The Book of Mormon – what’s new to you?

[Traveler]

This thread is to highlight what posters are learning from their current study of the Book of Mormon.

I will begin this with 1Nephi 5:16. Here Lehi learns that both he and Laban are direct decedents of Joseph.  Thus, Laban inherited from his father the right to “keep” the records.  As a direct descendent of Joseph Lehi was next in line to be a keeper of the convent – Nephi becomes the first son (most noble) and therefore the keeper of the covenant which explains why Nephi was instructed to behead Laban and take possession of the brass plates.   This fulfills the prophesy that a remnant (righteous branch) of the house of Joseph will be broken off (See 2Nephi 3:5).  The rest of chapter 3 prophesies that all this will commence the great work (from those that receive the Book of Mormon) in the last days to prepare for the Messiah. 

I understood that the Nephits carried the covenant of Joseph until their fall, but I never saw the symbolism of the beheading of Laban like unto the fall of the Nephits and the transfer of the covenant to Nephi symbolic to the transfer of the covenant to Joseph Smith and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

The Traveler

[rcthompson88]

I have not read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover since my mission. In that time my studies have been sporadic and typically topic oriented as opposed to linear. This year I have decided that I want to read the Book of Mormon all the way through multiple times and focus on a different topic each time.

During my second read through of the year I marked all names and titles for members of the Godhead. During that exercise I developed a much greater appreciation for the "Oneness" of the Godhead, and how many ways the Book of Mormon writers describe the Savior that we just don't hear anymore. In our time we see a clear distinction between God the Father and God the Son. Yet, so often Christ is described as God the Father, even heavenly Father, in the Book of Mormon. It has given me pause to better ponder what makes Jesus the Father in His work and mission. So far I have found the exercise to be fruitful.

[mikbone]

47 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I will begin this with 1Nephi 5:16. Here Lehi learns that both he and Laban are direct decedents of Joseph

Alma 10:3 And Aminadi was a descendant of Nephi, who was the son of Lehi, who came out of the land of Jerusalem, who was a descendant of Manasseh, who was the son of Joseph who was sold into Egypt by the hands of his brethren.

“The Prophet Joseph informed us that the record of Lehi, was contained on the 116 pages that were first translated and subsequently stolen, and of which an abridgment is given us in the first book of Nephi, which is the record of Nephi individually, he himself being of the lineage of Manasseh; but that Ishmael was of the lineage of Ephraim, and that his sons married into Lehi's family, and Lehi's sons married Ishmael's daughters... “

(Erastus Snow, JD 23:184)

 

Edited March 5, 2024 by mikbone

[Ironhold]

On 3/5/2024 at 11:57 AM, Traveler said:

This thread is to highlight what posters are learning from their current study of the Book of Mormon.

I will begin this with 1Nephi 5:16. Here Lehi learns that both he and Laban are direct decedents of Joseph.  Thus, Laban inherited from his father the right to “keep” the records.  As a direct descendent of Joseph Lehi was next in line to be a keeper of the convent – Nephi becomes the first son (most noble) and therefore the keeper of the covenant which explains why Nephi was instructed to behead Laban and take possession of the brass plates.   This fulfills the prophesy that a remnant (righteous branch) of the house of Joseph will be broken off (See 2Nephi 3:5).  The rest of chapter 3 prophesies that all this will commence the great work (from those that receive the Book of Mormon) in the last days to prepare for the Messiah. 

I understood that the Nephits carried the covenant of Joseph until their fall, but I never saw the symbolism of the beheading of Laban like unto the fall of the Nephits and the transfer of the covenant to Nephi symbolic to the transfer of the covenant to Joseph Smith and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

The Traveler

There's also the fact that Laban betrayed the brothers, offering to sell them the record then ordering them slain after getting their possessions. 

Even if we assume he was just that furious over them coming in the first time around and asking without any thought of compensation, what he did was inexcusable even by the standards of the day and could well have been the final sign that he was not worthy of the responsibility. 

[Vort]

12 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

There's also the fact that Laban betrayed the brothers, offering to sell them the record then ordering them slain after getting their possessions. 

Even if we assume he was just that furious over them coming in the first time around and asking without any thought of compensation, what he did was inexcusable even by the standards of the day and could well have been the final sign that he was not worthy of the responsibility. 

Laban was just a misunderstood guy with a temper problem. He lost his head. It happens.

[zil2]

28 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

offering to sell them the record

I don't recall this anywhere.  It was Nephi's idea to offer to buy the records.

[Ironhold]

3 minutes ago, zil2 said:

I don't recall this anywhere.  It was Nephi's idea to offer to buy the records.

Same difference kinda. 

Yeah, long day already... 💀

[Maverick]

I recently discovered that it’s likely that the brother of Jared was practicing plural marriage, with what would appear to be at least two wives at the same time. While Jared likely only had one wife. 

40 And it came to pass that the Lord did hear the brother of Jared, and had compassion upon him, and said unto him:

41 Go to and gather together thy flocks, both male and female, of every kind; and also of the seed of the earth of every kind; and thy families; and also Jared thy brother and his family; and also thy friends and their families, and the friends of Jared and their families. (Ether 1) 

20 And accordingly the people were gathered together. Now the number of the sons and the daughters of the brother of Jared were twenty and two souls; and the number of sons and daughters of Jared were twelve, he having four sons. (Ether 6) 

This is noteworthy because there are a growing number of members of the church who are rejecting the legitimacy of D&C 132 and the early practice of plural marriage in the restored church. One of their arguments is that the Book of Mormon is strictly against any form of marriage other than strict monogamy. These verses would appear to show that there is at least one example of plural marriage having been practiced by a very righteous man in the Book of Mormon, with whom God spoke face to face. 

[mordorbund]

So far two new things have stuck out to me in my reading. 1) Nephi never really leaves the theme of the Tree of Life dream. 2) In the last year I learned that when governments are corrupt it seems as if the very environment is out to punish the society. I could have learned the same lesson through King Noah.

[zil2]

8 hours ago, mordorbund said:

2) In the last year I learned that when governments are corrupt it seems as if the very environment is out to punish the society. I could have learned the same lesson through King Noah.

What am I forgetting?  I don't recall any natural disasters associated with King Noah (assuming the one in Mosiah 11-19)...

[mordorbund]

10 minutes ago, zil2 said:

What am I forgetting?  I don't recall any natural disasters associated with King Noah (assuming the one in Mosiah 11-19)...

Not natural, but they were surrounded by marauding Lamanites. Zeniff seems to have them under control. Noah diverted resources from prevention and became the hero of a crisis -- but the infrastructure already existed to prevent such a crisis (reading between the lines, I think the tower was one of Noah's building projects (even if it wasn't it doesn't change the corruption and neglect), but he never staffed it).

[zil2]

22 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

Not natural, but they were surrounded by marauding Lamanites. Zeniff seems to have them under control. Noah diverted resources from prevention and became the hero of a crisis -- but the infrastructure already existed to prevent such a crisis (reading between the lines, I think the tower was one of Noah's building projects (even if it wasn't it doesn't change the corruption and neglect), but he never staffed it).

Got it.  Not limiting "environment" to the natural one.

[Traveler]

On 4/8/2024 at 10:44 PM, Maverick said:

I recently discovered that it’s likely that the brother of Jared was practicing plural marriage, with what would appear to be at least two wives at the same time. While Jared likely only had one wife. 

40 And it came to pass that the Lord did hear the brother of Jared, and had compassion upon him, and said unto him:

41 Go to and gather together thy flocks, both male and female, of every kind; and also of the seed of the earth of every kind; and thy families; and also Jared thy brother and his family; and also thy friends and their families, and the friends of Jared and their families. (Ether 1) 

20 And accordingly the people were gathered together. Now the number of the sons and the daughters of the brother of Jared were twenty and two souls; and the number of sons and daughters of Jared were twelve, he having four sons. (Ether 6) 

This is noteworthy because there are a growing number of members of the church who are rejecting the legitimacy of D&C 132 and the early practice of plural marriage in the restored church. One of their arguments is that the Book of Mormon is strictly against any form of marriage other than strict monogamy. These verses would appear to show that there is at least one example of plural marriage having been practiced by a very righteous man in the Book of Mormon, with whom God spoke face to face. 

Though I would agree with some of your assessments of confusion over plural marriage in the early Church of the restoration – It is my opinion that that your assumptions of Ether 1 are not well founded.  My great grandfather was a polygamist late in the era of Utah polygamy.   He noted in his journal that most of the polygamists of his era were in error and disobedient to covenants concerning their plural wives (among his references of those disobedient was his brother).   He also referred to his entire family as singular.

I speculate that it was more likely that the brother of Jared had married children and thus the reason for plural reference to his families.   Or another possibility is that his first wife had died, and he remarried a woman that was previously married with children and then had more children.  This is only my opinion and I have nothing other than my opinion to reference.  There are other references like Jacob 1 verse 15.

While we are on the subject of plural wives.  Anciently the difference between a wife and concubine was that a wife entered the marriage with a dowry and a concubine had none.  The dowry was considered the property of the wife and if the wife was divorced the dowry had to be given back to the wife.  The same goes if the wife died – her dowry was to be returned to her family or children.

Early in the restored Church there was never a distinction between a wife and concubine – all were considered wives.  Many in modern western civilization think of concubines as illegitimate – akin to current standards of living together or common law wives.

 

The Traveler

Edited April 12, 2024 by Traveler

[ZealoulyStriving]

On 4/8/2024 at 9:44 PM, Maverick said:

I recently discovered that it’s likely that the brother of Jared was practicing plural marriage, with what would appear to be at least two wives at the same time. While Jared likely only had one wife. 

40 And it came to pass that the Lord did hear the brother of Jared, and had compassion upon him, and said unto him:

41 Go to and gather together thy flocks, both male and female, of every kind; and also of the seed of the earth of every kind; and thy families; and also Jared thy brother and his family; and also thy friends and their families, and the friends of Jared and their families. (Ether 1) 

20 And accordingly the people were gathered together. Now the number of the sons and the daughters of the brother of Jared were twenty and two souls; and the number of sons and daughters of Jared were twelve, he having four sons. (Ether 6) 

This is noteworthy because there are a growing number of members of the church who are rejecting the legitimacy of D&C 132 and the early practice of plural marriage in the restored church. One of their arguments is that the Book of Mormon is strictly against any form of marriage other than strict monogamy. These verses would appear to show that there is at least one example of plural marriage having been practiced by a very righteous man in the Book of Mormon, with whom God spoke face to face. 

In his "The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text" Royal Skousen has the original as "thy family" not "thy families".

https://bookofmormoncentral.org/content/book-mormon-earliest-text

 

Edited April 12, 2024 by ZealoulyStriving

[ZealoulyStriving]

An aha moment came just this morning as I finished Jacob 5. This is a note a quickly took on my phone:

"If the roots are the eternal covenant made with Abraham and his descendants, and the roots are in danger of dying if the branches aren't bearing good fruit- this points to temple work. The Abrahamic covenant can only preserve roots (ancestors) and branches (descendants) if they are joined together through temple work!!! Otherwise the earth would be totally wasted and cursed at the coming of the Lord (the Master of the Vineyard)."

The theme of Jacob 5 is Temple work. The principle work the servant (Joseph Smith Jr.) and those his brings with him (succeeding presidents of the Church) is facilitating the work for the dead and joining families and dispensations together so the covenant won't die, and leave this earth "without form, and void".

Edited April 12, 2024 by ZealoulyStriving

[askandanswer]

On 3/7/2024 at 6:10 AM, Vort said:

Laban was just a misunderstood guy with a temper problem. He lost his head. It happens.

Perhaps it might be more correct to say that his head was re-placed - from his shoulders to the ground.

[mikbone]

Jacob 5:3 For behold, thus saith the Lord, I will liken thee, O house of Israel, like unto a tame olive tree, which a man took and nourished in his vineyard; and it grew, and waxed old, and began to decay.

The average lifespan of an olive tree is 5-600 years but some live 2000 years.

So the only man that could have nourished the tree was the Lord.

Edited April 13, 2024 by mikbone

[Maverick]

22 hours ago, ZealoulyStriving said:

In his "The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text" Royal Skousen has the original as "thy family" not "thy families".

https://bookofmormoncentral.org/content/book-mormon-earliest-text

 

Interesting. 

I just checked and the 1829 Printer’s manuscript has “thy family” but the 1830 Book of Mormon has “thy families.” Unfortunately, the passage in question is no longer extant in the Original Manuscript. 

[Carborendum]

Quote

... the pleasing bar of God that striketh the wicked with awful dread and fear.

Jacob 6:13

The "bar" has a footnote to Moroni 10.  

Quote

...before the pleasing bar of the great Jehovah, the Eternal Judge of both quick and dead. Amen.

Moroni 10:34

I noted that the "bar" (from Moroni 10) used in conjunction with "Eternal Judge" indicates that the "bar" spoken of is about the final judgement.  Maybe, maybe not.  I was thinking of "the bar" that is used in modern settings for the inner area in the courtroom for the judge and lawyers.  So, I could see this referring to God as the ultimate judge. Therefore, we meet at his bar.

The problem is that this usage of the word "bar" is of modern origin.  It was far later than Moroni, and certainly later than Jacob.  So, why is this "bar" used in these verses?

Quote

"Bar of God"

"Bar of the Great Jehovah, the Eternal Judge..."

It is easy enough to say that these were simply the best modern language equivalents to ancient figures of speech.  And it could be.  But I just don't feel right about it.

Another answer didn't occur to me until I re-read the words:

Quote

...which bar striketh the wicked with awful dread and fear.

This isn't the bar of a modern courtroom.  This is a scepter, either of the Egyptian Pharaoh or a Judge of Israel (or possibly some combination of the two).

I prefer that dual symbolism of the Egyptian Pharaohs.  The flail and scepter were double-dual symbols.  

• The flail could punish disobedient servants, or it could be used to thresh wheat, thus providing for the people.
• The shepherd's crook was either a way to STRIKE down a criminal, or to bring a repentant soul into the fold.

To say that the bar (staff, rod, etc.) was "pleasing", and then say that is striketh fear and dread, would indicate a dual symbol.

Edited April 15, 2024 by Carborendum

[mikbone]

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I was thinking of "the bar" that is used in modern settings for the inner area in the courtroom for the judge and lawyers.  So, I could see this referring to God as the ultimate judge. Therefore, we meet at his bar.

From the Webester 1828 Dictionary

3) law

the railing in a courtroom that encloses the place about the judge where prisoners are stationed or where the business of the court is transacted in civil cases

the whole body of barristors or lawyers qualified to practice in the courts of any jurisdiction

And from the BoM

1 Nephi 12:9 And he said unto me: Thou rememberest the twelve apostles of the Lamb? Behold they are they who shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel; wherefore, the twelve ministers of thy seed shall be judged of them; for ye are of the house of Israel.

10 And these twelve ministers whom thou beholdest shall judge thy seed. And, behold, they are righteous forever; for because of their faith in the Lamb of God their garments are made white in his blood.

I bet that we will be judged by our current apostles.

I'd prefer to have Elder Monson or Erying pead my case.  But I'll probably get McConkie or Packer.  

Edited April 15, 2024 by mikbone

[NeuroTypical]

On 3/6/2024 at 1:40 PM, Vort said:

Laban was just a misunderstood guy with a temper problem. 

It's fascinating watching GenZ/Alpha starting to expound on stuff they're learning about the BoM.  So much political and social commentary goes with it:

 

 

 

[Vort]

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

I'd prefer to have Elder Monson or Erying pead my case.  But I'll probably get McConkie or Packard. 

McConkie was a lawyer. You'd be lucky to get him as defense counsel. As for Packard, he made some good cars back in the day. Later on, I think he and Hewlitt teamed up for some nonsense or other.

[Vort]

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

This isn't the bar of a modern courtroom.  This is a scepter, either of the Egyptian Pharaoh or a Judge of Israel (or possibly some combination of the two).

Interesting interpretation, one that has never occurred to me. I'll have to ruminate on that a bit.

The legalistic term "bar" originally meaning a rail of wood that created a physical barrier between the public area of an "inn of Court" (a late medieval lawyer's guild, both the association and the building) and the area where legal scholars and personnel worked. At least, that's what I gleaned from the sources. On examination, I'm starting to think that applying this meaning of "bar" to the verse penned (inscribed) by Moroni is anachronistic. Maybe "bar" as "scepter" makes more sense.

[zil2]

37 minutes ago, Vort said:

Interesting interpretation, one that has never occurred to me. I'll have to ruminate on that a bit.

The legalistic term "bar" originally meaning a rail of wood that created a physical barrier between the public area of an "inn of Court" (a late medieval lawyer's guild, both the association and the building) and the area where legal scholars and personnel worked. At least, that's what I gleaned from the sources. On examination, I'm starting to think that applying this meaning of "bar" to the verse penned (inscribed) by Moroni is anachronistic. Maybe "bar" as "scepter" makes more sense.

Or maybe the Nephites came up with things that their predecessors didn't.  Not exactly the same, but the idea of something separating those of power from the rest:

Quote

Mosiah 11:11 And the seats which were set apart for the high priests, which were above all the other seats, he did ornament with pure gold; and he caused a breastwork to be built before them, that they might rest their bodies and their arms upon while they should speak lying and vain words to his people.

Perhaps at some point, the Nephite judges had something similar - a bar separating the court from the "audience".  They certainly had lawyers...  Anywho, just a thought.

[mordorbund]

For what it’s worth, Royal Skousen favors the phrase “pleading bar” as the specific place where the defendant stands.