The Twelve Tribes against the Twelve Apostles

The first part of Nephi's high mountain vision deals with the conception, birth, baptism, ministry, end execution of Jesus Christ -- the resurrection is, strangely, omitted -- and presents no real problems. It is consistent with the stories we have in the New Testament. After Christ's execution on the cross, though, things get a little confusing:

And I, Nephi, saw that he was lifted up upon the cross and slain for the sins of the world.

And after he was slain I saw the multitudes of the earth, that they were gathered together to fight against the apostles of the Lamb; for thus were the twelve called by the angel of the Lord. And the multitude of the earth was gathered together; and I beheld that they were in a large and spacious building, like unto the building which my father saw.

 

And the angel of the Lord spake unto me again, saying: "Behold the world and the wisdom thereof; yea, behold the house of Israel hath gathered together to fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb."

And it came to pass that I saw and bear record, that the great and spacious building was the pride of the world; and it fell, and the fall thereof was exceedingly great.

 

And the angel of the Lord spake unto me again, saying: "Thus shall be the destruction of all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, that shall fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (1 Ne. 11:33-36).

This can be seen as a reference to the fact that the early church was persecuted. What is strange is the angel's insistence that "the house of Israel hath gathered together to fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb." In the history we know, it was primarily the Romans that persecuted the early Christians, and though the Jews also participated, it certainly wasn't the gathered House of Israel, a term which always refers to all Twelve Tribes being reunited, as in the LDS Article of Faith, "We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes" (A of F 10). The Ten Tribes disappeared in the eighth century BC and remain "lost" to this day. James, one of the apostles against whom these gathered tribes are supposed to be fighting, addresses his epistle "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad" (James 1:1).

Furthermore, elsewhere in the Book of Mormon, Jesus himself seems to say that the tribes will not be gathered until they accept him as their Redeemer:

And I command you that ye shall write these sayings after I am gone, that if it so be that my people at Jerusalem, they who have seen me and been with me in my ministry, do not ask the Father in my name, that they may receive a knowledge of you by the Holy Ghost, and also of the other tribes whom they know not of, that these sayings which ye shall write shall be kept and shall be manifested unto the Gentiles, that through the fulness of the Gentiles, the remnant of their seed, who shall be scattered forth upon the face of the earth because of their unbelief, may be brought in, or may be brought to a knowledge of me, their Redeemer.

And then will I gather them in from the four quarters of the earth; and then will I fulfil the covenant which the Father hath made unto all the people of the house of Israel (3 Ne. 16:4-5).

If the House of Israel is not gathered until after they accept Christ, why would they have "gathered together to fight against the twelve apostles"?

One possible interpretation is that the gathering in Nephi's vision is figurative. The tribes weren't literally gathered together any more than they were literally in a single "large and spacious building." Rather, the apostles went out into the world, meeting hostility wherever they went -- tradition has it that Matthew was killed in Ethiopia, Bartholomew in Armenia, Andrew in Greece, Thomas in India, and so on -- and in this way the Twelve Tribes, while still physically "scattered abroad," were figuratively "gathered" or united in their fighting against the apostles.

Another possibility is that "after he was slain" means thousands of years after he was slain (or just that Nephi saw this after he saw Jesus slain, which may or may not correspond to historical chronology). They fight may be still in the future, after the promised "literal gathering of Israel" -- which would mean the "twelve apostles" must be someone other than the biblical figures to whom that term usually refers, but this is hardly a problem for Mormons, who already accept that many different groups of twelve men can be and have been called by that title.

It is even possible that Nephi's use of the term has no reference to Jesus' disciples during his mortality at all. Notice how the Twelve are first introduced in the vision:

And I looked and beheld the Redeemer of the world, of whom my father had spoken; and I also beheld the prophet who should prepare the way before him. And the Lamb of God went forth and was baptized of him; and after he was baptized, I beheld the heavens open, and the Holy Ghost come down out of heaven and abide upon him in the form of a dove. And I beheld that he went forth ministering unto the people, in power and great glory; and the multitudes were gathered together to hear him; and I beheld that they cast him out from among them.

And I also beheld twelve others following him. And it came to pass that they were carried away in the Spirit from before my face, and I saw them not.

And it came to pass that the angel spake unto me again, saying: Look! And I looked, and I beheld the heavens open again, and I saw angels descending upon the children of men; and they did minister unto them.

And he spake unto me again, saying: Look! And I looked, and I beheld the Lamb of God going forth among the children of men. And I beheld multitudes of people who were sick, and who were afflicted with all manner of diseases, and with devils and unclean spirits; and the angel spake and showed all these things unto me. And they were healed by the power of the Lamb of God; and the devils and the unclean spirits were cast out (1 Ne. 11:27-31).

First Nephi sees scenes from the life of Jesus. Then he sees "twelve others following him" -- which may mean coming after him in time -- and these are then "carried away in the Spirit" so that he no longer sees them. Rather than this referring to anything that happened to the apostles themselves, I think this may just mean that this part of the vision ended, and he went on to the next scene. The next scene is "angels descending upon the children of men" -- When did this happen? It could have been any time -- and then the scene changes back to the life of Jesus. The Twelve are explicitly removed from the scene before this, and there is no mention of their appearing in the subsequent scenes of Jesus' life. This is consistent with the possibility that they are not contemporaries of the mortal Jesus.

If the Twelve Apostles in the vision are not the familiar New Testament characters, who might they be?

It's interesting that immediately after seeing the Twelve "carried away in the Spirit," Nephi sees angels descending and ministering. The number of angels is not specified, but could it be the same Twelve, now translated or resurrected beings? This brings me back to my 2023 post "Who were the 13 luminous beings Lehi saw in his Jerusalem vision?" This, you will recall, is what Lehi saw in that vision:

And it came to pass that he saw One descending out of the midst of heaven, and he beheld that his luster was above that of the sun at noon-day.

And he also saw twelve others following him, and their brightness did exceed that of the stars in the firmament. And they came down and went forth upon the face of the earth (1 Ne. 1:9-10).

In that post, I pointed out the identical language used in the two visions -- "twelve others following him" -- but thought the Twelve seen be Lehi couldn't be the apostles seen by Nephi because they descended from Heaven and didn't seem to be ordinary mortals. Now, though, I see that Nephi's vision does suggest that the Twelve Apostles may have been carried off to Heaven and then descended again as "angels."

What is meant by these angels "descending upon the children of men"? This unusual language is only found in other place in scripture:

And he [Jesus] saith unto him [Nathanael], Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man (John 1:51).

Here the angels both ascend and descend -- just as in Nephi's vision, if the Twelve are in fact the same beings as the angels. In my 2019 post "Notes on John 1," I had this to say about that verse of the Gospel:

"The angels of God ascending and descending" certainly sounds like a reference to Jacob's dream -- "And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven: and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it" (Genesis 28:12) -- with the Son of man playing the role of the ladder.

The use of "descending upon" makes sense in John 1 because Jesus is metaphorically Jacob's Ladder. What does it mean in Nephi's vision, where the angels descend not upon a singular Son of Man but "upon the children of men"?

The only other "descending upon" in scripture refers not to angels but to the Spirit at the baptism of Jesus:

And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him (Mark 1:10).

One likely interpretation of this is that the Spirit of God entered Jesus at this point, making him fully divine. Could Nephi mean something similar, with angelic spirits entering the bodies of mortals?

In my post on Lehi's Jerusalem vision, I proposed that the twelve star-like beings he saw descending out of heaven might be the patriarchs of the Twelve Tribes. Could it be these same patriarchs, as glorified "angels," that "descend upon" or enter the Twelve Apostles? Later in Nephi's vision he is told:

Thou rememberest the twelve apostles of the Lamb? Behold they are they who shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel (1 Ne. 12:9).

This would certainly make sense if the Twelve Apostles are in some sense the Twelve Patriarchs.

In my post on Lehi's Jerusalem vision, I noted that each of the Twelve Tribes is associated with a holy book and even used language suggesting that each book almost embodied one of the patriarchs:

If Joseph -- in the form of the book kept by his tribe, the plates of brass -- will go forth unto all nations, what of the other 11 starry beings who also go forth? Well, according to Nephi's later prophecies, each of the other tribes will also produce a holy book, and these, too, will go forth to the world.

And this brings me to the symbol of the Cherubim, or the Four Living Creatures -- who symbolize both the Twelve Tribes of Israel (see "The Throne and the World" for details) and, by a later tradition, the authors of the four canonical Gospels. And this reminds me of my own 2024 vision, recorded in "Étude brute?", in which I was shown a book and told

This book is the Cherubim. Not the Book of the Cherubim, but the Cherubim themselves.

Well, this post has certainly raised more questions than it has answered. I'm just thinking aloud and welcome comments.

What did Alma know, and when did he know it?

At the very beginning of Nephite history, Nephi himself prophesied that Jesus would come 600 years from the time Lehi left Jerusalem:

"Yea, even six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem, a prophet would the Lord God raise up among the Jews -- even a Messiah, or, in other words, a Savior of the world" (1 Ne. 10:4).

"And behold he cometh, according to the words of the angel, in six hundred years from the time my father left Jerusalem" (1 Ne. 19:8).

"For according to the words of the prophets, the Messiah cometh in six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem; and according to the words of the prophets, and also the word of the angel of God, his name shall be Jesus Christ, the Son of God" (2 Ne. 25:29).

However, when Alma the Younger is preaching an Ammonihah circa 82 BC, he appears to be unaware of this prophecy, as he says they "know not how soon" Christ will come:

And now we only wait to hear the joyful news declared unto us by the mouth of angels, of his coming; for the time cometh, we know not how soon. Would to God that it might be in my day; but let it be sooner or later, in it I will rejoice (Alma 13:25).

The skeptical explanation for this discrepancy goes something like this: According to the well-established theory of Mosiah priority, Joseph first dictated the lost 116 pages, then continued dictating from Mosiah 3 (now Mosiah 1, as the first two chapters were lost) to the end of the book, and finally went back and dictated from 1 Nephi to Words of Mormon. By the time he dictated the "small plates" books, Joseph Smith no longer remembered many of the details from the lost 116 pages, but he was worried that the pages might resurface at any time and didn't want there to be any discrepancies. That is why the "small plates" books give so few historical details and name so few of the characters. To pad out this section and make up for the lack of any detailed history, Joseph Smith filled the small plates with lots of prophecies, including Nephi's detailed visions of the future. The problem was that he didn't know he would later be creating these visions for Nephi at the time he dictated "large plates" books like Alma, and so the characters in that part of the book are inexplicably ignorant of what Nephi prophesied.

The only believing explanation I have encountered is simply that, for whatever reason, the contents of the small plates were just not common knowledge among the later Nephites. In support of this, we have Mormon circa AD 385 speaking of the small plates as if they were some obscure document buried in the archives, which he had not known about before:

And now, I speak somewhat concerning that which I have written; for after I had made an abridgment from the plates of Nephi, down to the reign of this king Benjamin, of whom Amaleki spake, I searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets, from Jacob down to the reign of this king Benjamin, and also many of the words of Nephi (W of M v. 3).

So it appears that, whatever the reason may be, Alma the Younger did not have access to the small plates. One problem with this assumption, though, is that in his words to his son Helaman circa 74 BC he appears to quote from them directly:

Yea, methought I saw, even as our father Lehi saw, God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels, in the attitude of singing and praising their God; yea, and my soul did long to be there (Alma 36:22).

The passage in boldface is a 20-word verbatim quote from the small plates:

And being thus overcome with the Spirit, he was carried away in a vision, even that he saw the heavens open, and he thought he saw God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God (1 Ne. 1:8).

If we want to maintain that Alma really didn't have the small plates, I guess the explanation must be that this passage was also in the lost 116 pages.

For the believer, the large plates, believed to have started with a Book of Lehi, would surely have contained an account of Lehi's Jerusalem vision, and Nephi's own account of that vision would likely have quoted some of his father's language directly. Alma wasn't quoting Nephi; rather, both Alma and Nephi were quoting Lehi.

For the skeptic, it is unlikely that Alma's quote would match the language of the lost 116 pages exactly, since Joseph Smith didn't have those pages when he wrote Alma. But when he was writing the replacement text ("small plates"), Smith referred to Alma and made sure to make Lehi say what Alma had said he'd said. If Smith was doing this, though, he wasn't very consistent about it. For example, Alma claimed that Lehi and Nephi called the ball Liahona (Alma 37:38), but Smith apparently forgot to include that word in the replacement text.

I've been familiar with the above arguments for some time. However, not until my umpteenth rereading of Alma just today did I notice another highly relevant passage. This is Alma addressing his son Corianton circa 74 BC

And now, my son, this was the ministry unto which ye were called, to declare these glad tidings unto this people, to prepare their minds; or rather that salvation might come unto them, that they may prepare the minds of their children to hear the word at the time of his coming (Alma 39:16).

Here Alma starts to say that Corianton is to prepare the minds of the people to hear Christ when he comes, but then he corrects himself and says that no, actually, it's to help them prepare their children to hear Christ when he comes. This implies that Alma knows Christ is not coming soon enough for people who are adults in 74 BC to hear him themselves but is coming soon enough for those people's children to hear him. In other words, he appears to know the date of Christ's coming with considerable precision, and this is in stark contrast to what he had said just eight years earlier -- when he said "we know not how soon" Christ will come and seemed to entertain the possibility that it would be in his lifetime.

So in 82 BC, Alma doesn't know when Christ is coming -- but then in 74 BC he (1) appears to quotes verbatim from 1 Nephi and (2) suddenly does know when Christ is coming. This strongly suggests to me that at some point between those two dates, Alma gains access to the small plates and becomes familiar with their contents.I'm going to have to go back through the relevant portion of the Book of Mormon with that hypothesis in mind and see if I can find any hints of exactly when and how that might have happened.

Further evidence for the Zenos theory

My recent dream about how "There's no Second Isaiah" (see my post "In New York, about the only garbage they won't pick up is sunglasses") prompted me to look into the evidence that the Book of Isaiah had a single author, in contrast to the mainstream position -- usually presented as an established fact -- that chapters 40-66 are by a much later author or authors. So I got an electronic copy of The Indivisible Isaiah: Evidence for the Single Authorship of the Prophetic Book (1964) by Rachel Margalioth and started reading it.

Much of Mrs. Margalioth's method consists of finding distinctive words and expressions that are found in both parts of Isaiah (1-39 and 40-66) but in the writings of no other prophet. The sheer number and specificity of these parallels in style and word choice does indeed make it hard to avoid the conclusion that the book is the work of a single author. As Mrs. Margalioth writes:

This indicates not only a uniformity of style, but also to a uniform trend of thought. This reveals the innermost recesses of human thinking wherein idea and language are woven into one web, and there can be no room for a stranger. This is the style of a man which is the man himself. Our [Jewish] sages must have meant just this when they declared that no two prophets speak in identical style (p. 42).

This got me thinking about Zenos, the otherwise unknown prophet whose work is quoted in three parts of the Book of Mormon. Since these three texts differ greatly in genre and style, it is reasonable to assume that they are quoting three separate Zenos documents rather than a unified "Book of Zenos." For ease of reference, I will give them names:

• 1 Zenos (fragments of which are quoted or paraphrased in 1 Ne. 19:10-17): a prophecy about the distant future, mot notably including the death and resurrection of a Jesus-like figure
• 2 Zenos (quoted in Jacob 5): an extended allegorical story about olive trees
• 3 Zenos (quoted in Alma 33:4-11): a short, psalm-like composition on the subject of answered prayers

That's a pretty small sample -- 102 verses in total, compared to the 1,292 verses of the Book of Isaiah -- but I thought it might be worthwhile to check to see if any of the three Zenos texts share any distinctive wording not found elsewhere. If they do, that would be consistent with Zenos being a real person.

I found no such parallels, which is perhaps not entirely surprising given how short all but one of the texts are.

I did find something else, though. In my 2024 post "Zenos was quoted by Joel, Nephi, Alma, Malachi, and Paul," I propose -- building on the work of a Redditor who goes by Stisa79 -- that several other texts in both the Bible and the Book or Mormon also quote or allude to 1 Zenos. I establish this by showing that these uncredited Zenos quotations share distinctive language with the 1 Zenos fragments in 1 Ne. 19 and with each other. One of my commenters then found a paper by Quinten Barney using a similar method to show that two other texts might be influenced by 1 Zenos. I found additional links connecting these two to the texts I had found. I've been meaning to write an exhaustive post about all the scriptural texts that likely quote or allude to 1 Zenos, but I got bogged down in the sheer volume and complexity of all the links I would have to document, and so I haven't finished it yet. Anyway, my current list of texts likely influenced by 1 Zenos is:

• Joel 2
• Malachi 4 (discovered by Stisa79)
• Matthew 23-24 (discovered by Quinten Barney)
• 1 Corinthians 3
• 1 Nephi 22 (discovered by Stisa79)
• 2 Nephi 25-26 (discovered by Stisa79)
• Alma 45
• Helaman 13-15 (discovered by Quinten Barney)

Although I didn't find any direct linguistic links between the 1 Zenos fragments and 3 Zenos, I did find links between 3 Zenos and two of the texts in the above list, which I believe to have been influenced by 1 Zenos. Here are the relevant verses:

Yea, and thou hast also heard me when I have been cast out and have been despised by mine enemies; yea, thou didst hear my cries, and wast angry with mine enemies, and thou didst visit them in thine anger with speedy destruction (Alma 33:10, explicitly quoting 3 Zenos).

And they shall be visited with thunderings, and lightnings, and earthquakes, and all manner of destructions, for the fire of the anger of the Lord shall be kindled against them, . . . And when these things have passed away a speedy destruction cometh unto my people; for . . . when the Spirit ceaseth to strive with man then cometh speedy destruction, and this grieveth my soul (2 Ne. 26:6, 10-11, with strong links to 1 Zenos). 

Yea, I will visit them in my fierce anger, and there shall be those of the fourth generation who shall live, of your enemies, to behold your utter destruction; and this shall surely come except ye repent, saith the Lord; and those of the fourth generation shall visit your destruction (Hel. 13:10, with strong links to 1 Zenos).

Alma 33:10 and Hel, 13:10 are the only verses in all scripture to include the words {enemies, visit, anger, destruction}. With the exception of enemies, the words even occur in the same sequence in both texts.

The phrase "speedy destruction" occurs twice in 2 Ne. 26:10-11, once in Alma 33:10, and nowhere else in scripture. Both passages also include visit and anger.

This obviously falls far short of the sheer volume of parallels connecting the two parts of the Book of Isaiah, but I still think it counts as a little more evidence in favor of the reality of Zenos.

I haven't yet done any intertextual study of Jacob 5 (2 Zenos), more because it's really long and boring than for any more respectable reason. Once I do that, I'll try to put together a single article covering the Zenos text exhaustively.

Hollow pillars of light or fire

Ritchie Valens put this in my mind. When you don't speak Spanish, even a common Spanish word has relatively few mental associations, so for me the word arriba is associated with (1) "La Bamba," (2) Speedy Gonzales, and (3) the Spanish translation of Joseph Smith's 1838 account of his First Vision. This last is something I heard recited every week by my Spanish-speaking colleagues when I was a Mormon missionary. I never actively tried to memorize it, but I heard it so many times that to this day I can still recite it verbatim:

Vi una columna de luz, más brillante que el sol, directamente arriba de mi cabeza; y esta luz gradualmente descendió hasta descansar sobre mí. . . . Al reposar sobre mí la luz, vi en el aire arriba de mí a dos Personajes, cuyo fulgor y gloria no admiten descripción. Uno de ellos me habló, llamándome por mi nombre, y dijo, señalando al otro: "Éste es mi Hijo Amado: ¡Escúchalo!"

The ellipsis is not mine. The missionaries memorized a slightly edited version of what Smith wrote, removing the reference to the demonic attack he experienced immediately before the vision. Here's the original English:

I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me. . . . When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other -- This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him! (JS-H vv. 16-17)

Despite the clear description of "a pillar of light exactly over me head," artwork tends to show the light as being located in front of Smith and not really in the form of a pillar with clear boundaries. This is probably the best known artistic depiction:

This is one of the few that shows Smith himself inside the pillar of light, as described:

The strangest feature of this pillar of light is that it "descended gradually until it fell upon" Smith. This means it was not at all like a beam of light shining down from the heavens, which would instantaneously (in a nanosecond per foot traversed) reach the ground, but was more like a moving object with a particular shape -- apparently that of a cylinder -- and a clearly defined bottom (and so perhaps also a clearly defined top?). When the pillar first appeared, the bottom of it was still high above Smith, and then it gradually descended until it reached him.

It was not until the pillar of light rested on Smith that he was able to see the two Personages, who were presumably (but are not said explicitly to have been) inside the pillar. One possible explanation of this would be that the "walls" of the pillar radiated brilliant light in one direction only, namely outward. Since the pillar was "above the brightness of the sun," it would of course be impossible for anyone looking into it from outside to see anything at all. The inside of the pillar must have been considerably less bright. Otherwise, he still wouldn't have been able to see anything -- and it's hard to imagine the two Personages being so bright as to be notable for their "brightness and glory" even against a background that was brighter than the sun.

This idea of a hollow pillar of light which can have people inside it also appears in the Book of Mormon:

And it came to pass that Nephi and Lehi were encircled about as if by fire, even insomuch that they durst not lay their hands upon them for fear lest they should be burned. Nevertheless, Nephi and Lehi were not burned; and they were as standing in the midst of fire and were not burned. And when they saw that they were encircled about with a pillar of fire, and that it burned them not, their hearts did take courage. For they saw that the Lamanites durst not lay their hands upon them; neither durst they come near unto them, but stood as if they were struck dumb with amazement (Hel. 5:23-25).

Nephi and Lehi were not in the fire but "encircled about" by it. The fire apparently had the form of a hollow cylinder. Those in the center were not burned, but those on the outside were afraid they would be if they got too close. Thus, as with Joseph Smith's pillar of light, the radiant energy seems to be directed only outward. It seems likely that the Lamanites could not actually see Nephi and Lehi at this point, just as Smith could not see the Personages inside the pillar until he, too, was inside it.

Later in the same chapter, the Lamanites repent and find themselves inside a pillar of fire with Nephi and Lehi:

And it came to pass that when they cast their eyes about, and saw that the cloud of darkness was dispersed from overshadowing them, behold, they saw that they were encircled about, yea every soul, by a pillar of fire. And Nephi and Lehi were in the midst of them; yea, they were encircled about; yea, they were as if in the midst of a flaming fire, yet it did harm them not, neither did it take hold upon the walls of the prison; and they were filled with that joy which is unspeakable and full of glory (Hel. 5:43-44).

In the past, I visualized each person being encircled about by his own pillar of fire, but now I think the most natural reading is that there was a single pillar of fire encircling them all. From the fact that nothing was burned, not even "the walls of the prison," I take it that this was more properly a pillar of light, like Smith's, called "fire" because they didn't know what else to call it.

The other main scriptural account of Beings inside a pillar is in Exodus, where the Lord is sometimes in a "pillar of fire" and sometimes in a non-radiant "pillar of cloud":

And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night: He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people (Ex. 13:21-22).

It is understood that the people didn't actually see the Lord himself when he was in the pillar. As with Joseph Smith, what was inside the pillar could not be seen from outside it.

The Lord could see out of the pillar, though:

And it came to pass, that in the morning watch the LORD looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians (Ex. 14:24).

It is strongly implied that Moses went inside the pillar when he saw God face to face:

And it came to pass, as Moses entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar descended, and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the Lord talked with Moses. And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door. And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle (Ex. 33:9-11).

It's not entirely clear that Moses was inside the pillar, as he "entered into the tabernacle," while the pillar "stood at the door of the tabernacle." However, the people saw only the pillar, while Moses himself probably saw the Lord, and the best explanation is that Moses was inside the pillar with him.

Who concealed the Gadiantons' secret plans?

In the 75th or 76th year of the judges, Nephi son of Helaman says in a prayer that the band of Gadianton has been eradicated. I have added in brackets the implied referents of the third-person pronouns and possessives, noting that one of them is ambiguous.

O Lord, behold this people repenteth; and they [the people] have swept away the band of Gadianton from amongst them [the people] insomuch that they [the Gadiantons] have become extinct, and they [who?] have concealed their [the Gadiantons'] secret plans in the earth. Now, O Lord, because of this their [the peoples'] humility wilt thou turn away thine anger . . . (Hel. 11:10-11).

The first possible reading is that the people have demonstrated their humility by (1) repenting, (2) wiping out the Gadianton band, and (3) concealing the Gadiantons' secret plans in the earth.

The second possible reading is that the people have been so successful in sweeping away the Gadianton band that that the Gadiantons have (1) become extinct and (2) been forced to conceal their secret plans in the earth.

The first is the most natural reading for a couple of reasons. First, "their humility" definitely refers to the humility of the people, but that reading would be difficult if the three instances of they/their preceding it all referred to the Gadiantons. Second, it is unnatural to say that the Gadiantons "have become extinct and" done something else; they obviously would have had to conceal their plans before they became extinct, and so it would be more natural to say that first in the sentence. If the meaning of the passage is that, although the Gadiantons' themselves have become extinct, their plans are still hidden somewhere in the earth, we would expect a but rather than an and. Because of its naturalness, I assume many readers of the Book of Mormon (including myself until very recently) take the first reading for granted and don't even notice the ambiguity.

The official Chinese translation of the Book of Mormon removes the ambiguity and makes the first reading the only one possible. It says, essentially, that the people have "repented, wiped out the Gadiantons, and concealed their secret plans." The subject of all these verbs can only be "this people."

However, the Russian translators made the opposite call: "они скрыли свои тайные планы" can only mean "they hid their own secret plans." If anyone other than the Gadiantons themselves had hidden the plans, the correct possessive would be их rather than the reflexive свои.

Despite what I have said about the naturalness of the first reading, I can see the Russians' point of view, too. Why would the people who eradicated the Gadiantons themselves carefully conceal the Gadiantons' secret plans instead of just destroying them? Years later, people dig up the plans and use them to start a Gadianton revival. For that even to have been possible, the plans must have been intentionally buried in such a way that they would be preserved -- something analogous to Moroni writing on gold plates and burying them in a stone box. It's hard to imagine any motive for the enemies of the Gadiantons to do that.

If the Gadiantons themselves buried the plans so that they would be preserved for future generations, that raises questions, too. It suggests that the "secret plans" were not just a playbook for criminal mischief but were seen by the Gadiantons as having some almost religious value.

I'm still trying to work out possible understandings of the whole "secret plans" plot point. I just want to document this ambiguity in the text first and see what other people think.

The end of the endless

In D&C Section 19, the Lord explains that when the punishment of the damned is described as "endless" or "eternal," this does not necessarily mean that it has no end:

Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment. Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name's glory.

Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery . . . . I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore -- Eternal punishment is God's punishment. Endless punishment is God's punishment (D&C 19:6-8, 10-12).

I'm sure I'm not the only Mormon to have found this passage a bit embarrassing. The doctrine that damnation is not necessarily eternal is a good one, but the explanation for that doctrine presented here just reads like sophistry. Really, we're supposed to distinguish between "endless" and "no end"? Also, the claims about what is and isn't written aren't even true. There are passages that say there shall be "no end" to the torment of the damned:

. . . not the destruction of the soul, save it be the casting of it into that hell which hath no end (1 Ne. 14:3).

. . . their torment is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end (2 Ne. 9:16).

These can be explained away -- the first passage says only that hell itself has no end, not that any particular soul will stay there forever; while the second only says their torment is like a fire that has no end -- but again, this feels like sophistry, an attempt to make the text say something other than its plain meaning.

⁂

It turns out, however, that there are several passages in the Book of Mormon that do speak of "everlasting" or "eternal" or "endless" torment that nevertheless does have an end. For example, here is Alma the Younger recounting his conversion experience:

Nevertheless, after wading through much tribulation, repenting nigh unto death, the Lord in mercy hath seen fit to snatch me out of an everlasting burning, and I am born of God. My soul hath been redeemed from the gall of bitterness and bonds of iniquity. I was in the darkest abyss; but now I behold the marvelous light of God. My soul was racked with eternal torment; but I am snatched, and my soul is pained no more (Mosiah 27:28-29).

Alma very clearly says that he has experienced "eternal torment," but that that experience had an end, and he is tormented no more.

Here is telling the story again:

But I was racked with eternal torment, for my soul was harrowed up to the greatest degree and racked with all my sins. Yea, I did remember all my sins and iniquities, for which I was tormented with the pains of hell . . . . And now, for three days and for three nights was I racked, even with the pains of a damned soul. . . .

I cried within my heart: O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me, who am in the gall of bitterness, and am encircled about by the everlasting chains of death.

And now, behold, when I thought this, I could remember my pains no more; yea, I was harrowed up by the memory of my sins no more. And oh, what joy, and what marvelous light I did behold; yea, my soul was filled with joy as exceeding as was my pain! (Alma 36:12-13, 16, 18-20).

Alma's "eternal torment" -- which he equates with "the pains of hell" and "of a damned soul" -- lasted "for three days and for three nights." It was eternal, but also of a relatively short duration.

Here is Ammon describing the salvation of the Lamanites:

Yea, they were encircled about with everlasting darkness and destruction; but behold, he has brought them into his everlasting light, yea, into everlasting salvation; and they are encircled about with the matchless bounty of his love; yea, and we have been instruments in his hands of doing this great and marvelous work (Alma 26:15).

Here again, the "everlasting darkness and destruction" are clearly stated to have had an end.

Finally, here is Moroni, talking not about damnation but about death:

And because of the redemption of man, which came by Jesus Christ, they are brought back into the presence of the Lord; yea, this is wherein all men are redeemed, because the death of Christ bringeth to pass the resurrection, which bringeth to pass a redemption from an endless sleep, from which sleep all men shall be awakened by the power of God when the trump shall sound; and they shall come forth, both small and great, and all shall stand before his bar, being redeemed and loosed from this eternal band of death, which death is a temporal death (Morm. 9:13).

Here the end of the endless is about as explicit as can be: "an endless sleep, from which sleep all men shall be awakened."

This last quote, from Moroni, is the least amenable to the D&C 19 treatment. "Endless sleep is God's sleep"? In what sense does the sleep of death pertain to God? I think the obvious reading is that death, unlike ordinary sleep, is potentially endless. Death is a sleep that would last forever, were it not for divine intervention. It is endless by nature, and yet it may end. To quote Lovecraft, who has been in the sync-stream recently,

That is not dead which can eternal lie,

And with strange aeons even death may die.

I think "eternal damnation" should probably be understood in the same way. It is naturally and potentially endless, and yet its end may be brought about if God and Man so choose.

Dancing for decapitation -- stop me if you've heard this one

Gustave Moreau, La fille de Jared dansant devant Akish (1876)

1. The dancing daughter of Jared

Here's a tale of Jaredite devilry from the Book of Ether. See if it reminds you of anything:

And it came to pass that he begat Omer, and Omer reigned in his stead. And Omer begat Jared; and Jared begat sons and daughters.

And Jared rebelled against his father, and came and dwelt in the land of Heth. And it came to pass that he did flatter many people, because of his cunning words, until he had gained the half of the kingdom. And when he had gained the half of the kingdom he gave battle unto his father, and he did carry away his father into captivity, and did make him serve in captivity;

And now, in the days of the reigns of Omer he was in captivity the half of his days. And it came to pass that he begat sons and daughters among whom were Esrom and Coriantumr; and they were exceedingly angry because of the doings of Jared their brother, insomuch that they did raise an army and gave battle unto Jared. And it came to pass that they did give battle unto him by night. And it came to pass that when they had slain the army of Jared they were about to slay him also; and he plead with them that they would not slay him, and he would give up the kingdom unto his father. And it came to pass that they did grant unto him his life.

And now Jared became exceedingly sorrowful because of the loss of the kingdom, for he had set his heart upon the kingdom and upon the glory of the world.

Now the daughter of Jared being exceedingly expert, and seeing the sorrows of her father, thought to devise a plan whereby she could redeem the kingdom unto her father. Now the daughter of Jared was exceedingly fair. And it came to pass that she did talk with her father, and said unto him: 

Whereby hath my father so much sorrow? Hath he not read the record which our fathers brought across the great deep? Behold, is there not an account concerning them of old, that they by their secret plans did obtain kingdoms and great glory?

And now, therefore, let my father send for Akish, the son of Kimnor; and behold, I am fair, and I will dance before him, and I will please him, that he will desire me to wife; wherefore if he shall desire of thee that ye shall give unto him me to wife, then shall ye say: 

I will give her if ye will bring unto me the head of my father, the king.

And now Omer was a friend to Akish; wherefore, when Jared had sent for Akish, the daughter of Jared danced before him that she pleased him, insomuch that he desired her to wife. And it came to pass that he said unto Jared: 

Give her unto me to wife.

And Jared said unto him: 

I will give her unto you, if ye will bring unto me the head of my father, the king.

And it came to pass that Akish gathered in unto the house of Jared all his kinsfolk, and said unto them: 

Will ye swear unto me that ye will be faithful unto me in the thing which I shall desire of you?

And it came to pass that they all sware unto him, by the God of heaven, and also by the heavens, and also by the earth, and by their heads, that whoso should vary from the assistance which Akish desired should lose his head; and whoso should divulge whatsoever thing Akish made known unto them, the same should lose his life. And it came to pass that thus they did agree with Akish. And Akish did administer unto them the oaths which were given by them of old who also sought power, which had been handed down even from Cain, who was a murderer from the beginning. And they were kept up by the power of the devil to administer these oaths unto the people, to keep them in darkness, to help such as sought power to gain power, and to murder, and to plunder, and to lie, and to commit all manner of wickedness and whoredoms.

And it was the daughter of Jared who put it into his heart to search up these things of old; and Jared put it into the heart of Akish; wherefore, Akish administered it unto his kindred and friends, leading them away by fair promises to do whatsoever thing he desired (Ether 8:1-17).

2. The dancing daughter of Herodias

I assume anyone with even a passing familiarity with the New Testament will immediately recognize the dancing-for-decapitation plot point in Ether as being strangely similar to one found  in the Gospels:

This obviously calls to mind the story of the daughter of Herodias, as told in Mark 6 (and Matthew 14):

And when a convenient day was come, that Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee; and when the daughter of the said Herodias came in, and danced, and pleased Herod and them that sat with him, the king said unto the damsel, 

Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.

And he sware unto her, 

Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom.

And she went forth, and said unto her mother, 

What shall I ask? 

And she said, 

The head of John the Baptist.

And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying, 

I will that thou give me by and by in a charger the head of John the Baptist.

And the king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath's sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her (Mark 6:21-26).

Essentially the same story is told in Matthew 14, but I have quoted the Mark version because it has more in common with the story in Ether. (Matthew omits the reference to "the half of my kingdom" and does not say Herod is "exceeding" sorry.)

3. Two different types of parallels

I think it's important to recognize that the story in Ether parallels that in Mark in two very different ways.

First, and most obviously, there is the core similarity of the plot itself: Someone wishes to be rid of an enemy but does not have the power to do so themselves, so they have their daughter ingratiate a powerful person by dancing for him, which leads to that person agreeing to bring them the enemy's head. This core parallel is reinforced by some incidental similarities in the way the story is told. For example, in both stories "the daughter" is unnamed (only in extrabiblical tradition is the daughter of Herodias called Salome), is said to have "pleased" the man she danced for, and so on.

The other parallels are of the type discussed in this blog's inaugural post, "Lehi, Nephi, and the pillar of fire that 'dwelt upon a rock': A case study of hard-to-define biblical parallels." I have yet to coin a suitable term to refer to parallels of this kind, and so they remain as "hard to define" as ever.

As you will recall if you've read that post, the Book of Mormon's opening verses introduce two characters, Nephi and Lehi, and relate Lehi's vision in which "a pillar of fire . . . dwelt upon a rock" (1 Ne. 1:6). Searching for Nephi and Lehi in the King James Bible, you will find that Nephi (i.e., naphtha) was the name given to a liquid that was "poured on the great stones" and "kindled a flame" (2 Macc. 1:31-32), while Lehi is a place name, introduced one verse after we are told that Samson "dwelt in the top of the rock" (Judg. 15:8). So in both the Bible and the Book of Mormon, Lehi is connected with someone or something that "dwelt" on a "rock," and Nephi is connected with a fire burning on a rock -- but the stories incorporate these elements in entirely different ways, so that the stories themselves are not similar at all.

The two dancing-daughter stories are similar, but in addition there are parallels of this Lehi-Nephi type (for lack of anything better to call them), where biblical elements appear in the Book of Mormon story but fit into that story in a completely different way:

• Herod promises up to "the half of my kingdom" to the dancing daughter. Jared first gains "the half of the kingdom" before being removed from power; it is the desire to regain this lost half-kingdom that motivates the decapitation scheme.
• Herod is "exceeding sorry" because he has to kill John, whom he fears and respects. Jared is "exceeding sorrowful" (unnecessarily "corrected" to exceedingly in later editions) because he has lost his kingdom. 
• The dancing daughter of Herodias requests the decapitation at the prompting of her mother. Jared requests the decapitation at the prompting of his dancing daughter.
• Herod swears an oath to give the dancing daughter ""whatsoever thou shalt ask," which turns out to be the decapitation of John. Akish has all his family and friends swear an oath to assist him and keep his secrets; this is to facilitate his plan to decapitate Omer, and it results in their doing "whatsoever thing he desired."

One major difference between the two stories is that only one of the decapitation plots is successful: John is in fact beheaded, while Omer escapes that fate. Even in this difference there is a biblical parallel, though, when you consider how Omer is saved: "the Lord warned Omer in a dream that he should depart out of the land; wherefore Omer departed out of the land with his family" (Ether 9:3). After the deaths of Jared and Akish, who had plotted to kill him, Omer returns (Ether 9:6, 12-13).

Compare this passage from Matthew:

And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they [the wise men] departed into their own country another way.

And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:

And was there until the death of Herod: . . . But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life. (Matt. 2:12-15, 19-20).

This is not part of the Bible's dancing-daughter story -- it's not even the same king Herod -- but it's another story about a murderous "Herod," and it, too, has echoes in Ether 8. The link seems to be the name Herod (which is also phonetically similar to Jared). The expression "warned . . . in a dream" appear only in Ether 8 and Matthew 2, and nowhere else in the Bible or Book of Mormon.

4. Skeptical explanations

Obviously, skeptics are going to explain any biblical parallels in the Book of Mormon as plagiarism or "borrowing" on the part of Joseph Smith: Smith took the main theme from the story of the daughter of Herodias and adapted it for his story about Jared and Omer. It's puzzling that Smith would plagiarize so heavily from the Bible, though -- the one text that he knew most of the potential readers of the Book of Mormon would be intimately familiar with, making his plagiarism extremely easy to detect. If Smith wanted to lift material from the Bible, we would expect him to at least try to disguise it. Instead, we have lots of very obvious Bible plagiarism -- including, in other parts of the book, extensive copy-and-pastes from famous passages in the epistles of Paul. Why would a fraudulent Joseph Smith -- who was obviously neither stupid nor lacking in creativity -- have done that?

And the Lehi-Nephi type parallels can't easily be explained as conscious plagiarism. If Smith made a conscious decision to plagiarize the main story of Salome, it would make no sense to add in other elements from that story -- half the kingdom, exceeding sorrow, oaths to do whatever is requested -- but to work them into the story in a completely different way. This would obviously be more difficult than either straightforward plagiarism or original storytelling, and what purpose would it serve but to make the plagiarism more obvious? What does the "half the kingdom" reference add to the Jared story, except as another telltale sign of the biblical source?

I think the only explanation is that the Lehi-Nephi parallels were added subconsciously: Thinking of the daughter of Herodias story primed Smith's mind, by subconscious free-association, to think of other themes and expressions from that story, and also from another murderous-Herod story. He put these into his text because they just appeared in his mind, without being consciously aware that they had their source in the New Testament.

5. Believing explanations

Coincidence is always a possibility. One need only peruse one of those lists of Lincoln-Kennedy coincidences to be persuaded that two very real events can be connected in multiple ways be sheer coincidence. Some of the similarities are straightforward (each president was shot in the head on a Friday and succeeded by a Southerner named Johnson who was born in '08) and others are more of the "Lehi-Nephi" variety (Lincoln was shot in Ford's Theatre; Kennedy was shot in a Ford automobile, a Lincoln). Other explanations are obviously to be preferred, though.

The beginnings of an explanation for the basic story similarity can be found in the fact that the daughter of Jared's dance-for-decapitation scheme was inspired by "an account concerning them of old, that they by their secret plans did obtain kingdoms and great glory" (Ether 8:9), and of these secret plans Moroni writes, "it hath been made known unto me that they are had among all people" (Ether 8:20). Based on this, we should positively expect to see similar schemes being carried out among other people. It is hardly a stretch to suggest that the wicked Herods might have been involved in Gadianton-style secret combinations. The story of Esther might be a (partially disguised) account of another such scheme. Although she does not dance, Esther is "fair and beautiful" (Esther 2:7) and with that beauty extracts from Ahasuerus the very promise -- "even to the half of the kingdom" (Esther 5:6, 7:2) -- that Salome extracted from Herod. Like Salome and Jared, Esther uses that promise for murderous ends, getting the king to execute Haman and declare open season on the Jews' enemies. Is Esther -- whose book contains not a single reference to God or prayer -- less of a heroine than popularly believed? "For I, Nephi, have not taught them many things concerning the manner of the Jews; for their works were works of darkness, and their doings were doings of abominations" (2 Ne. 25:2). The daughterly dance of death could well be some established ritual among the workers in darkness.

Could the "unto the half of my kingdom" wording also be part of an established secret-combination oath? If so, the inclusion of similar wording may be not a coincidence but an allusion. We know that Moroni is unwilling to "write the manner of their oaths and combinations" (Ether 8:20) directly, so perhaps he is deliberately saying "the half of the kingdom" as a hint to those with ears to hear.

That would leave only "exceeding sorrowful" and "warned in a dream" as seemingly coincidental parallels. They could be just that, coincidences, or they could be instances the sort of "biblical contamination" I proposed in my first post here.