Thoughts on the murder of Laban

Nephi and his brothers have twice failed to obtain the plates of brass from Laban. The first time, Laman alone goes to Laban and simply asks for the plates; Laban refuses, calls him a robber, and threatens to kill him. The second time, the four brothers goes together, bringing gold and silver to offer in payment. Laban again refuses, throws them out, and sends servants to kill them. In fleeing, the brothers have no choice but to leave their gold and silver behind, "and it fell into the hands of Laban" (1 Ne. 3:26).

The third attempt famously ends with Nephi's decapitating the helpless Laban, whom he then impersonates in order to steal the plates. None of this was planned in advance, we are told, but Nephi nevertheless seems to have had a premonition that things would end with the "destruction" of Laban. Citing Moses as an example to encourage his brothers before this final attempt, Nephi concludes with, "Let us go up; the Lord is able to deliver us, even as our fathers [who left Egypt with Moses], and to destroy Laban, even as the Egyptians" (1 Ne. 4:3). He approaches Laban's house alone, with neither weapons nor money nor a clear plan, apparently counting on the Lord to come through with a Moses-style miracle.

And it was by night; and I caused that they should hide themselves without the walls. And after they had hid themselves, I, Nephi, crept into the city and went forth towards the house of Laban.

And I was led by the spirit, not knowing beforehand the things which I should do.

Nevertheless I went forth, and as I came near unto the house of Laban I beheld a man, and he had fallen to the earth before me, for he was drunken with wine.

And when I came to him I found that it was Laban (1 Ne. 4:5-8).

The standard Mormon reading is that "the spirit" that led Nephi was the Spirit of the Lord -- hence the capitalization in current editions -- but several commentators have pointed out that this is never made explicit in the text; it is only ever called "the spirit." Daymon Smith has proposed that it was a spirit associated with Makmahod, the sword which Laban wore and with which Nephi killed him. Corbin Volluz raises an even darker possibility with the Hamlet quote that serves as the title of his 2013 essay "'The Spirit That I Have Seen May Be The Devil' -- Nephi's Slaying of Laban." It has also been proposed that the "spirit" was only Nephi's own internal monologue, which is how most moderns would also understand the "gods" who moved the Homeric heroes, but in my judgment this possibility can be ruled out. In telling the story, Nephi distinguishes sharply between the words of the spirit and his own rationalizations, even though it would be in his interest to ascribe the latter to the spirit as well.

And I beheld his sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath thereof; and the hilt thereof was of pure gold, and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine, and I saw that the blade thereof was of the most precious steel.

And it came to pass that I was constrained by the spirit that I should kill Laban; but I said in my heart: Never at any time have I shed the blood of man. And I shrunk and would that I might not slay him (1 Ne. 4:9-10).

Nephi presents himself as unwilling to kill Laban, doing so in the end only because he was thus "constrained" -- that is, compelled or forced -- by the spirit. The spirit speaks only after Nephi has drawn Laban's sword, which is one of Daymon Smith's reasons for associating the spirit with the sword itself. It also raises a question, though: Why is Nephi, professedly unwilling to shed blood, unsheathing Laban's sword before the spirit has constrained him to kill? Is he drawn to the fine weapon by an irrepressible manly curiosity, like Achilles among the women? Is he planning to take it with him for self-defense as he sneaks into Laban's house to steal the plates? Possibly -- but the most natural reading is that the idea of murdering Laban has already occurred to Nephi by the time the spirit on his shoulder, be it angel or devil, chimes in.

And the spirit said unto me again: Behold the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands. Yea, and I also knew that he had sought to take away mine own life; yea, and he would not hearken unto the commandments of the Lord; and he also had taken away our property (1 Ne. 4:11).

The spirit first simply says, "Kill him," with no explanation given. The second time it offers that "the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands" -- not a moral justification, but a suggestion that Nephi's remarkable luck in finding Laban defenseless may not be luck but providence. If God didn't want you to kill him, why would he have made him so easy to kill? Note also that the spirit refers to "the Lord" in the third person, implying that it is not itself the Spirit of the Lord.

Nephi then begins to give his own rationalizations for the murder: that Laban had tried to kill him and had taken their property. As Corbin Volluz mentions in his essay, Nephi will go on to commit these very crimes against Laban, killing him and taking his property. When he goes on to put on Laban's clothes and speak in his voice, it perhaps underscores the deeper symbolic sense in which he has "become Laban." Nephi also says that Laban "would not hearken unto the commandments of the Lord," perhaps implying that Nephi and his brothers had told him that the Lord had commanded them to take the plates but that Laban had still refused to cooperate.

And it came to pass that the spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands; behold the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes. It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief.

And now, when I, Nephi, had heard these words, I remembered the words of the Lord which he spake unto me in the wilderness, saying that: Inasmuch as thy seed shall keep my commandments, they shall prosper in the land of promise. Yea, and I also thought that they could not keep the commandments of the Lord according to the law of Moses, save they should have the law. And I also knew that the law was engraven upon the plates of brass. And again, I knew that the Lord had delivered Laban into my hands for this cause -- that I might obtain the records according to his commandments.

Therefore I did obey the voice of the spirit, and took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword (1 Ne. 4:12-18).

After repeating its previous statements, the spirit adds that the Lord himself "slayeth the wicked," implying that therefore Nephi is justified in doing the same. What follows is clearly influenced by the New Testament and is thus textually suspect: "It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief." This echoes the language of Caiaphas as to why Jesus must die:

Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.

And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; and not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad (John 11:47-52).

This introduces further moral complications. On the one hand, Caiaphas is clearly proposing something wicked: that Jesus be killed for the crime of performing miracles, lest he become so popular as to be perceived as a threat to Rome and provoke violent retaliation. On the other hand, the Gospel author suggests that, due to his role as high priest, Caiaphas spoke more than he knew, and that his words had an unintended but truer meaning: that it was in fact good for Jesus to die in order to save his own nation and others.

Taking his words as he intended them, though, Caiaphas was wrong. Having Jesus executed did not save the Jews from the Romans, who in a matter of decades would raze Jerusalem and its Temple and kill or enslave most of the Jewish people. Nephi's hopes were to prove equally vain. What happened to his nation, the Nephites, in the end? The very fate that the murder of Laban was supposed to prevent: They "all dwindled in unbelief" (Ether 4:3), and then "they were all destroyed" (Morm. 8:2).

Daymon Smith in the final volume of his Cultural History of the Book of Mormon makes the provocative suggestion that the theft of the brass plates may have caused another nation, too, to dwindle in unbelief:

Moreover, we can suppose that the Brass Plates -- being removed from Jerusalem, immediately prior to its capture by Babylon -- also generated commentary and other metatext. Such metatext would've been preserved, carried to Babylon and eventually the gaps in the record were filled in by Babylonian traditions.

This, he says, would yield the Old Testament as we have it, a Babylonized "counterfeit" of the brass-plate records "which inscribes false traditions into scripture."

Who or what was the "spirit" that constrained Nephi to kill? How laudable or culpable was Nephi for obeying it? I don't have definitive answers to those questions, but I think it is clear that the acquisition of the brass plates came at a cost. "Should the first book in the Nephite record be subtitled, 'The Tragedy of Nephi'?" Corbin Volluz asks. It is certainly tempting to see in him a tragic hero in the classical mold: a good man doomed by a tragic error or hamartia, in this case the murder of Laban and the theft of the plates.