Did Mormon have the New Testament?

The Book of Mormon contains several lengthy quotations from the New Testament. For example, Moroni 7 quotes extensively from 1 Corinthians 13; and Moroni 10, from 1 Corinthians 12. These are generally seen as problematic, since it is assumed that the Book of Mormon peoples had no contact with the Old World after the 6th century BC and would therefore not have had any of the biblical books written after that time.

The one known exception to this is the second half of the Book of Malachi, which was written long after Lehi left Jerusalem, but which Jesus recited to the Nephites when he visited them (3 Ne. 24-25), explaining, "These scriptures, which ye had not with you, the Father commanded that I should give unto you" (3 Ne. 26:2). So we have at least once instance of Old World scripture being brought to the Nephites -- not by "contact" in the ordinary sense, but by a resurrected being for whom travel between continents is presumably not a problem.

Mormon lived in the 4th century AD, well after all the books of the Bible had been written. (In fact, the Council of Rome, which formally defined the Catholic canon and created "The Bible," occurred during Mormon's lifetime.) Is it possible that he had the New Testament, or at least parts of it, brought to him by resurrected or translated messengers?

I think the probability is high.

Just a few chapters after Jesus gives part of Malachi to the Nephites, Mormon has this to say about the Three Nephites -- the three disciples who were "transfigured" by Jesus so that they would not die.

[25] Behold, I was about to write the names of those who were never to taste of death, but the Lord forbade; therefore I write them not, for they are hid from the world.

[26] But behold, I have seen them, and they have ministered unto me.

[27] And behold they will be among the Gentiles, and the Gentiles shall know them not.

[28] They will also be among the Jews, and the Jews shall know them not.

[29] And it shall come to pass, when the Lord seeth fit in his wisdom that they shall minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them.

[30] And they are as the angels of God, and if they shall pray unto the Father in the name of Jesus they can show themselves unto whatsoever man it seemeth them good.

Here we learn that the Three Nephites are apparently able to travel around the world at will (just like the resurrected Jesus?). They visit both Jews and Gentiles incognito -- but to Mormon they have "ministered" more openly, since he has seen them and knows their names.

In what did this "ministering" consist? In Webster's 1828 dictionary, one definition of the verb minister is "to afford supplies; to give things needful." Is it possible that one of the things they supplied Mormon with was scriptures? As we continue reading, I think Mormon drops a broad hint to that effect.

[31] Therefore, great and marvelous works shall be wrought by them, before the great and coming day when all people must surely stand before the judgment-seat of Christ;

[32] Yea even among the Gentiles shall there be a great and marvelous work wrought by them, before that judgment day.

[33] And if ye had all the scriptures which give an account of all the marvelous works of Christ, ye would, according to the words of Christ, know that these things must surely come.

[34] And wo be unto him that will not hearken unto the words of Jesus, and also to them whom he hath chosen and sent among them; for whoso receiveth not the words of Jesus and the words of those whom he hath sent receiveth not him; and therefore he will not receive them at the last day;

Verse 33 strongly implies that Mormon believes he has special access to "all the scriptures which give an account of all the marvelous works of Christ" and "the words of Christ." This would surely include the New Testament. In context, the reference in v. 34 to "them whom [Jesus] hath chosen and sent among them" likely refers to the Three Nephites, and one of their roles is to deliver "the words of Jesus." If you put all the pieces together, I think Mormon is telling us that the Three Nephites, who travel freely among Jew and Gentile, have given him Christian scriptures to which he would not otherwise have access.

As if to underscore the connection, Mormon seems to draw on the New Testament in his account of the transfiguration of the Three Nephites earlier in 2 Ne. 28:

[12] And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words, he touched every one of them with his finger save it were the three who were to tarry, and then he departed.

[13] And behold, the heavens were opened, and they were caught up into heaven, and saw and heard unspeakable things.

[14] And it was forbidden them that they should utter; neither was it given unto them power that they could utter the things which they saw and heard;

[15] And whether they were in the body or out of the body, they could not tell; for it did seem unto them like a transfiguration of them, that they were changed from this body of flesh into an immortal state, that they could behold the things of God.

[16] But it came to pass that they did again minister upon the face of the earth; nevertheless they did not minister of the things which they had heard and seen, because of the commandment which was given them in heaven.

[17] And now, whether they were mortal or immortal, from the day of their transfiguration, I know not;

Compare this to Paul's language in 2 Corinthians 12:

[2] I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

[3] And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)

[4] How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

Is this deliberate -- telling the story of the Three Nephites using language delivered to him by the Three Nephites themselves?

The parallelism in Mosiah 9-10

Mosiah 10 repeats a large number of elements from Mosiah 9, mostly in the same order and often in nearly the same language. This was discovered by Ganesh Cherian, who discusses it on YouTube here, here, and here.

This is presented, particularly in the last video, as evidence against the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. The idea is that Joseph Smith had memorized "Mad Libs" style templates that he would use in dictating the text, and that in this case he used the same template twice in a row.

Of course, if only Mosiah 10 had repeated the elements in reverse order rather than in the same order as Mosiah 9, it would be an extended chiasmus, one of the apologists' favorite evidences for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. So I don't see why the repetition Cherian has found couldn't also be a form of literary parallelism used by the Nephites. In my mind, the fact the repeated series of elements comes immediately after the original makes the parallelism theory more plausible; if the two parallel series were in entirely different parts of the book, that would be more consistent with the Mad Libs theory.

Anyway, however you interpret them, the parallels are indisputably there in the text. The purpose of this post is to document them in text form for ease of reference, since it appears Cherian's own work is all in video format. (I also identify the specific parallels somewhat differently from Cherian, though he deserves 100% of the credit for noticing them.)

[9:7] And he also commanded that his people should depart out of the land, and (A) I and my people went into the land that we might possess it.

[9:8] And we began to build buildings, and to repair the walls of the city, yea, even the walls of the city of Lehi-Nephi, and the city of Shilom.

[9:9] And we began to (B) till the ground, yea, even with (C) all manner of seeds, with seeds of corn, and of wheat, and of barley, and with neas, and with sheum, and with seeds of (D) all manner of fruits; and (E) we did begin to multiply and prosper in the land.

[9:10] Now it was the cunning and the craftiness of king Laman, to bring my people into bondage, that he yielded up the land that we might possess it.

[9:11] Therefore it came to pass, that after we had dwelt in the land for the space of twelve years that king Laman began to grow uneasy, lest by any means my people should wax strong in the land, and that they could not overpower them and bring them into bondage.

[9:12] 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.

[9:13] Therefore (F) it came to pass that king Laman (G) began to stir up his people that they should contend with my people; therefore there (H) began to be wars and contentions in the land.

[9:14] For, in the thirteenth year of my reign in the land of Nephi, away (I) on the south of the land of Shilom, when my people were watering and feeding their flocks, and tilling their lands, a numerous host of Lamanites (J) came upon them and began to slay them, and to take off their flocks, and the corn of their fields.

[9:15] Yea, and it came to pass that they fled, all that were not overtaken, even into the city of Nephi, and did call upon me for protection.

[9:16] And it came to pass that I did (K) arm them with bows, (L) and with arrows, (M) with swords, (N) and with cimeters, and with clubs, (O) and with slings, and with all manner of weapons which we could invent, and I and my people did (P1) go forth against the Lamanites to battle.

[9:17] Yea, (Q) in the strength of the Lord did we (P2) go forth to battle against the Lamanites; for I and my people did cry mightily to the Lord that he would deliver us out of the hands of our enemies, for we were awakened to a remembrance of the deliverance of our fathers.

[9:18] And God did hear our cries and did answer our prayers; and we did go forth in his might; yea, we did (P3) go forth against the Lamanites, and in one day and a night we did slay three thousand and forty-three; we did slay them even until we had driven them out of our land. [. . .]

[9:19] And I, myself, with mine own hands, did help to bury their dead. And behold, to our great sorrow and lamentation, two hundred and seventy-nine of our brethren were slain.

[10:1] And it came to pass that we again began to establish the kingdom and (A′) we again began to possess the land in peace. And I caused that there should be weapons of war made of every kind, that thereby I might have weapons for my people against the time the Lamanites should come up again to war against my people.

[10:2] And I set guards round about the land, that the Lamanites might not come upon us again unawares and destroy us; and thus I did guard my people and my flocks, and keep them from falling into the hands of our enemies.

[10:3] And it came to pass that we did inherit the land of our fathers for many years, yea, for the space of twenty and two years. 

[10:4] And I did cause that the men should (B′) till the ground, and raise (C′) all manner of grain and (D′) all manner of fruit of every kind.

[10:5] And I did cause that the women should spin, and toil, and work, and work all manner of fine linen, yea, and cloth of every kind, that we might clothe our nakedness; and thus (E′) we did prosper in the land—thus we did have continual peace in the land for the space of twenty and two years.

[10:6] And (F′) it came to pass that king Laman died, and his son began to reign in his stead. And he (G′) began to stir his people up in rebellion against my people; therefore they (H′) began to prepare for war, and to come up to battle against my people.

[10:7] But I had sent my spies out round about the land of Shemlon, that I might discover their preparations, that I might guard against them, that they might not (J′) come upon my people and destroy them.

[10:8] And it came to pass that they came up (I′) upon the north of the land of Shilom, with their numerous hosts, men (K′) armed with bows, (L′) and with arrows, (M′) and with swords, (N′) and with cimeters, and with stones, (O′) and with slings; and they had their heads shaved that they were naked; and they were girded with a leathern girdle about their loins.

[10:9] And it came to pass that I caused that the women and children of my people should be hid in the wilderness; and I also caused that all my old men that could bear arms, and also all my young men that were able to bear arms, should gather themselves together to (P1′) go to battle against the Lamanites; and I did place them in their ranks, every man according to his age.

[10:10] And it came to pass that we did (P2′) go up to battle against the Lamanites; and I, even I, in my old age, did (P3′) go up to battle against the Lamanites. And it came to pass that we did go up (Q′) in the strength of the Lord to battle.

That's a series of 17 elements repeated in precisely the same order, with two additional elements (I and Q) only slightly out of order. The chance that this is a coincidence is, I think, negligible. And, as I have said, I think the theory that this is a Nephite literary form is more plausible than the Mad Libs theory. I think having to repeat so many elements in the same order, while at the same time moving the story forward rather than just repeating it, would have made the dictation harder for Smith, not easier. And the fact that the repetition comes immediately after the original makes this look more like a single coherent structure than like a case of self-plagiarism.

This is unlikely to be a one-off. I predict that other long repeated series can be found elsewhere in the book -- and that, as here, the repeated series will come immediately after the original. (If once can be found that is not immediately after the original, that would lend more credence to the Mad Libs theory.)

"I say unto you" in the Bible and the Book of Mormon

It may not be as notorious as "it came to pass," but "I say unto you" is nearly as distinctive a feature of Book of Mormon language, occurring about 6.3 times as frequently there as in the King James Bible. I touched on this a bit in my 2013 post "Behold, I say unto you, Nay," but that post was more narrowly focused on the use of the formula in answering one's own rhetorical yes/no question, a pattern that is common in the Book of Mormon but entirely absent from the Bible. Not until recently did I notice that "I say unto you" was itself noteworthy.

"I say unto you" may sound to us -- and, apparently, to Joseph Smith -- like generic biblical language, but it's actually a characteristic turn of phrase favored by one specific figure. In the King James Version, this phrase is used once by Absalom (2 Sam. 13:28), once by Gamaliel (Acts 5:38), and 121 times by Jesus. In the Book of Mormon, virtually everyone uses it:

As with "it came to pass," this pattern of usage is evidence that the language of the Book of Mormon reflects Joseph Smith's imperfect attempts to sound "biblical" and is unlikely to correspond to any specific feature of Nephite language.

"It came to pass" in the Book of Mormon does NOT match biblical usage

Despite its members, flawed and frail,

The human species as a mass

Came not upon this earth to fail

The test divine. It came to pass.

-- Yes and No (spoken by the Joseph Smith character)

You can't really write about the Book of Mormon without talking about "it came to pass," which occurs approximately once every 200 words, 8.7 times as frequently as in the King James Bible. Mark Twain famously called the phrase Joseph Smith's "pet" and said, "If he had left that out, his Bible would have been only a pamphlet."

From the apologetic point of view, the prevalence of "it came to pass" is consistent with the Book of Mormon's being an ancient text written by Bible-reading Hebrews, and the greater frequency of the phrase in the Book of Mormon can perhaps be explained by the fact that it is typically used in narrative passages, and the Book of Mormon is more consistently narrative in nature than the Bible. For example, the biblical books of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, and Lamentations contain not a single instance of "it came to pass"; but no comparable books of poetry or "wisdom literature" exist in the Book of Mormon. 

From a more skeptical point of view, "it came to pass" is just Joseph Smith trying to make his book sound biblical and going a bit overboard with it -- just as someone trying to imitate King James language today might do so by sticking -eth on the end of all sorts of words, even where it would never have been used in authentic 17th-century English.

From the former perspective, "it came to pass" in the Book of Mormon is a Hebraism, a sign that it was written by the same sort of people who wrote the Bible. From the latter, it is a pseudo-Hebraism, a clumsy attempt by a non-Hebrew to imitate a Hebrew stylistic feature.

I come down firmly on the pseudo-Hebraism side of the argument. Here's why.

"It came to pass" essentially means "it happened," and you will find that in the Bible its function is almost always (96% of the time) to indicate when something happened. That is, it is almost always used together with a time expression. Here are the first few occurrences of "it came to pass" in the Bible, with the time expressions underlined:

And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord (Gen. 4:3).

And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him (Gen. 4:8).

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose (Gen. 6:1-2).

And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth (Gen. 7:10).

And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made (Gen. 8:6).

Does the Book of Mormon show a similar pattern of usage? In a word, no.

For the purposes of the above chart, "with a time expression" means that immediately before or after the words "it came to pass (that)" is an adjunct phrase indicating when the event in question came to pass. I was quite generous about what I counted as a time expression; even the common BoM phrase "now it came to pass" made the grade, since now is, at least literally and etymologically, a time adverb. However, instances like the following were categorized as "with no time expression":

And it came to pass that the three hundred and sixty and sixth year had passed away (Morm. 4:10).

And it came to pass that the days of Ether were in the days of Coriantumr (Ether 12:1).

In the Mormon reference above, the passing of the 366th year is what came to pass, not an expression of when it came to pass. In the Ether reference, nothing at all comes to pass (i.e., happens), and the use of the phrase must be considered a solecism. Grammatically speaking, in each of these sentences, the time reference after "it came to pass that" is the subject and is thus not a syntactic adjunct.

Anyway, regardless of the linguistic details of how I classified "it came to pass" sentences, the main point is that the same classification method was used for the King James Bible and the Book of Mormon, with extremely different results.

My conclusion is that the majority of the instances of "it came to pass" in the Book of Mormon do not reflect any stylistic feature of the original records but rather come from Joseph Smith and his conscious or subconscious efforts to "sound biblical."

It's plausible that Joel quoted (and inverted) Zenos

In "Zenos was quoted by Joel, Nephi, Alma, Malachi, and Paul," I proposed that Joel 2:28-32 paraphrases or alludes to Zenos. (See that post for the evidence behind this assertion.) However one of these links seemed a little dubious at first. Joel writes, "I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh" (Joel 2:28), while Nephi, in a passage we had identified as containing Zenosian material writes, "the fulness of the wrath of God shall be poured out upon all the children of men" (1 Ne. 22:16). The expression "pour[ed] out . . . upon all" is unique to these two passages, but the meaning is obviously completely different. Furthermore, nothing in Joel suggests that he is quoting or paraphrasing anyone else -- no "thus saith the prophet" or anything like that.

Since reading Jonathan Neal Atkinson's 2002 Southern Baptist Theological Seminary dissertation "New Exodus, New Covenant, New Creation: The Reuse of the Old Testament in Joel," I no longer have these misgivings. As Atkinson documents, the Book of Joel is extremely allusive, almost on the level of the Book of Revelation. Of its 73 verses, Atkinson reckons that 58 of them -- 79% -- quote, paraphrase, or allude to other books of the Old Testament, including Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, 1 Kings, Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Zephaniah, and Malachi. There is some disagreement among scholars over the direction of these influences -- whether Joel is a very early prophet quoted by all these other books or a very late prophet who quotes them all -- but Atkinson makes a convincing case that it is the latter. In no case does Joel ever explicitly cite his sources. Given that background knowledge about Joel, we can assume that of course he would have alluded to Zenos, too, if he had access to that prophet's writings, but would not have mentioned his name.

But is it plausible that he would completely invert the meaning of his source, alluding to Zenos's negative outpouring of wrath but changing it to a positive outpouring of God's spirit? Yes. We have an example of just that, where Joel alludes to Micah and/or Isaiah but inverts their meaning:

. . . they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore (Isa. 2:4 = Micah 4:3).

Beat your plowshares into swords and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong (Joel 3:10).

Joel clearly alludes to these earlier prophets (see Atkinson's dissertation for evidence regarding the direction of dependence) but turns their meaning on its head, making Isaiah's prophecy of peace into a call to war. It is therefore highly plausible that he could have given Zenosian material a similar treatment.

Yes, the Book of Mormon does quote Joshua -- but the Church is covering it up!

I've been reading Jonah Barnes's new book The Key to the Keystone: How Apocryphal Texts Unlock the Book of Mormon's Brass Plates. Barnes's basic thesis is that the content of the Brass Plates differs significantly from that of the Old Testament as we have it, and that various apocryphal and pseudepigraphal texts preserve some of these alternative traditions that were lost from the Bible but preserved, via the Brass Plates, in the Book of Mormon. Since I've also explored the question of how the Brass Plates may have differed from the Bible (see "Moses and the Exodus: Where the Book of Mormon parts ways with the Torah"), I'm reading his arguments with interest, though some of the links are more convincing than others.

Barnes is part of the small but growing Mormon "anti-Deuteronomist" movement, which sees Josiah as a bad guy, rejects the Book of Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic History (meaning the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings), and casts Laman and Lemuel as Deuteronomists. He makes the bold claim that the Book of Mormon never quotes from or alludes to any of these rejected books.

The Book of Mormon very obviously does contain material that echoes Deuteronomy -- namely, the prophecy of the prophet like unto Moses, and the account of the Lord's "burial" of Moses. However (as I also pointed out in my Moses post), the Book of Mormon versions of these passages differ significantly from Deuteronomy as we have it, so Barnes concludes that they aren't from Deuteronomy itself but from some older tradition which the Deuteronomists later incorporated. This seems to me to be special pleading, motivated by his anti-Deuteronomist agenda. When the Book of Mormon contains alternate versions of Genesis stories, Barnes says the Nephites must have had an "expanded" version of Genesis; when it contains alternate versions of Deuteronomy material, he concludes that they didn't have Deuteronomy at all.

As a clear example of this bias, Barnes asserts that the Nephites had Leviticus (doubt), based mostly on vague references to the "law of Moses." The only specific links he provides are a reference to drinking blood ("something prohibited by Leviticus 17:14") and the phrase "statues, and judgements, and commandments," which "appears in Leviticus 26:15." In fact, all three of these could with equal justice be adduced as evidence that the Nephites had Deuteronomy, a.k.a. "the book of the law," which also prohibits blood-drinking (Deut. 15:23; see also Gen. 9:4), and which has seven references to statutes and judgments and commandments, including one (Deut 11:1) which matches the Book of Mormon wording much more closely than does Leviticus.

The Book of Mormon also prominently quotes Joshua -- "Choose ye this day whom ye will serve" -- so I was anticipating some similar argument from Barnes about how it wasn't actually from Joshua after all. Astonishingly, what I found instead was a flat denial that the passage in question even exists. Attempting to make the case that the Book of Mormon writers surely would have quoted the Deuteronomistic History if they had had it, Barnes writes:

Surely the Book of Mormon writers will tell the famous stories from Joshua, Samuel, and Kings again and again, as they so often tell and retell the story of Adam and Eve... right?

It turns out that they don't. Nephi said, "I did liken all scriptures unto us, that it might be for our profit and learning." So why did the Nephite prophets not:

1) Quote Joshua's adage to "choose ye this day whom ye will serve" when the Lamanites and Nephites parted ways in 2 Nephi 5?

2) Recite the Lord's promise in Joshua 1:8 . . .

He goes on to list a total of 11 things from the Deuteronomistic History that the Nephites might have been expected to quote if they had had access to it -- but very first on the list is a passage from Joshua which the Nephites absolutely do quote, word for word, though not in the chapter Barnes mentions. Barnes even gives it in its Book of Mormon form (the KJV has "Choose you this day"):

For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve (Alma 30:8).

How could Barnes possibly have missed that? It's one thing to overlook it; it's another to say, "If the Nephites had Joshua, how come they never quote this specific sentence?" -- and then give a sentence which does in fact appear word for word in the Book of Mormon!

My theory, based on my own experience trying to look up the Alma reference above, is that Barnes was led astray by the church's Great and Abominable Search Function, the awfulness of which it is impossible to overstate. I normally use Ctrl-F on a text file from Gutenberg if I need to search the Book of Mormon, but when I read Barnes, I only had my phone handy, so I had to run the search on the church's Gospel Library app. Here are the results of my initial search:

As you can see, it returns whole chapters rather than verses as search results. It turns out that Alma 30 is in fact the chapter I was looking for, but you'd never guess that from looking at the search results. Instead of highlighting the verse that includes all four of the words in my search prompt, it offers instead as an excerpt the first occurrence of one of them, in this case "day." If Jonah Barnes had run a similar search to check if the Book of Mormon quotes this line from Joshua, it's easy to see how he could have wrongly concluded that it does not.

I was still sure that it does, though, so I tried a different search term. Remembering that Joshua was quoted in the context of explaining that Nephite law did not regulate beliefs, I searched for that instead:

Most of these looked like they were "law of Moses" references, but Alma 1 looked like it might be about the actual legal system, so I clicked that one. I thought I had found what I was looking for:

Nevertheless, this did not put an end to the spreading of priestcraft through the land; for there were many who loved the vain things of the world, and they went forth preaching false doctrines; and this they did for the sake of riches and honor. Nevertheless, they durst not lie, if it were known, for fear of the law, for liars were punished; therefore they pretended to preach according to their belief; and now the law could have no power on any man for his belief. And they durst not steal, for fear of the law, for such were punished; neither durst they rob, nor murder, for he that murdered was punished unto death (Alma 1:16-18).

That was the expression I had remembered -- but the Joshua quote was nowhere to be found! Was Jonah Barnes right? Had I somehow misremembered? I was so certain of my memory that I was beginning to consider Mandela Effect type explanations, but then I gave the Great and Abominable Search Function one more go and finally found the passage I'd had in mind:

Now there was no law against a man’s belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds. For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve. Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; or rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him; but if he did not believe in him there was no law to punish him. But if he murdered he was punished unto death; and if he robbed he was also punished; and if he stole he was also punished; and if he committed adultery he was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished. For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man’s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds (Alma 30:7-11).

If anyone knows of a digital Book of Mormon with a less abominable search function, do let me know. I've even tried downloading the Bickertonites' Bible & BOM app, but it treats all search prompts as if they were in quotation marks -- so the prompt choose day serve returns zero results -- and so is no better than a Ctrl-F. The Community of Christ no longer appears to offer any scripture search function, and even if they did there would be the inconvenience of their different chapter-and-verse scheme.

UPDATE: The University of Michigan has a fairly decent BoM search. I'm putting it in the sidebar.

Zenos was quoted by Joel, Nephi, Alma, Malachi, and Paul

"One of the grand fundamental principles of Mormonism," said Joseph Smith, "is to receive the truth, let it come from whence it may." Even Reddit, you may ask? Yes, apparently, even Reddit.

As laid out in my previous post, "A closer look at Malachi material in the Small Plates," there are three places in the Book of Mormon where Malachi seems to be quoted by prophets who definitely (according to the Book of Mormon itself) did not have access to the Book of Malachi. The passages in question are 1 Ne. 22:15-24, 2 Ne. 25:13, and 2 Ne. 26:4-9. In every case, it is the same brief passage, Malachi 4:1-2, that is quoted or paraphrased, suggesting that both Nephi and Malachi may have been quoting some unknown third prophet.

But which prophet? My first thought was that it might be some lost prophecy of Isaiah, since all the Malachi material occurs in commentaries on that prophet. 1 Ne. 20-21 quotes Isa. 48-49 in full, and 1 Ne. 22 (with Malachi material) is Nephi's commentary. Then 2 Ne. 12-24 quotes Isa. 2-14 in full, and 2 Ne. 25-26 (with Malachi material) is Nephi's commentary. Other lost Isaiah material (the "sting of death" bit, not appearing in our Old Testament but cited in the Gospel of Nicodemus as a saying of Isaiah) appears to be quoted in the Book of Mormon, so it seemed like a reasonable hypothesis.

In a comment, though, Bill pointed me to "What is Malachi doing in 1st and 2nd Nephi?" In this Reddit post, someone using the handle stisa79 makes the case that the prophet being quoted by both Nephi and Malachi is Zenos. Upon investigation, I find this theory to be pretty compelling.

Stisa79 notes that 1 Ne. 19 quotes extensively from Zenos, often referring to him simply as "the prophet" but in a context that makes it clear that Zenos is intended. Then 1 Ne. 20-21 quotes Isaiah, and then we come to 1 Ne. 22. In vv. 1-14, Nephi repeatedly paraphrases the Isaiah passages he has just quoted. Then in vv. 15, 17, and 23 -- right where Malachi appears to be quoted -- Nephi again cites "the prophet." The context makes Zenos a likely candidate for the prophet he has in mind.

Here is the first citation from "the prophet":

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. For the time soon cometh that the fulness of the wrath of God shall be poured out upon all the children of men; for he will not suffer that the wicked shall destroy the righteous. 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 (1 Ne. 22:15-17).

The words in red echo Malachi 4:1; those in blue echo 1 Corinthians 3:15. Under the Zenos theory, then, both Malachi and Paul were also quoting Zenos. Is there any hint of such a connection in the Bible? Remarkably, there is. (This bit is my own discovery, not the Redditor's.) Here is the context of the passage in Paul, color-coded in the same way as the one from Nephi:

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 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 abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire (1 Cor. 3:11-15).

That word stubble is what first caught my eye, but the real smoking gun is the second passage I have highlighted in red: "the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire." What's the logical connection (implied by "because") between those two clauses? It only makes sense if we assume Paul is alluding to "the day . . . that shall burn as an oven" (Mal. 4:1).

To be clear, this could be a case of Paul alluding to Malachi, and Joseph Smith plagiarizing both Malachi and Paul, but I think the Zenos theory is a much tidier explanation.

Why assume it's Zenos, though? Just because Nephi calls both Zenos and this chap "the prophet"? He also sometimes calls Isaiah "the prophet," so that in itself isn't very strong evidence. For specific evidence that it is Zenos, we need to turn to the Malachi-like language in 2 Nephi. (We now return to summarizing this Redditor's argument; the bit about Paul is my only original contribution here.)

Here are the two passages in question. Language that seems to come from Malachi is highlighted in red, while the words highlighted in blue seem to be allusions to -- something else:

Behold, they will crucify him; 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; and all those who shall believe on his name shall be saved in the kingdom of God. Wherefore, my soul delighteth to prophesy concerning him, for I have seen his day, and my heart doth magnify his holy name (2 Ne. 25:13).

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. 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 buildings shall fall upon them and crush them to pieces and grind them to powder. 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 they shall be as stubble, and the day that cometh shall consume them, saith the Lord of Hosts. O the pain, and the anguish of my soul for the loss of the slain of my people! For I, Nephi, have seen it, and it well nigh consumeth me before the presence of the Lord; but I must cry unto my God: Thy ways are just. But behold, the righteous that hearken unto the words of the prophets, and destroy them not, but look forward unto Christ with steadfastness for the signs which are given, notwithstanding all persecution, behold, they are they which shall not perish. But the Son of righteousness shall appear unto them; and he shall heal them, and they shall have peace with him, until three generations shall have passed away, and many of the fourth generation shall have passed away in righteousness (2 Ne. 26:4-9). 

And here are the words of Zenos to which the blue phrases appear to allude:

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 (1 Ne. 19:10-16).

That about covers the Redditor's argument, but let me add one more discovery of my own. The language marked in green above seems to allude to Peter's quotation of the prophet Joel:

But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; . . . I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke (Acts 2:16, 19).

Does this mean Joel, too, was quoting Zenos? Remarkably, as with Paul, the evidence is there:

And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars [LXX: vapor] of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call (Joel 2:28-32).

The blue passages allude not to anything in our Book of Malachi, but to passages we have identified above as coming from Zenos. Immediately after appearing to quote Malachi, Nephi adds that "the fulness of the wrath of God shall be poured out upon all the children of men" -- and then (I have just noticed now!) -- proceeds to quote the same Joel-like language we find attributed to Zenos in 1 Ne. 19.

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. For the time soon cometh that the fulness of the wrath of God shall be poured out upon all the children of men; for he will not suffer that the wicked shall destroy the righteous. 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. Behold, my brethren, I say unto you, that these things must shortly come; yea, even blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke must come; and it must needs be upon the face of this earth; and it cometh unto men according to the flesh if it so be that they will harden their hearts against the Holy One of Israel. For behold, the righteous shall not perish; for the time surely must come that all they who fight against Zion shall be cut off (1 Ne. 22:15-19).

Where Joel has "my spirit," Nephi has "the fulness of the wrath of God" -- but in each case the language about it being "poured out upon all" (an expression not found elsewhere in the Bible) is the same.

I've marked Joel's "The sun shall be turned to darkness" in blue as well. To understand why, we need to look at three different passages:

to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness (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 (2 Ne. 25:13).

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

So the three days of darkness are three days in the sepulchre, after which the one in the sepulchre will rise with healing in his wings. In Malachi, the one with healing in his wings is the Sun. We may thus infer that in the original figurative language used by Zenos, the Sun is laid in a sepulchre for three days, causing the three days of darkness. Joel's reference to the Sun turning to darkness would then be an allusion to this same prophecy.

Going back to the Joel quote above, you'll see that I've highlighted "before the great and terrible day of the Lord come." In my original post about Malachi, "Malachi, and the Small Plates as Nephite pseudepigrapha," I noted that Colby Townsend cites Alma 45 as an example of Malachi language in the Book of Mormon:

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. And when that great day cometh, behold, the time very soon cometh that those who are now, or the seed of those who are now numbered among the people of Nephi, shall no more be numbered among the people of Nephi. But whosoever remaineth, and is not destroyed in that great and dreadful day, shall be numbered among the Lamanites, and shall become like unto them, all, save it be a few who shall be called the disciples of the Lord; and them shall the Lamanites pursue even until they shall become extinct. And now, because of iniquity, this prophecy shall be fulfilled (Alma 45:12-14).

Townsend saw in this a reference to Malachi 4: "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord" (Mal. 4:5). I dismissed this in my post, noting that although the phrase "great and dreadful day" is unique to Malachi in the King James Version, in the original Hebrew the very same expression (translated "terrible" rather than "dreadful") occurs in Joel 2, so Alma could have been quoting Joel instead. Now, though, it appears that both Malachi 4 and Joel 2 are quoting Zenos, so this passage in Alma turns out to be relevant after all. That is confirmed by the phrase I have highlighted in blue above. Here is the same language in one of the Malachi/Zenos passages we have already discussed:

But the Son of righteousness shall appear unto them; and he shall heal them, and they shall have peace with him, until three generations shall have passed away, and many of the fourth generation shall have passed away in righteousness (2 Ne. 26:9).

I find the case that all of this is from Zenos to be extremely compelling, and the intertextuality is so very intricate and self-consistent that it is hard to believe it could have been contrived by Joseph Smith -- especially by a Joseph Smith who was at the same time too dumb to know Nephi shouldn't have been quoting Malachi and Paul. In my opinion, the evidence laid out here (much of which, again, comes from "stisa79"), transforms the Malachi material in the Book of Mormon from a major embarrassment to a powerful evidence of the book's authenticity. (And I say that as someone who is not an apologist and who was initially perfectly willing to accept the opposite conclusion, that Malachi proves the Small Plates are fake.)

The one loose end that remains is the Book of Mormon's use of "Son of Righteousness" instead of "Sun of righteousness." Malachi has Sun, and I think I've made a pretty good case that Zenos used Sun as well (with the Sun's three-day entombment in a sepulchre causing the three days of darkness). Since the two words are homophones in English but entirely dissimilar in Hebrew, it's hard to see how the Sun-to-Son swap could have been made by anyone other than the English-speaking Joseph Smith. That, I believe, is now the only unsolved problem relating to Malachi material in the Book of Mormon.