’s covenant, but “they were a separate people as to their faith,” and had organized their own religion in opposition to the king and his priests.

    2     They did not believe what had been said concerning the resurrection of the dead, neither did they believe concerning the coming of Christ.
    3     And now because of their unbelief they could not understand the word of God; and their hearts were hardened.
    4     And they would not be baptized; neither would they join the church. And they were a separate people as to their faith, and remained so ever after, even in their carnal and sinful state; for they would not call upon the Lord their God.
    5     And now in the reign of Mosiah they were not half so numerous as the people of God; but because of the dissensions among the brethren they became more numerous.

    There is a transition here, so we are now talking about their effect on Alma’s church.

    6     For it came to pass that they did deceive many with their flattering words, who were in the church, and did cause them to commit many sins; therefore it became expedient that those who committed sin, that were in the church, should be admonished by the church.
    7     And it came to pass that they were brought before the priests, and delivered up unto the priests by the teachers; and the priests brought them before Alma, who was the high priest.

    Now we see the final and conclusive transfer of ecclesiastical power from the king to Alma. 8 Now king Mosiah had given Alma the authority over the church.

    9     And it came to pass that Alma did not know concerning them; but there were many witnesses against them; yea, the people stood and testified of their iniquity in abundance.
    10     Now there had not any such thing happened before in the church; therefore Alma was troubled in his spirit, and he caused that they should be brought before the king.
    11     And he said unto the king: Behold, here are many whom we have brought before thee, who are accused of their brethren; yea, and they have been taken in divers iniquities. And they do not repent of their iniquities; therefore we have brought them before thee, that thou mayest judge them according to their crimes.
    12     But king Mosiah said unto Alma: Behold, I judge them not; therefore I deliver them into thy hands to be judged. (Mosiah 26: 2-12)

    Two things are important there: one is that they are charged with “divers iniquities” but we are not told what those iniquities were. The second is that whatever they had done wrong was contrary to civil law. If their crimes had been something like theft or murder, then the king would have abdicated his throne altogether by turning there judgement over to Alma. But there is no evidence that was the case.

    13     And now the spirit of Alma was again troubled; and he went and inquired of the Lord what he should do concerning this matter, for he feared that he should do wrong in the sight of God. (Mosiah 26: 13)

    God’s response was that Alma should excommunicate those who did not repent.

    From this part of the story, two things appear: First, The civil crimes for which they were accused were in fact religious crimes. That leads to the second, which is that in an attempt “to stir them up in remembrance of the oath” the kings new system of priests had attempted to enforce goodness through legislation. The result was that the children who grew up under the strict regulations of that system, rebelled and altogether turned away from King Benjamin’s covenant.

    Apparently, in their zeal to succeed, the king’s new order of priests had overlooked the key to success that King Benjamin had given them:

    27     And see that all these things are done in wisdom and order; for it is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength. And again, it is expedient that he should be diligent, that thereby he might win the prize; therefore, all things must be done in order. (Mosiah 4: 27)

    It seems to be the nature of almost all people who have defined “goodness” for themselves, and who have authority, to codify that goodness into rules that they can impose upon the lives of others. Sometimes that enforcement is attempted by government; sometimes by subculture; sometimesbyfamily. And it seems to be the nature of almost all people,whentheyare confronted with rules of behavior that are too rigid and too restrictive – rules that permit no wiggle room – when the rules of enforced “goodness” violate one’s sense of agency and Self – then it is in the innate inclination of almost everyone is to look for some other way. That seems to be the story of the children who were too young to understand King Benjamin’s covenant.

    Civil and criminal law are designed to protect people from other people who would hurt them. That works if the legal system works. Law can force people to ACT honestly, but law can never change people’s hearts and force them to BE good. When one group of people, who define the outward forms of their own goodness as the only acceptable outward forms, try to take away the agency of other people by imposing those forms of goodness upon them, there can be only one consequence: both groups suffer because the people who call themselves good begin to act like tyrants, and the others are not taught what goodness really is. Even if they are compelled to hear the words of the teaching, they are not truly taught because the very nature of goodness is obscured by the reality of its enforcement. When cultural sin takes on an aspect more important than real sin, true doctrines get lost in a power struggle that happens within the souls of people in both groups of people. The enforcers begin to fear they are losing control, and that fear causes them to be more vigorous in their enforcement because the system has become more important to them than the doctrine. Consequently the people on whom goodness is imposed rebel against the system, but because they have not been taught to separate the system from the doctrine, they rebel against the doctrine also. They try to define their own “goodness” outside the rigors of the system – and thus outside the doctrine also. Apostasy overtakes both camps because neither adhere to the truth any more.

    There is a universal truth about both ancient and modern systems of religion: No matter how correct its doctrine may have been in its beginning, no structured goodness can be used to take away the agency of its adherents, to the degree it does that, or seeks to do that, the religion of the enforcers ceases to be good.

    Perhaps King Mosiah’s greatest contribution was that he recognized that apostasy in his own people, and turned the powers of state religion over to Alma who was more concerned with freeing the people from real sin than from cultural sin.