All are not alike unto God

And I am filled with charity, which is everlasting love; wherefore, all children are alike unto me; wherefore, I love little children with a perfect love; and they are all alike and partakers of salvation

-- Mormon, Moroni 8:17

"Except to the eye of love, one Aberdeen terrier looks very much like another Aberdeen terrier, sir. Mr. Blumenfeld, I am happy to say, did not detect the innocent subterfuge."

"Jeeves," I said -- and I am not ashamed to confess that there was a spot of chokiness in the voice -- "there is none like you, none."

-- P. G. Wodehouse, "Episode of the Dog McIntosh"

I have to side firmly with Jeeves here. Against Mormon -- who says that he is full of love; therefore all children are alike to him; therefore his love is perfect -- I must insist that one member of a category is very much like another except to the eye of love. Blindness to what makes each individual and situation unique is the very antithesis of love. That is why "always love partakes of broken rule," why "the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1:17), and why a Pharisee is a "child of hell" (Matt. 23:15). "Platonic love" in a literal sense -- love of the ideal and not the real -- is not love.

Of course I know and agree with what Mormon is trying to say, but the way in which he says it is unfortunate. Nephi is the other offender, and this verse of his is increasingly popular with the Church Formerly Known as Mormon:

[H]e denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile (2 Ne. 26:33).

What these two prophets mean is that all subcategories of human beings -- baptized and unbaptized, Black and White, bond and free, male and female, Christian and Pagan and Jew -- are alike to God and to those whose love is perfect. But this is not because they see only some broader category -- "children" or "children of men" -- but because they see only the individual.

A man who loves his dog loves it not because it is an Aberdeen terrier, and certainly not because it is a dog, but because it is that particular dog. Five sparrows are sold for two farthings, but each is known to God (Luke 12:6). Even the plants in my garden have individual names, and how much more must that be true with God?

Love thy neighbor as thyself -- that is, as a self, as unlumpable as your own.

Brothers and brethren

The Book of Mormon uses the archaic plural brethren 499 times and the modern brothers 9 times.

Brothers always refers to biological siblings, both elder and younger. Laman and Lemuel are Nephi's "brothers," and he and Sam are their "brothers," too.

my elder brothers, who were Laman, Lemuel, and Sam (1 Ne. 2:5)
I did not rebel against him like unto my [elder] brothers (1 Ne. 2:16)
thou and thy [elder] brothers should go unto the house of Laban (1 Ne. 3:4)
thy [elder] brothers murmur (1 Ne. 3:5)  

Laman and Lemuel did speak many hard words unto us, their younger brothers (1 Ne. 3:28)

Helaman's "brothers" are older than him; but Pagag, the firstborn, also has "brothers."

counsel with your elder brothers . . . be nourished by your brothers" (Alma 39:10)

the firstborn . . . was Pagag. . . . they chose all the [younger] brothers of Pagag (Ether 6:25-26)

Brethren is also used for both elder and younger male siblings. Laman and Lemuel are referred to as Nephi's "brethren" countless times, and he also refers to "Jacob and Joseph, my younger brethren" (2 Ne. 5:6). Besides this use, brethren can also refer to co-religionists, "brethren of the church" (1 Ne. 4:26, Alma 5:14). The convenient ambiguity of Nephi's words to Zoram makes it clear that the same word was used in both of these senses:

And I also spake unto him that I should carry the engravings, which were upon the plates of brass, to my [biological] elder brethren, who were without the walls. . . . And he, supposing that I spake of the brethren of the church, . . . did follow me (1 Ne. 4:24, 26).

So far, so unremarkable. It's just a word with two possible plurals, analogous to cows and kine, or cherubs, cherubim. What piqued my interest and prompted me to write this post was a handful of verses where brothers and brethren are used together, apparently with different meanings. Here is the first such instance:

And now there was a great mourning and lamentation among the people of Limhi, the widow mourning for her husband, the son and the daughter mourning for their father, and the brothers for their brethren (Mosiah 21:9).

Given the context, I assume that this means "younger brothers mourning for their elder brothers." It seems clear that we are talking about literal family relations, but if it were the same word both times in the original language, it's hard to see why it would have been translated differently. Although, as documented above, both brothers and brethren are used elsewhere in the text for both elder and younger siblings, here it may just be a convenient way of expressing "one kind of brother mourning for the other kind of brother."

The remaining instances of brothers being contrasted with brethren have to do with the four sons of Mosiah.

And the voice of the Lord came to Ammon, saying: Thou shalt not go up to the land of Nephi, for behold, the king will seek thy life; but thou shalt go to the land of Middoni; for behold, thy brother Aaron, and also Muloki and Ammah are in prison. Now it came to pass that when Ammon had heard this, he said unto Lamoni: Behold, my brother and brethren are in prison at Middoni, and I go that I may deliver them (Alma 20:2-3).

Ammon and Aaron are biological siblings, two of the four sons of Mosiah. We don't know who exactly Muloki and Ammah are (this is the first of only two times they are mentioned), but they are apparently either kinsmen in a broader sense (cousins or such) or biologically unrelated "brethren of the church."

Muloki and Ammah were not the only "brethren" preaching alongside the four brothers.

[Ammon, after having parted from his biological brothers,] departed out of their synagogue, and came over to a village which was called Ani-Anti, and there he found Muloki preaching the word unto them; and also Ammah and his brethren. . . . Aaron and a certain number of his brethren were taken and cast into prison, and the remainder of them fled out of the land of Middoni unto the regions round about. And those who were cast into prison suffered many things, and they were delivered by the hand of Lamoni and Ammon, and they were fed and clothed (Alma 21:11, 13-14).

The "brethren" of Ammah are apparently actual siblings or kinsmen, since if they were co-religionists they would not have been specifically Ammah's brethren. In Alma 20, the Lord tells Ammon that Aaron, Muloki, and Ammah are in prison, but here it is "Aaron and a certain number of his brethren" -- which would be an unlikely way of phrasing it if the "certain number" were two and if they were the two people who had just been mentioned by name. So it was apparently more than just those three who were in prison, but the Lord only mentioned the three to Ammon. This perhaps suggests that Muloki and Ammah may have been Ammon and Aaron's "brethren" in a different sense than the other prisoners. There is a further hint of this a couple of chapters later:

Behold, now it came to pass that the king of the Lamanites sent a proclamation among all his people, that they should not lay their hands on Ammon, or Aaron, or Omner, or Himni, nor either of their brethren who should go forth preaching the word of God, in whatsoever place they should be, in any part of their land (Alma 23:1).

This certainly makes it sound as if Ammon, Aaron, Omner, and Himni (the four biological brothers) had only two "brethren" -- who would presumably be Muloki and Ammah. However, we can't say for sure that this is the intended meaning. In Websters' 1828 dictionary (describing American English as used at the time the Book of Mormon was translated), these are the first two definitions of either:

1. One or another of any number. Here are ten oranges; take either orange of the whole number, or take either of them. In the last phrase, either stands as a pronoun or substitute.

2. One of two. This sense is included in the foregoing.

So the first definition is one "of any number." And it does make more sense that the king would forbid the Lamanites to lay hands on any and all Nephite preachers rather than singling out six individuals. Most other instances of either in the Book of Mormon clearly mean "one of two"; however, there is one unambiguous counterexample:

And now, behold, the Lamanites could not retreat either way, neither on the north, nor on the south, nor on the east, nor on the west, for they were surrounded on every hand by the Nephites (Hel. 1:31).

Here, "either way" clearly means any of four ways. Taking this into account, I think it is relatively unlikely that Alma 23:1 is singling out Muloki and Ammah.

Here is the final verse to distinguish brothers from brethren:

And now behold, Ammon, and Aaron, and Omner, and Himni, and their brethren did rejoice exceedingly . . . . And now, these are the words of Ammon to his brethren, which say thus: My brothers and my brethren, behold I say unto you, how great reason have we to rejoice (Alma 25:17, 26:1)

Here I think it is tolerably clear that Ammon's "brothers" are his actual siblings, Aaron, Omner, and Himni, while his "brethren" could be either specifically Muloki and Ammah or else his "brethren of the church" in general.

Where did Moroni's variant text of Malachi come from?

Joseph Smith reported that Moroni quoted to him a version of Malachi "with a little variation from the way it reads in our Bibles" (JS-H v. 36). Below are the King James Version and the version quoted by Moroni, with the differences italicized:

For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. . . . Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse. (Mal. 4:1, 5-6).

For behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall burn as stubble; for they that come shall burn them, saith the Lord of Hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. . . . Behold, I will reveal unto you the Priesthood, by the hand of Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers. If it were not so, the whole earth would be utterly wasted at his coming (JS-H vv. 36-39, also D&C 2).

It would normally be unsurprising -- positively to be expected -- that the biblical texts known to the Nephites should differ from our own. However, the last two chapters of Malachi are the one exception to that generalization, because we know exactly what the Nephite text looked like. This text was not brought over from Jerusalem (as it had not yet been written at the time Lehi and Mulek departed) but was dictated to them by Jesus himself. His dictation of Malachi 4 comprises 3 Nephi 25, and it reads exactly as in our King James Bibles. Moroni's father Moroni is the one who wrote the 3 Nephi we have, so it's hard to imagine how Moroni could have had any different Malachi text.

We've established that several parts of the Book of Mormon that appear to be quoting Malachi are actually quoting Zenos (see here and here), whom Malachi also quoted -- so could the text Moroni quoted to Joseph Smith have been Zenos rather than Malachi? Unlikely, for two reasons.

First, Moroni quoted "part of the third chapter of Malachi; and he quoted also the [entire] fourth or last chapter of the same prophecy" (JS-H v. 36); except for the three verses discussed above, the text was the same as in the King James Bible. In 3 Nephi, Jesus quotes Malachi 3 and 4 in their entirety (only those two chapters) and refers to what he has just quoted as "scriptures, which ye had not with you" (3 Ne. 26:2). If they already essentially the same text in Zenos, this would be unnecessary. Only a small part of the Malachi text can be quoting Zenos -- and this is what we find. Aside from the single phrase "great and dreadful day" (Mal. 4:5), all suspected Zenos material in Malachi is in two consecutive verses: Mal. 4:1-2.

Second, where Moroni's quotation differs from our Malachi, it also differs from Zenos. Moroni's quotation of Mal. 4:2 and of the "great and dreadful day" phrase do not differ from Malachi as we have it, so that leaves only part of one verse that could help us determine whether he is quoting Zenos or Malachi.

shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up (Mal. 4:1, King James Version).

shall burn as stubble; for they that come shall burn them (JS-H v. 37, Moroni's Malachi quotation).

Let's compare these with suspected Zenos-influenced texts:

the day that cometh shall burn them up, . . . for they shall be as stubble (2 Ne. 26:4)

stubble . . . the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire . . . shall be burned (1 Cor. 3:12-13, 15)

shall be as stubble; and the day cometh that they must be burned (1 Ne. 22:15).

The only Zenos-like feature of Moroni's quotation is that he uses the word as when comparing the wicked to stubble, technically making it a simile rather than a metaphor. Where Moroni has "burn as stubble," and Malachi has "be stubble," our Zenos texts have something halfway between the two: "be as stubble." It's hard to draw any conclusions from these trivial differences in wording. The same goes for the distinction between "burn them" (Moroni) and "burn them up" (Malachi). Even if we considered the difference significant, one of our Zenos texts has "up," and the other two do not, leaving it ambiguous whether or not Zenos himself used that word.

The only really significant between Malachi and Moroni in this verse is that Malachi has the wicked burned by "the day that cometh," while in Moroni's version it is "they that come" -- apparently some group of people or angels or something -- that will do the burning. Of our three Zenos texts, one sidesteps the question by using the passive ("they must be burned"), one strongly implies that it is "the day" that brings the fire, and one matches Malachi exactly: "the day that cometh shall burn them up." None of them suggests Moroni's version, where it is a group of beings that perform the burning.

So Moroni's Malachi differs from (1) the Book of Malachi in our Bibles, (2) the Malachi chapters dictated by Jesus in the Book of Mormon, and (3) the hypothetical Zenos text Malachi seems to have been quoting or alluding to. To this list we can add (4) Joseph Smith's inspired revision of Malachi, as the Prophet's only comment on the book in his Bible revision manuscript is "Malicah Correct."

What about the possibility that Moroni had access to scripture from elsewhere? In my 2025 post "Did Mormon have the New Testament?" I make the case that the Three Nephites, who travel incognito among all peoples, have delivered to Mormon what he strongly implies that he has: "all the scriptures which give an account of all the marvelous works of Christ" (3 Ne. 28:33). Could they also have provided him with a variant Malachi text from some distant nation?

Even if that were so, though, it's hard to see why Moroni would have quoted that version of the text in preference to the one dictated by Jesus Christ himself. What authority could possibly trump that?

My best guess at this point is that Jesus Christ was the source of Moroni's modified version of Malachi. After Jesus has dictated the words of Malachi, we read:

And now it came to pass that when Jesus had told these things [i.e. dictated Malachi 3-4] he expounded them unto the multitude . . . .

And now there cannot be written in this book even a hundredth part of the things which Jesus did truly teach unto the people; but behold the plates of Nephi do contain the more part of the things which he taught the people.

And these things have I written, which are a lesser part of the things which he taught the people; and I have written them to the intent that they may be brought again unto this people, from the Gentiles, according to the words which Jesus hath spoken. And when they shall have received this, which is expedient that they should have first, to try their faith, and if it shall so be that they shall believe these things then shall the greater things be made manifest unto them (3 Ne. 26:1, 6-9).

Jesus did not provide a different text of Malachi; the text we have is correct. What he did do was expound upon the esoteric meaning of that text. Jesus' commentary on Malachi was among the "greater things" which were written on the Plates of Nephi (which Moroni had) but not included in the Book of Mormon. Malachi never wrote that "they that come shall burn them" or that Elijah will "reveal unto you the Priesthood," but that was the meaning given to his words by Jesus. Moroni did not quote Malachi verbatim but paraphrased sometimes, incorporating Jesus' commentary, in order to communicate something to Joseph Smith that would not have been apparent from the unadorned biblical text.

By the way, I believe quoting and commenting on Malachi would be very much in character for Jesus. In my 2022 post "Reasons to think Jesus read Malachi 2:1-3:1 in the Temple," I make the case that a large part of John 7 consists of commentary on Malachi. It would appear that at Bountiful he picked up where he had left off and did the next two chapters.

There is no Second Coming in the Book of Mormon

One of the reasons my blog Fourth Gospel First has been paused for so long is that I am engaging primarily with the Book of Mormon now, and the perspective of the two books differs enough to raise questions about how to harmonize them and which should really be put "first." One thing they have in common, though, is a virtual silence on the subject of the Second Coming of Jesus -- which is interesting given how important the idea of an imminent Second Coming would become in the movement that came to be associated with the name Mormon. The CJCLDS's Topical Guide entry for "Jesus Christ, Second Coming" lists 57 scripture references, of which zero are from the Fourth Gospel and only one from the Book of Mormon.

Although the Topical Guide overlooks it, I believe there is one reference to the Second Coming in the Fourth Gospel, though it is in the 21st chapter, which was likely not part of the original Gospel:

Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved . . . Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, "Lord, and what shall this man do?"

Jesus saith unto him, "If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me."

Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, "He shall not die"; but, "If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?" (John 21:20-23)

This is at the very end of the Gospel, after Jesus has already lived, died, and risen from the dead, and yet he still speaks of some future time when he will "come." His followers associated tarrying till he comes with not dying, which may imply that they understood the Second Coming to be in the distant future, such that no mortal then living could expect to live long enough to see it. Alternatively, it could mean they expected that those alive at the Second Coming would be "twinkled" into immortality as described by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:51-53 and thus would not die. At any rate, some sort of Second Coming is definitely indicated. However, as noted, Chapter 21 probably isn't really part of the original Fourth Gospel.

The one Second Coming verse listed from the Book of Mormon is 3 Ne. 27:16. Here it is in context:

And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross; and after that I had been lifted up upon the cross, that I might draw all men unto me, that as I have been lifted up by men even so should men be lifted up by the Father, to stand before me, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil -- And for this cause have I been lifted up; therefore, according to the power of the Father I will draw all men unto me, that they may be judged according to their works. And it shall come to pass, that whoso repenteth and is baptized in my name shall be filled; and if he endureth to the end, behold, him will I hold guiltless before my Father at that day when I shall stand to judge the world (3 Ne. 27:14-16).

This certainly refers to a future "judgment day," but only if we smuggle in assumptions from outside the Book does that necessarily imply a Second Coming. Jesus says nothing here about his returning to Earth. On the contrary, he repeatedly emphasizes that all men will "stand before" Jesus to be judged because they are "lifted up" by God and "drawn unto" him. In other words, we go to him; he doesn't come to us. It's logically possible that Jesus could be on Earth rather than in Heaven when this happens, but nothing in the text suggests that.

Aside from that one verse, there are a few chapters, quoting Isaiah and Malachi, which are said in the chapter headings added by the CJCLDS to refer to the Second Coming. But, like 3 Ne. 27, they don't, unless you assume they do. As I wrote in "Jesus and the Messianic prophecies: Summary and conclusions" after going through all the Messianic material in the Old Testament, "There is not the slightest hint in Old Testament prophecy that the Messiah will come twice."

To my mind, this passage from the Book of Mormon seems to rule out a Second Coming:

Wherefore, he shall bring forth his words unto them [the Jews], which words shall judge them at the last day, for they shall be given them for the purpose of convincing them of the true Messiah, who was rejected by them; and unto the convincing of them that they need not look forward any more for a Messiah to come, for there should not any come, save it should be a false Messiah which should deceive the people; for there is save one Messiah spoken of by the prophets, and that Messiah is he who should be rejected of the Jews (2 Ne. 25:18).

This is pretty unambiguous: "there should not any [Messiah] come, save it should be" -- Jesus coming back a second time? No -- "a false Messiah which should deceive the people."

I may have missed something, just as the Topical Guide people missed John 21, so if you think there's anything in the Book of Mormon that suggests there will be a Second Coming, do leave a comment.

Update: Almost immediately after publishing this, I did think of a counterexample. I don't know how I didn't think of it before, what with mentioning the Beloved Disciple and "twinkling" and all that.

Therefore, more blessed are ye, for ye shall never taste of death; but ye shall live to behold all the doings of the Father unto the children of men, even until all things shall be fulfilled according to the will of the Father, when I shall come in my glory with the powers of heaven. And ye shall never endure the pains of death; but when I shall come in my glory ye shall be changed in the twinkling of an eye from mortality to immortality; and then shall ye be blessed in the kingdom of my Father (3 Ne. 28:7-8).

"When I shall come in my glory" is pretty clearly a Second Coming.

Identifying the 1 Zenos texts

Acknowledgments: My starting point for this analysis was "What is Malachi doing in 1st and 2nd Nephi?," a Reddit post by someone using the handle stisa79, which Bill Wright brought to my attention; and "Samuel the Lamanite, Christ, and Zenos: A Study of Intertextuality," an Interpreter article by Quinten Barney, which was brought to my attention by a commenter using the handle jason (who, I should probably mention, strongly disagrees with Barney and calls his theory "blasphemy"). My earlier analysis, "Zenos was quoted by Joel, Nephi, Alma, Malachi, and Paul," was published in 2024 but failed to include two key secondary texts.

⁂

1. The Zenos fragments in 1 Nephi 19

The first reference to Zenos in the Book of Mormon is in 1 Nephi 19, where Nephi quotes or paraphrases him extensively.

[10] And the God of our fathers, who were led out of Egypt, out of bondage, and also were preserved in the wilderness by him, yea, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, yieldeth himself, according to the words of the angel, as a man, into the hands of wicked men, to be lifted up, according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified, according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially given unto those who are of the house of Israel.

[11] For thus spake the prophet: The Lord God surely shall visit all the house of Israel at that day, some with his voice, because of their righteousness, unto their great joy and salvation, and others with the thunderings and the lightnings of his power, by tempest, by fire, and by smoke, and vapor of darkness, and by the opening of the earth, and by mountains which shall be carried up.

[12] And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.

[13] And as for those who are at Jerusalem, saith the prophet, they shall be scourged by all people, because they crucify the God of Israel, and turn their hearts aside, rejecting signs and wonders, and the power and glory of the God of Israel.

[14] And because they turn their hearts aside, saith the prophet, and have despised the Holy One of Israel, they shall wander in the flesh, and perish, and become a hiss and a byword, and be hated among all nations.

[15] Nevertheless, when that day cometh, saith the prophet, that they no more turn aside their hearts against the Holy One of Israel, then will he remember the covenants which he made to their fathers.

[16] Yea, then will he remember the isles of the sea; yea, and all the people who are of the house of Israel, will I gather in, saith the Lord, according to the words of the prophet Zenos, from the four quarters of the earth.

[17] Yea, and all the earth shall see the salvation of the Lord, saith the prophet; every nation, kindred, tongue and people shall be blessed.

In v. 10, Nephi cites, in rapid succession, an angel, Zenock, Neum, and Zenos. In the remained of the passage, he alternates between citing "the prophet" and "the prophet Zenos." I think the most reasonable assumption is that all these references to an unnamed "prophet" also refer to Zenos. However, I do not think 1 Ne. 19:10b-17 represents a single extended quotation. The repeated interpolation of "saith the prophet" and similar expressions suggests that Nephi is stringing together bits and pieces of Zenos material, perhaps with some paraphrasing. Just after this Zenos material, Nephi will go on to quote two whole chapters of Isaiah (1 Ne. 20-21 = Isa. 48-49), introducing it with "Hear ye the words of the prophet" (1 Ne. 19:24) but then never interrupting Isaiah to say "saith the prophet" or anything similar. Nor do the Book of Mormon's other extensive quotations from Zenos (Jacob 5, Alma 33:4-11) contain any such interruptions.

If the Zenos quotations in 1 Ne. 19 are fragmentary, is there any way of reconstructing more of the original text (the hypothetical "1 Zenos") from which Nephi was drawing?

⁂

2. An example of reconstruction from partial quotations

For the purposes of a thought experiment, I used the BYU Scripture Citation Index to find four talks by Mormon leaders in which they quoted or paraphrased parts of Matthew 5:11-12.

Now imagine that, centuries in the future, the original Sermon on the Mount has been lost, and all we have are these talks. Imagine further that the talks have come down to us without the quotation marks and ellipses and footnotes, so that we are left to infer what is a direct quotation, what is a paraphrase, and what is the speaker's own words.

Hanks cites his source as "the Sermon on the Mount" but appears to be summarizing it rather than quoting it in any detail. However, we notice that Lee and Andersen have some of the same language as Hanks, in the same order, and infer that they are referencing that same sermon. Hanks doesn't say anything about being "blessed" or about the persecution of "The prophets which were before you," but since Lee and Anderson share this language, and juxtapose it with language we have already identified as coming from the Sermon on the Mount, we can conclude that this other shared language is from the Sermon as well.

Notice that Packer doesn't use any of the language that Hanks does -- Hanks being our only source that explicitly claims to be referencing the Sermon on the Mount. Nevertheless, by noticing a parallel between Packer and Andersen, after having already concluded that the Andersen passage is quoting the Sermon, we can infer that Packer is likely quoting the Sermon as well.

In our efforts to reconstruct as much as we can of the Sermon on the Mount, we can call Hanks a primary text because we know for sure that it comes from the Sermon. Lee and Andersen are secondary texts, whose connection to the Sermon we infer from their similarity to a primary text. Finally, Packer is a tertiary text, considered to be possible Sermon material because of its parallels with a secondary text.

We could summarize our conclusions about the likely content of the Sermon on the Mount as follows:

The P column is from a primary text, so we are highly confident that it reflects the Sermon. The S + S column contains material that is not in a primary text but occurs in two different secondary texts and is thus also very likely to be from the Sermon. The third column has material that only appears in one secondary text and thus may or may not be from the Sermon. Is "for my sake" something Andersen added himself, or is it Sermon material only he quoted? We can't be sure.

Note that, though "for great is your reward in heaven" appears in two of our texts, we put it in the S column and not an S + T column. That's because this line is our only reason for considering Packer to be a tertiary text in the first place, so it would be circular reasoning to take its presence in Packer as additional evidence that it is from the Sermon.

Finally, the T column has material which only occurs in one tertiary text. If these four talks were really all we had, I would not be at all confident in concluding that this T material came from the Sermon -- unless it filled a conceptual gap, that is, unless the reconstructed text just made more sense with it included, which I don't think is true in this case.

In fact, of course, everything in the tables above does come from the Sermon on the Mount. This has just been a thought experiment to show how we might reconstruct parts of a lost Sermon, and how our confidence in the inclusion of various lines might vary.

The Zenos fragments in 1 Nephi 19 are our primary text, our Hanks. The next step is to look for potential secondary texts -- other passages in the Bible or Book of Mormon that closely parallel the primary text. 

⁂

3. Secondary texts

Much of the language in 1 Nephi 19 (P, our primary text) has parallels elsewhere in the Bible and Book of Mormon. Four secondary texts emerged as potentially informative: Joel 2 (S1, our first secondary text), Matthew 23-24 (S2), 2 Nephi 25-26 (S3), and Helaman 13-15 (S4).

3.1. Joel 2 (S1)

First, we have this brief but fairly specific parallel with Joel 2:

by fire, and by smoke, and vapor of darkness (P: 1 Ne. 19:11)

fire and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness (S1: Joel 2:30-31)

We have the three elements fire, smoke, and darkness in the same order. Also, where the Hebrew text of Joel has וְתִֽימֲר֖וֹת "pillars," the Septuagint (a third-century Greek translation, possibly reflecting an ancient variant Hebrew text) has ἀτμίδα "vapor," matching the 1 Zenos text (but also matching the Septuagint quotation from Joel in Acts 2:19, so this isn't a "How could Joseph Smith have known that?" moment).

3.2. Matthew 23-24 (S2)

A more extensive parallel is found with the words of Jesus in Matthew. First, the two texts refer to the necessity of what they predict in nearly the same language:

all these things must surely come (P: 1 Ne. 19:12)

all these things must come to pass (S2: Matt. 24:6)

Second, they each juxtapose signs with power and glory:

signs and wonders, and the power and glory of the God of Israel (P: 1 Ne. 19:13).

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man . . . and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (S2: Matt. 24:30).

Third, they each predict that the Jews will be killed and hated by all nations:

they shall wander in the flesh, and perish, . . . and be hated among all nations (P: 1 Ne. 19:14).

Then shall they . . . kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations (S2: Matt. 24:9).

Fourth, they each talk about people being gathered from "four" places (meaning, figuratively, from all over):

all the people who are of the house of Israel, will I gather in . . . from the four quarters of the earth (P: 1 Ne. 19:16).

they shall gather together his elect from the four winds (S2: Matt. 24:31)

The Joel and Matthew secondary texts share the specific detail of the sun being darkened and something also happening to the moon:

The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood (S1: Joel 2:31)

shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light (S2: Matt. 24:29)

This detail is not in the 1 Nephi 19 fragments, though it is implied by the general prediction of "darkness." The specific reference to the sun, at least, will prove to be important when we bring in the tertiary texts.

3.3. 2 Nephi 25-26 (S3)

Another secondary text is found in 2 Nephi 25-26. Chapters 12-24 comprise an extended quotation from Isaiah, and Chapter 27 is also an Isaiah commentary, it is not surprising that Chapters 25-26 should also include quotations from and commentary on a prophet, in this case possibly Zenos.

First, each text talks about a divine figure being in a sepulchre, and this is juxtaposed with a reference to a period of three days. The details in the two texts complement one another. 1 Ne. 19 says there will be three days of darkness at his death, and 2 Ne. 25 he will only be dead for three days and then rise from the dead. Neither text by itself says that it will be dark while he is in the sepulchre and light again when he comes out, but that seems to be what the original 1 Zenos text was saying. As we will see later, this is connected with the one in the sepulchre being metaphorically a "sun."

to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death (P: 1 Ne. 19:10)

and after he is laid in a sepulchre for the space of three days he shall rise from the dead with healing in his wings (S3: 2 Ne. 25:13)

Second, each passage describes the Lord "visiting" people with thunderings, lightnings, fire, storms, the earth opening up, and mountains moving. The parallels are very extensive here.

The Lord God surely shall visit all the house of Israel at that day, some with his voice . . . and others with the thunderings and the lightnings of his power, by tempest, by fire, . . . and by the opening of the earth, and by mountains which shall be carried up (P: 1 Ne. 19:11).

And they that kill the prophets, and the saints, the depths of the earth shall swallow them up, saith the Lord of Hosts; and mountains shall cover them, and whirlwinds shall carry them away . . . . And they shall be visited with thunderings, and lightnings, and earthquakes . . . for the fire of the anger of the Lord shall be kindled against them (S3: 2 Ne. 26:5-6).

Third, each predicts that the Jews will be "scourged" by other peoples, and this is associated with their rejection of God or Christ. Again, the details are complementary. In 1 Ne. 19, we are told that this punishment comes because they rejected and crucified God. In 2 Ne. 25, we are told that the punishment will continue until they accept Christ, which would make sense if their rejection of Christ was the reason for the punishment.

And as for those who are at Jerusalem, saith the prophet, they shall be scourged by all people, because they crucify the God of Israel, and turn their hearts aside, rejecting signs and wonders, and the power and glory of the God of Israel (P: 1 Ne. 19:13).

And after they have been scattered, and the Lord God hath scourged them by other nations . . . until they shall be persuaded to believe in Christ (S3: 2 Ne. 25:16).

3.4. Helaman 13-15 (S4)

Probably the most extensive parallels of all are found in Helaman 14. This is part of Samuel the Lamanite's Sermon on the Wall, which comprises Chapters 13-15. This raises some question marks, since the brass plates were kept by the Nephites, and we would not normally expect a Lamanite to be familiar with them.

First, both texts give three days of darkness as a sign of the death of God/Jesus. Both texts specify that the sign is intended for distant isles, not for those in Jerusalem. In 1 Ne. 19, the sign is for those who "inhabit the isles of the sea"; in Hel. 14:20, it is only "upon the face of this land" -- i.e. the Nephites' land, said to be "upon an isle of the sea" in 1 Ne. 10:20 -- that there will be no light.

concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea (P: 1 Ne. 19:10)

concerning another sign, a sign of his death, . . . there shall be no light upon the face of this land, even from the time that he shall suffer death, for the space of three days, to the time that he shall rise again from the dead (S4: Hel. 14:20)

However, Samuel later seems to say that the darkness will be worldwide:

darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days (S4: Hel. 14:27)

Second, the two texts give a similar list, in the same order, of natural phenomena that are to occur at the time of his death:

with the thunderings and the lightnings . . . by tempests . . . and by mountains which shall be carried up (P: 1 Ne. 19:11)

there shall be thunderings and lightnings . . . there shall be great tempests . . . and there shall be many places which are now called valleys which shall become mountains, whose height is great (S4: Hel. 14:21, 23)

Third, they both refer to rocks rending, with Samuel going into some detail:

the rocks of the earth must rend (P: 1 Ne. 19:12)

the rocks which are upon the face of this earth, which are both above the earth and beneath, which ye know at this time are solid, or the more part of it is one solid mass,shall be broken up; yea, they shall be rent in twain, and shall ever after be found in seams and in cracks, and in broken fragments upon the face of the whole earth, yea, both above the earth and beneath (S4: Hel. 14:21-22)

It was specifically Matthew 24 and Helaman 14 that we identified as having clear links to 1 Nephi 19. For those two secondary texts' links to each other -- which are very extensive -- we will have to go beyond chapter boundaries (which are artificial anyway and not part of the original documents) and compare Jesus' discourse in Matt. 23-24 with Samuel's in Hel. 13-15.

First, both discourses refer to "blind guides," an expression found nowhere else in scripture:

Woe unto you, ye blind guides (S2: Matt. 23:16)

 

Ye blind guides (S2: Matt. 23:24)

Yea, how long will ye suffer yourselves to be led by foolish and blind guides? (S4: Hel. 13:19)

Second, they condemn the people's killing and mistreatment of past prophets, hitting the main points in the same order:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets . . . And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. . . . Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city . . . thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee (S2: Matt. 23:29-30, 34, 37)

Yea, wo unto this people, because of this time which has arrived, that ye do cast out the prophets, and do mock them, and cast stones at them, and do slay them . . . ye say: If our days had been in the days of our fathers of old, we would not have slain the prophets; . . . if a prophet come among you . . . ye are angry with him, and cast him out and seek all manner of ways to destroy him . . . O that I had repented, and had not killed the prophets, and stoned them (S4: Hel. 13:24-26, 33)

It is plausible that Zenos would deliver such a diatribe, since he himself was a prophet who was persecuted and ultimately killed: "the prophet Zenos did testify boldly; for the which he was slain" (Hel. 8:19). Samuel and Jesus faced similar threats, and their quoting Zenos would add a layer of irony: You say you wouldn't have killed the prophets like your ancestors did, but your ancestors who killed the prophet Zenos said the same thing about their prophet-killing ancestors! Both discourses specifically mention the stoning of prophets. Zenock, who is never mentioned without Zenos and may have been an associate (cf. Elijah and Elisha), was stoned to death (Alma 33:17).

Third, both discourses speak of houses being left desolate, in almost identical language:

Behold, your house is left unto you desolate (S2: Matt. 23:38)

your houses shall be left unto you desolate (S4: Hel. 15:1)

Finally, both pronounce woes on pregnant and nursing mothers:

And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! (S2: Matt. 24:19)

your women shall have great cause to mourn in the day that they shall give suck. . . . and woe unto them which are with child (S4: Hel. 15:2)

The parallels between the Matthew and Helaman texts are so extensive and specific that some sort of textual relationship is undeniable. To skeptics, of course, it's just Joseph Smith plagiarizing the New Testament. Postulating that Jesus and Samuel were both quoting some hypothetical earlier prophet, whose works have conveniently disappeared, would be pure special pleading were it not for the Zenos links. But these links are not obvious, as nothing in the text draws attention to them, and it seems extremely unlikely that Joseph Smith would have worked them in on purpose to give himself an out if accused of plagiarism -- an out which he never used and which was never even discovered until the Internet age. (This is not an attempt at an apologetic. The basic validity of the Book of Mormon is assumed here, not argued for.)

The Helaman text also has links to 2 Ne. 25-26, as both prophecy destruction after the fourth generation from the coming of Christ.

and many of the fourth generation shall have passed away in righteousness. And when these things have passed away a speedy destruction cometh unto my people (S3: 2 Ne. 26:9-10)

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 (S4: Hel. 13:10)

First, both texts condemn the mistreatment of the prophets, listing the same three actions in the same order.

they perish because they cast out the prophets, and the saints, and stone them, and slay them (S3: 2 Ne. 26:3)

Yea, wo unto this people, because of this time which has arrived, that ye do cast out the prophets, and do mock them, and cast stones at them, and do slay them (S4: Hel. 13:24)

Second, both speak of choosing darkness rather than light:

they yield unto the devil and choose works of darkness rather than light (S3: 2 Ne. 26:10)

how long will ye choose darkness rather than light? (S4: Hel. 13:29)

Third, both refer to the anger of the Lord being kindled against people:

the fire of the anger of the Lord shall be kindled against them (S3: 2 Ne. 26:6)

the anger of the Lord is already kindled against you (S4: Hel. 13:30)

Fourth, both mention signs of Jesus' coming and of his death:

And after the Messiah shall come there shall be signs given unto my people of his birth, and also of his death and resurrection (S3: 2 Ne. 26:3)

this will I give unto you for a sign at the time of his coming (S4: Hel. 14:3)

And behold, again, another sign I give unto you, yea, a sign of his death (S4: Hel. 14:14)

Fifth, both mention the Lamanites dwindling in unbelief and being smitten, but ultimately being shown mercy. Samuel explicitly references Zenos at this point:

After my seed and the seed of my brethren [the Lamanites] shall have dwindled in unbelief, and shall have been smitten by the Gentiles; yea, after the Lord God shall have camped against them round about, and shall have laid siege against them with a mount, and raised forts against them; and after they shall have been brought down low in the dust, even that they are not, yet the words of the righteous shall be written, and the prayers of the faithful shall be heard, and all those who have dwindled in unbelief shall not be forgotten (S3: 2 Ne. 26:15).

Yea, even if they should dwindle in unbelief the Lord shall prolong their days, until the time shall come which hath been spoken of by our fathers, and also by the prophet Zenos, and many other prophets, concerning the restoration of our brethren, the Lamanites, again to the knowledge of the truth -- Yea, I say unto you, that in the latter times the promises of the Lord have been extended to our brethren, the Lamanites; and notwithstanding the many afflictions which they shall have, and notwithstanding they shall be driven to and fro upon the face of the earth, and be hunted, and shall be smitten and scattered abroad, having no place for refuge, the Lord shall be merciful unto them (S4: Hel. 15:11-12).

Zenos lived before there were any such people as the Lamanites, but one of his prophecies must later have been interpreted as referring to them.

4. Tertiary texts

To summarize so far, our primary text for 1 Zenos is 1 Nephi 19 (P). Secondary texts include Joel 2 (S1), Matthew 23-24 (S2), 2 Nephi 25-26 (S3), and Helaman 13-15 (S4). Each of these has links both to the primary text and to at least one of the other secondary texts.

We now come to tertiary texts, which are linked to one or more of the secondary texts, and perhaps also to each other, but not directly to the primary text. The tertiary texts identified so far are Malachi 4 (T1), 1 Corinthians 3 (T2), 1 Nephi 22 (T3), and Alma 45 (T4).

4.1. Malachi 4 (T1)

Malachi 4 has links to two of our secondary texts: Joel 2 and 2 Nephi 25-26. With Joel it shares this distinctive expression ("terrible" and "dreadful" being alternate translations of the same Hebrew word):

The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come (S1: Joel 2:31)

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord (T1: Mal. 4:5)

Note that the two texts differ on what will happen before the great and terrible day.

The parallels with 2 Ne. 25-26 are more extensive. First, they both represent someone or something rising with healing in his wings. Second, if we assume that "Son" in the Book of Mormon is a scribal error for the homophone "Sun," both texts identify this healing figure as the Sun of righteousness.

he shall rise from the dead, with healing in his wings (S3: 2 Ne. 25:13)

But the Son of righteousness shall appear unto them; and he shall heal them (S3: 2 Ne. 26:9)

But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings (T1: Mal. 4:2)

Third, we have these very closely parallel passages about the proud and wicked being burned as stubble by the coming day:

Wherefore, all those who are proud, and that do wickedly, the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of Hosts, for they shall be as stubble (S3: 2 Ne. 26:4)

and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts (T1: Mal. 4:1)

4.2. 1 Corinthians 3 (T2)

Both 2 Nephi 26 and Malachi 4 are linked to 1 Corinthians 3 via "the day" that shall burn things, including "stubble":

Wherefore, all those who are proud, and that do wickedly, the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of Hosts, for they shall be as stubble (S3: 2 Ne. 26:4).

For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch (T1: Mal. 4:1).

Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss (T2: 1 Cor. 3:12-13, 15)

4.3. 1 Nephi 22 (T3)

There are extensive links connected 1 Nephi 22 to several secondary and tertiary texts. Nephi also repeatedly cites "the prophet," confirming that he is quoting or alluding to someone else's words.

Otherwise unique language about something being "poured out" "upon all" occurs in Joel 2 and 1 Ne. 22. What is poured out is very different, though:

I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh (S1: Joel 2:28)

the wrath of God shall be poured out upon all the children of men (T3: 1 Ne. 22:16)

This use of the same expression to express both a curse (pouring out wrath) and a blessing (pouring out the spirit) is in fact typical of the biblical prophets. As Rachel Margalioth writes:

As this study proves, each prophet expresses praise and blessing by converting derogatory phrases of his own to the good, employing phrases characteristic of his book alone. Consequently, even if we did not know the authorship of a prophecy of comfort such as "Then will I build you, and not break you down, and will plant you and not pluck you up" (Jeremiah XLII:10), it would still be ascribed to Jeremiah -- for only in his book are to be found these very phrases in the contrary meanings: "Behold, that which I have built will I break down, and that which I have planted I will pluck up" (Jeremiah XLV:4; and also XXIV:6). . . . This mode of converting prophecies from doom to solace, and vice versa, with the same verbiage for both, proven customary in the prophetic books -- is never the case with two different prophets. We have no example of one prophet expressing good or evil by inverting the expressions of another (The Indivisible Isaiah, pp. 38-39).

Actually, I think we do have one example of a prophet inverting the expressions of another: Joel writes "Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears" (Joel 3:10), inverting Isaiah's "they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks" (Isa. 2:4; also Micah 4:3). Conveniently, it is Joel that is the one exception to Margalioth's generalization. Either Zenos is inverting his own expression, as prophets are known to do, with one version quoted by Nephi and the other by Joel; or else Joel is inverting Zenos, as Joel is known to do. Either way, Joel is evidence that Nephi is in fact quoting Zenos.

Both Matt. 24 and 1 Ne. 22 juxtapose "power and great glory" with a gathering from four places:

and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds (S2: Matt. 24:30-31)

and the Holy One of Israel must reign in dominion, and might, and power, and great glory. And he gathereth his children from the four quarters of the earth (T3: 1 Ne. 22:24-25)

Very similar language is used in 2 Nephi 26, Malachi 4, 1 Corinthians 3, and 1 Nephi 22 to describe the proud and wicked burning as stubble. An additional link between 1 Cor. 3 and 1 Ne. 22 is the reference to being "saved . . . as by fire."

Wherefore, all those who are proud, and that do wickedly, the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of Hosts, for they shall be as stubble (S3: 2 Ne. 26:4).

For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch (T1: Mal. 4:1).

Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire (T2: 1 Cor. 3:12-13, 15) 

For behold, saith the prophet, the time cometh speedily that Satan shall have no more power over the hearts of the children of men; for the day soon cometh that all the proud and they who do wickedly shall be as stubble; and the day cometh that they must be burned . . . Wherefore, he will preserve the righteous by his power, even if it so be that the fulness of his wrath must come, and the righteous be preserved, even unto the destruction of their enemies by fire. Wherefore, the righteous need not fear; for thus saith the prophet, they shall be saved, even if it so be as by fire (T3: 1 Ne. 22:15, 17).

Given the parallels, we can assume that "the prophet" cited in 1 Ne. 22:15 is Zenos and that the part about Satan having no more power over human hearts is also from Zenos.

Both 2 Ne. 26 and 1 Ne. 22 speak of being brought low in the dust and destroyed. The latter text attributes this language to "the prophet":

they shall have been brought down low in the dust, even that they are not (S3: 2 Ne. 26:15)

they are those who must be brought low in the dust; they are those who must be consumed as stubble; and this is according to the words of the prophet (T3: 1 Ne. 22:23)

Mal. 4 and 1 Ne. 22 use similar language about "calves of the stall":

and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall (T1: Mal. 4:1).

the righteous must be led up as calves of the stall (T3: 1 Ne. 22:24).

4.4. Alma 45 (T4)

Alma 45 uses the "great and dreadful day" language of Joel 2 and Malachi 4:

The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come (S1: Joel 2:31)

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord (T1: Mal. 4:5)

But whosoever remaineth, and is not destroyed in that great and dreadful day, shall be numbered among the Lamanites (T4: Alma 45:14)

Both 2 Nephi 26 and Alma 45 juxtapose works of darkness with the passing away of the fourth generation.

and many of the fourth generation shall have passed away in righteousness. And when these things have passed away a speedy destruction cometh unto my people; . . . for because they yield unto the devil and choose works of darkness rather than light, therefore they must go down to hell (S3: 2 Ne. 26:9-10)

Yea, and this because they shall dwindle in unbelief and fall into the works of darkness, and lasciviousness, and all manner of iniquities; yea, I say unto you, that because they shall sin against so great light and knowledge, yea, I say unto you, that from that day, even the fourth generation shall not all pass away before this great iniquity shall come (T4: Alma 45:12)

Both Helaman 13 and Alma 45 prophecy war, famine, and pestilence 400 years after the coming of Christ, ending in the extinction of the Nephites before the fourth generation has passed away. One problem with attributing this commonality to Zenos, though, is that both prophets explicitly present this as something that was revealed to them personally (highlighted in blue). My interpretation of this would be that, since Zenos obviously didn't prophesy specifically about "Nephites," it is through their own revelations that Alma and Samuel know to what time and people Zenos was referring.

And he said unto them: Behold, I, Samuel, a Lamanite, do speak the words of the Lord which he doth put into my heart; and behold he hath put it into my heart to say unto this people that the sword of justice hangeth over this people; and four hundred years pass not away save the sword of justice falleth upon this people. . . . And four hundred years shall not pass away before I will cause that they shall be smitten; yea, I will visit them with the sword and with famine and with pestilence. 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 (S4: Hel. 13:5, 9-10).

Behold, I perceive that this very people, the Nephites, according to the spirit of revelation which is in me, in four hundred years from the time that Jesus Christ shall manifest himself unto them, shall dwindle in unbelief. Yea, and then shall they see wars and pestilences, yea, famines and bloodshed, even until the people of Nephi shall become extinct . . . I say unto you, that from that day, even the fourth generation shall not all pass away before this great iniquity shall come (T4: Alma 45:10-12).

5. Summary

This diagram shows the nine texts considered here (1 primary, 4 secondary, 4 tertiary; 2 Old Testament, 2 New Testament, and 5 Book of Mormon) and how they are interrelated. As can be seen, each of the texts is linked to between three and six of the others

The next step after this preliminary analysis is to look at the major themes of these texts, try to harmonize the details in each of them, and reconstruct as far as possible the content of the hypothetical 1 Zenos document on which they all draw.

The Brass "five books of Moses" revisited

This is the standard reading of Nephi's list of what is included in the Plates of Brass (1 Ne. 5:11-13):

And he beheld that they did contain:

(1) the five books of Moses [Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy], which gave an account [in Genesis] of the creation of the world, and also of Adam and Eve, who were our first parents;

And also (2) a record of the Jews from the beginning, even down to the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah [parts of Judges, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles];

And also (3) the prophecies of the holy prophets, from the beginning, even down to the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah; and also many prophecies which have been spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah [Isaiah,  parts of Jeremiah, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah; plus other prophets like Zenos and Zenock].

In other words, the Brass Plates essentially contained the Old Testament, minus the post-exilic books, plus some other books we no longer have.

As discussed in "Moses and the Exodus: Where the Book of Mormon parts ways with the Torah," I doubt this. In that post, I emphasized that Nephi makes it sound as if all five books of Moses were about the Creation and Adam and Eve, when in fact only a few chapters of Genesis touch on those topics. I've just realized that another reading is possible, one in which Nephi is summarizing the content of each of the five books in turn:

And he beheld that they did contain the five books of Moses, which gave an account of:

(1) the creation of the world,

and also (2) of Adam and Eve, who were our first parents;

And also (3) a record of the Jews from the beginning, even down to the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah;

And also (4) the prophecies of the holy prophets, from the beginning, even down to the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah;

and also (5) many prophecies which have been spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah.

The main question this reading raises is why these would all be considered "books of Moses." If we allow ourselves a little flexibility with the punctuation, though, we can modify our reading slightly:

And he beheld that they did contain the five books:

(1) of Moses, which gave an account of the creation of the world,

and also (2) of Adam and Eve, who were our first parents;

And also (3) a record of the Jews from the beginning, even down to the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah, king of Judah;

And also (4) the prophecies of the holy prophets, from the beginning, even down to the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah;

and also (5) many prophecies which have been spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah.

In the King James English which the Book of Mormon so often imitates, a relative clause with which can refer to a person, as in the Lord's Prayer: "Our Father, which art in Heaven . . ." (Matt. 6:9). Under this reading, the five books of the Brass Plates would be: (1) Moses, (2) Adam and Eve, (3) the Jews, (4) the Holy Prophets, and (5) Jeremiah.

Note that I don't think we can assume from the Book of Mormon alone (taking the Bible to be unreliable) that Adam and Eve predated Moses. "Our first parents" is also used to refer to Lehi and Nephi at one point (Hel. 5:6), so it does not necessarily mean the first ancestors of the entire human race.

Idolatry or idleness

A few passages in the Book of Mormon appear to contain errors immediately followed by corrections. This is probably the most obvious instance:

. . . and thus we see that they buried their weapons of peace, or they buried the weapons of war, for peace (Alma 24:19).

Since "weapons of peace" doesn't make any sense, the "or" seems to be a correction, meaning "or rather." Since one can't easily erase an error once it has been engraved on a gold plate, it makes sense that errors would be corrected in this way. Alternatively, "weapons of peace" could have been Joseph Smith's slip of the tongue rather than a mistake on the plates, but that seems less likely, since his scribe could have just crossed out the incorrect phrase and written the correct one. The mistake itself could have been made in any language, though.

The following example from Alma, though, seems like it must have been a slip of the tongue on Joseph's part, since it is only in English that idolatry and idleness sound similar.

For those who did not belong to their church did indulge themselves in sorceries, and in idolatry or idleness, and in babblings, and in envyings and strife . . . (Alma 1:32).

This seems to be an error and correction because "idolatry or idleness" is such an odd expression otherwise. The two concepts seem to be unrelated, but they do sound similar in English. However, another possibility is that the text really is equating idolatry with idleness to make some point -- something along the lines of "fasting and prayer, or otherwise rejoicing and prayer" (D&C 59:14). Three other passages in the Book of Mormon, which pair idolatry with idleness but without using similar-sounding words, suggest that this is in fact the case:

Now they were a lazy and an idolatrous people; therefore they were desirous to bring us into bondage, that they might glut themselves with the labors of our hands; yea, that they might feast themselves upon the flocks of our fields (Mosiah 9:12).

Yea, and thus they were supported in their laziness, and in their idolatry, and in their whoredoms, by the taxes which king Noah had put upon his people; thus did the people labor exceedingly to support iniquity (Mosiah 11:6).

Thus they were a very indolent people, many of whom did worship idols, and the curse of God had fallen upon them because of the traditions of their fathers; notwithstanding the promises of the Lord were extended unto them on the conditions of repentance (Alma 17:15).

This juxtaposition does not occur in the Bible. The closest thing I can think of conceptually is the occasional references to idols as "vanities," for example:

They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation (Deut. 32:31).

The Hebrew words translated "vanities," and pretty clearly referring to the worship of "that which is not God," means "emptiness, futility, uselessness" and is thus conceptually akin to idleness. So perhaps that is the idea behind the "laziness and idolatry" passages in the Book of Mormon: useless people who worship useless things.