I only saw bits and pieces of the Women’s Session of General Conference tonight, but got a teaser of the theme last night from Elder Oaks’ visit to Claremont.

The LDS Church has generally been very favorable to refugees and immigrants. There is good historical reason for this. As dramatized by video in the session today, LDS have institutional memory and family stories about the multiple times we too had to flee because of violence and death, leaving behind everything of value. We too were dependent on others who found us strange and foreign, but who nevertheless opened their hearts and homes.

http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1&isUI=1

Deuteronomy is the heart of the law of Moses, both in the sense that that is where much of the text is located, but also because of its sympathetic compassion: You shall love the refugee, for you were refugees in the land of Egypt. (Deu 10:19).

Israel had taken refuge in Egypt because of famine, and were then exploited and oppressed.

As for the refugee, you shall not wrong or oppress them, for you were refugees in the land of Egypt (Exo 22:21)

As for the refugee, you shall not take advantage of them; you know how it feels to be a refugee, because you were refugees in the land of Egypt. (Exo 23:9)

Like a full citizen is how you shall treat the refugee living with you, and you shall love them like yourself, for you were refugees in the land of Egypt. (Lev 19:34)

I can’t embed the other video, here.

But today, we will echo the law of Moses, by remembering our own history as immigrants and refugees driven out,  and acting with according compassion; We have been invited to emulate Christ by “doing unto the least of these.”

Make Easter memorable for someone who needs it.

My bookshelf

These chapters are Nephi’s literary swan song, his winding down. He’s now in the position Lehi was in 2 Nephi 1-4, that is, old, preparing for his exit, and wanting to leave behind some words of guidance and distilled wisdom…. which makes for some interesting comparisons. Whereas Lehi spoke to his immediate children, Nephi speaks to his descendants and people. Notably, the closing arguments of Nephi’s life as the basics of the Gospel. He pleads with people to repent (31:11, 13, 17), be baptized (31:4-14), receive the Holy Ghost (31:12-14), and endure to the end (31:15-16, 19-20). This, according to the Book of Mormon, is the Gospel (see Noel Reynolds here for a shorter summary and here for an Ensign version.) The rest is just details or, as Joseph Smith called them, “appendages.”

Related to this is the logical-but-wrong idea that “fulness of the Gospel” includes all those “details” like eternal marriage, baptism for the dead, three degrees of glory, etc. The Book of Mormon, as is well known, is said to contain “the fulness of the gospel” but these things are not really mentioned in the Book of Mormon (although on becoming-as-God, see 3 Nephi 28:1), probably because the Nephite prophets didn’t know about them. Remember that line-upon-line thing. Also of interest is that the 1981 edition Introduction also said that the Bible too contained the fulness of the Gospel. (See this LDS history blog for data and discussion.)

But for outsiders who assume the Book of Mormon is The Mormon Bible, they are surprised (and often critical) to find that the it doesn’t forbid alcohol, or talk about endowment sessions, or any number of other uniquely Mormon things. The implication, then, is that “fulness of the gospel” does not mean a comprehensive laundry list of every practice, doctrine, policy, or ordinance, but is defining “the gospel” narrowly as the good news of Jesus’ salvation… as we saw Nephi (and Noel Reynolds) just do.  For more on this aspect, see here.

31:3 “For the Lord God giveth light unto the understanding; for he speaketh unto men according to their language, unto their understanding.” I think one can parse this language in several ways, but it’s strikingly similar to D&C 1:24.

Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.

Both passages touch on the idea of accommodation, that God must adapt his message and commands to mankind’s fallen state. At minimum, this means language, but also extends to knowledge, culture, and worldview. This accommodative principle comes out of the Bible, was used extensively by Christians and Jews (including Jesus), and also has support from Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and a dozen other General Authorities. I’ve got a chapter on this in my book with plenty of citations, but in the meantime, you can watch my presentation on it from BYU’s New Testament Commentary conference last summer. I adapted my research to fit the conference topic of Corinthians, where it turned out to fit quite naturally.

31:5 -“if the Lamb of God, he being holy, should have need to be baptized by water, to fulfil all righteousness, O then, how much more need have we, being unholy, to be baptized, yea, even by water!” Nephi makes a classic Jewish qal wahomer (pronounced “call wah hoe-MER) argument for baptism. The phrase literally means “light and heavy” and reasons from lesser to greater or vice-versa. That is, if something applies in a small case, surely it applies even more in a large case!  This type of rhetoric/argument occurs in Old Testament (Pro. 12:3, 11:31,  Jer 12:5, Eze 15:5, Exo 6:12, Genesis 44:8, etc.) but much more explicitly in the Talmud and New Testament, e.g. Matt 6:30, John 7:23, Rom 5:15, 2Co 3:7-11, etc.)

31:13-15 Baptism is not the covenant itself, but the witness or sign of the covenant we make. (At least in modern times, the terms of that covenant are spelled out in the pre-baptismal interview, where the baptisee must verbally agree to the terms of the baptismal covenant; otherwise, they don’t get baptized. This does not seem to be in force for e.g. Acts 8:27-40.) Mosiah 18:10 says that our baptism serves as “as a witness before [God] that [we] have entered into a covenant” and Alma 7:15 similar says “show unto your God that ye are willing to repent of your sins and enter into a covenant with him to keep his commandments, and witness it unto him this day by going into the waters of baptism.” Thus did Joseph Smith preach that “Baptism is a sign to God, to angels to heaven that we do the will of God ” Words of Joseph Smith, 108. The association of a public witness or visible sign with a covenant goes all the way back to Genesis 9:12-13, and Genesis 17:11, and is found elsewhere too.

31:19 “And now, my beloved brethren, after ye have gotten into this strait and narrow path, I would ask if all is done? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for ye have not come thus far save it were by the word of Christ with unshaken faith in him, relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save.” I aways liked the phrase “mighty to save.” It’s an odd English construction, but the phrase appears in Isa. 63:1, and the construction elsewhere in the Old Testament (e.g. “near to flee” Gen 19:20)  More importantly, when it comes to salvation and we are baptized people, upon whose merits do we rely? Our own? No, still on Christ’s merits! See my lengthy discussion on grace and works here.

32:8 Said Brigham Young, on the subject of not praying,

When we neglect any one of these duties, the enemy says, “I have made so much ground.” If the Devil can induce an Elder to drink a little, he is not satisfied with this triumph, but says to him, “Your wife and children know it, don’t pray tonight.” The Elder says to his family, “I feel tired tonight, we won’t have prayers.” The enemy says, “I have gained another point.” You indulge still further, and you will find other excuses. Your head is not right, your heart is not right, your conscience is not right, and you retire again without praying. By and by, you begin to doubt something the Lord has revealed to us, and it is not long before such a one is led away captive of the Devil. JD 18:216.- Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 81

33:2-3 “I Nephi, have written what I have written, and I esteem it as of great worth…”  Back to 1Ne 19:6-7. Nephi’s writing what he thinks is worthwhile and important, and at this point, he says “Yeah, well… Those plates are all inscribed now, and I think it’s good.” Could he have done it better? Maybe. We acknowledge potential errors in judgment and writing from the get-go in the Book of Mormon, with the Title Page, c.f. Mormon 8:17, 9:31.

As always, you can support my work through making your regular Amazon purchases through this Amazon link. Or you can donate directly here.

You can also get updates by email whenever a post goes up (subscription box on the right). If you friend me on Facebook, please drop me a note telling me you’re a reader. I tend not to accept friend requests from people I’m not acquainted with.

Not a lot of time today, so here’s a short post, on Nephi’s non-contextual application of the Isaiah chapters to his people.

A note on 2 Nephi 26:29, wherein Nephi defines “priestcraft”-

priestcrafts are that men 1) preach and 2) set themselves up for a light unto the world, that 3) they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion.

Nephi’s translated definition dovetails well with Webster’s 1828, which says “The stratagems and frauds of priests; fraud or imposition in religious concerns; management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose on the credulity of others. ” (My italics.)

Alma 1:16 echoes this as well,  “this did not put an end to the spreading of priestcraft through the land; for there were many who loved the vain things of the world, and they went forth preaching ^afalse doctrines; and this they did for the sake of ^briches and honor.”

LDS, on the other hand,  have a tendency to define priestcraft as “preaching the gospel for money,” thereby casting aspersions on professional clergy of other religions. Note that this is not Nephi’s definition. It is not simply being paid in return for preaching the gospel, but one’s motive in doing so. Is it for money and praise, not for building up the kingdom?

Is it for building up the kingdom? That’s not priestcraft. (In my experience the vast majority of non-lds priests, pastors, and rabbis are not engaged in priestcraft, and there are definitely some advantages to a professional clergy.)

When I taught Book of Mormon at BYU, one of the questions I put on the midterm (#15) was, “Brother Spackman is getting paid to teach the gospel. How is this not priestcraft?” Students were expected to know Nephi’s definition and talk about motive. Motive is rarely transparent, however, and our motives are often mixed and opaque, even to ourselves. Nevertheless, as President Benson once said, “Our motives for the things we do are where the sin is manifest.” -“Beware of Pride,” Ensign, May 1989, 5.

Now, there’s another problem with the common definition of priestcraft, namely, it’s inconsistent both with current and past LDS practice, as well as the New Testament. The fifteen Apostles (as well as some others)  receive a living stipend from the Church and other support. Morever, in the 19th century, Bishops also received some remuneration. It is more accurate to describe the LDS Church as having a non-professional clergy (in the sense that one does not choose it as a profession) than an unpaid clergy. When it comes to the New Testament, Paul makes clear in 1 Corinthians 9:6 onwards that those who preach the gospel have a right to make their living through that preaching. He argues from the Torah to that extent and then quotes Jesus in 1Co 9:14. The KJV misleads a bit here; it’s certainly true that those who preach the gospel should live and embody the gospel, but it’s quite clear the passage  means more than that; “the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel.”

In his Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader’s Guide (Oxford Press) Grant Hardy spends a good bit of time on Nephi and the Isaiah chapters, and it’s not the usual kind of thing, either. He points out how Nephi has carefully woven Isaiah in and out of his material before and after the lengthy Isaiah quotation, as one aspect of presenting

a new prophecy about the relationships of the Jews, the Gentiles, and the descendants of Lehi in the last days. One of his major concerns is the visionary book – the Book of Mormon – and how it will be received (as we have seen, Isaiah 29 plays an integral role in this discussion). At the same time, key terms from Joseph’s Brass Plates prophecies are reintroduced into these chapters:

 

2 Nephi 3

The seer shall do a work… which shall be of great worth unto them (7)

---

unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto the seed of thy loins (11)

---

the fruit of thy loins shall write, and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write (12)

 

---

unto the confounding of false doctrines (12)

---

bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers (12)

---

when my work shall commence among all my people, unto the restoring thee, O House of Israel (13)

---

their words shall proceed forth out of my mouth (21)

---

 

the weakness of their words will I make strong (21)

---

 

2 Nephi 25-33

I know that they shall be of great worth unto them in the last days (25:8 +28:2, 33:3)

---

I bring forth my word unto the children of men (29:7 +25:18)

---

I shall speak unto the Jews and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the Nephites and they shall write it (29:12)

---

all those who preach false doctrines (28:15 +28:9, 12)

---

they shall be restored unto the knowledge of their fathers (30:5)

---

the Lord God shall commence his work among all nations … to bring about the restoration of his people (30:8)

---

the words of your seed should proceed forth out of my mouth (29:2, 33:14)

---

 

the words which I have written in weakness will be made strong (33:4)

---

 

These do not seem to be random hits, nor are they simply the result of the pervasive biblical diction in the Book of Mormon. For the most part, these phrases are clustered in these two sections of Second Nephi. For instance, outside of these chapters, “false doctrine(s)” appears only once (at Alma 1:16), and both “bring forth my word” and “knowledge of their fathers” never occur anywhere else. In addition, in at least one passage (focusing on his own writings), Nephi tells us explicitly that he has Joseph’s prophecy in mind: “the Lord God promised unto me that these things which I write shall be kept and preserved, and handed down unto my seed, from generation to generation, that the promise may be fulfilled unto Joseph, that his seed should never perish” (2 Ne. 25:21), which is a reference to 2 Nephi 3:16 (“the Lord hath said unto me, ‘I will preserve thy seed forever’”).

All this indicates that Nephi’s concluding discourse in 2 Nephi 25–33 is not simply an academic commentary on Isaiah 2–14. Rather, it represents a deliberate, creative synthesis of his own revelations, the writings of Isaiah, and the prophecy of Joseph. In this case, the form of Nephi’s writing reflects his theology.

As always, you can support my work through making your regular Amazon purchases through this Amazon link. Or you can donate directly here.

You can also get updates by email whenever a post goes up (subscription box on the right). If you friend me on Facebook, please drop me a note telling me you’re a reader. I tend not to accept friend requests from people I’m not acquainted with.