Alma 33

Alma 33:1

1 Now after Alma had spoken these words, they sent forth unto him desiring to know whether they should believe in one God, that they might obtain this fruit of which he had spoken, or how they should plant the seed, or the word of which he had spoken, which he said must be planted in their hearts; or in what manner they should begin to exercise their faith.

Social: The first question we hear from the Zoramites is whether or not they should believe in one God. This is a rather fascinating question that tells us quite a bit about both the religion and the socio-political associations of these farmers. The first thing it tells us is that they currently believe in more than one God, and that they are aware that Alma does not. To understand the social and political meaning of this interesting situation, we must return to some of the information that we have about Antionum and the Zoramites.

First, the Zoramites are new to Antionum, and because they do not name the city after Zoram, we suspect that the city or the location was already known and named. We understand that the Zoramites are apostate Nephites who have rejected Nephite religion and politics, and have apparently intentionally chosen a location that is peripheral to the Nephite lands, and bordering a wilderness where there are Lamanites (see Alma 31:3).

The Zoramite worship appears to have adopted a polytheistic belief system. This is consonant with their conscious move away from the Nephites and toward the Lamanites. They have created a society which excludes the farming class from participation in the religion. This very exclusion makes it unlikely that this particular clan had voluntarily come to Antionum to be with the Zoramites. Why would they intentionally follow a religio-political system that they knew would create a condition that they did not want?

If they did not voluntarily come to join the Zoramites, where did they come from? It is most likely that they were already there. Antionum was a named location, and it is quite likely that it supported scattered hamlets of farmers that were unattached to the larger city states of the area. Into this inhabited area come the Zoramites and create a city center. As one of the peoples in the area, there would be an expectation of a relationship between the outlying farmers and the center of the city. In most cases, this would be a relationship of mutual benefit, but in this case, one of the benefits that was apparently expected was unfulfilled. In Mesoamerican cities, the city served as the religious center for the entire land. In this case, however, at least this one segment of the population was not receiving the desired benefit from the city’s religion. We may deduce, therefore, that they did not follow the Zoramites to this location, but were rather previous occupants of the land.

As we will see in the next verse, Alma expects that this clan will have known of Nephite scripture, or brass plate scripture at the very least. Since the brass plates were unknown in the region until the arrival of the Nephites in Zarahemla in about 200 BC, this expectation also tells us that they had been affiliated with the Nephites prior to the arrival of the Zoramites. It appears that they were typical of many ancient farming populations, where they adopted at least some of the religion of the dominant city to which they became attached. Thus they had a Nephite background, but had become assimilated into Zoramite religion, but were unhappy with the results of that assimilation.

Alma 33:2

2 And Alma said unto them: Behold, ye have said that ye could not worship your God because ye are cast out of your synagogues. But behold, I say unto you, if ye suppose that ye cannot worship God, ye do greatly err, and ye ought to search the scriptures; if ye suppose that they have taught you this, ye do not understand them.

Social: While Alma will teach them the gospel, there is another important thing that he is not teaching them. Alma does not suggest that they should leave their homes and come to a location closer to a city where the true religion is taught. This might have been a politically expedient solution because it would decrease the economic base of the rebellious Zoramites. However, Alma makes no such suggestion, and in fact goes to lengths to explain that worship need not be associated with a location. These people have accepted Zoramite religion because of the expectation of mutual benefit with the city state. Alma is suggesting that they might be able to continue to have the political and defensive benefits while disassociating themselves from the religious aspects of the city. The is the reason that Alma emphasizes that idea that true worship does not require a specific place.

As noted in the commentary on the previous verse, Alma specifically mentions scripture, and expects that they would be familiar with it. Alma states that they ought “to search the scriptures.” This is an interesting allusion to possible literacy in this population. It would be surprising in the ancient world to have a farming population that was sufficiently literate to read the scriptures, but that may not be Alma’s meaning here. We may have a phrase that is used more as an expression than as a literal indication of literacy. Alma may expect that they understand the scriptures from having heard them, which is the standard way in which such populations would have experienced the scriptures.

Alma 33:3

3 Do ye remember to have read what Zenos, the prophet of old, has said concerning prayer or worship?

Alma supports his assertion that they do not need a place for worship by citing a scripture that he assumes will be familiar to this people. It is a text from Zenos, a prophet from the brass plates. It is interesting to note that Alma does not pull out his pocket plates to read this passage, but rather cites it from memory. This is not uncommon in the ancient world where there was less access to written sources than there is now. In such societies the memory was more frequently called upon, and such peoples were frequently capable of prodigious feats of memory. This passage from Zenos encompasses verses 4-11.

Alma 33:4

4 For he said: Thou art merciful, O God, for thou hast heard my prayer, even when I was in the wilderness; yea, thou wast merciful when I prayed concerning those who were mine enemies, and thou didst turn them to me.

Context for Zenos: For Zenos, the “wilderness” in which he resided would obviously have been in the Old World rather than in the New World. His enemies were the enemies of Israel. Sorenson has speculated that the brass plates were a Northern Kingdom record (John L. Sorenson, (Sorenson, John L. “The “Brass Plates” and LDS Biblical Scholarship” undated mss.), and so the wilderness here would have been north of Jerusalem.

Context for Alma’s discourse: Alma is preaching to a people who are not city dwellers, but farmers in the outskirts of the land. While they are not in a wilderness area, they border on a wilderness. That would be sufficient to have a conceptual connection between the physical location of Zenos and these particular farmers. This verse speaks of prayer, and prayer outside of the city center, which is precisely the message that Alma has been trying to teach.

Alma 33:5

5 Yea, O God, and thou wast merciful unto me when I did cry unto thee in my field; when I did cry unto thee in my prayer, and thou didst hear me.

Context for Zenos: Zenos is creating a series of parallelisms. He is noting specific places, but the intent is not to define places, but rather to indicate that all places are available for prayer. Each of his statements includes a place and a prayer. The common thread is prayer, with the place changing. The next conceptual movement in the series is outside-in. He begins in the wilderness, and moves closer and closer to the very person. This movement takes the symbolic invocation of place and moves it away from the physical into the heart of the one who prays.

Alma 33:6

6 And again, O God, when I did turn to my house thou didst hear me in my prayer.

Alma 33:7

7 And when I did turn unto my closet, O Lord, and prayed unto thee, thou didst hear me.

Context for Alma’s discourse: These verses take the concept of place closer to the person, and farther from the city state where this clan had supposed that they must worship. In their own homes, and inside their own homes, there would be a place for worship. While in Zenos’ time and place there might have been internal structures fitting the idea of a closet, in Mesoamerica the typical farmer’s home would not have any internal structure that might fit our understanding of a closet. What they might have had, however, is a household shrine, and this verse might have been interpreted by them to indicate such a location of worship inside the home. This still fits the understanding that Alma is presenting, which is that worship of God does not depend upon the formal location for religious practices in the city center.

Alma 33:8

8 Yea, thou art merciful unto thy children when they cry unto thee, to be heard of thee and not of men, and thou wilt hear them.

Both contexts: Zenos makes a distinction between the prayer of the heart directed to God and a social prayer. He emphasizes that God hears the prayer of the individual, even when given in the wilderness, the field, the home, or the closet. The emphasis on personal prayer is contrasted with public prayer. This was an issue in both the Old and New Worlds. Jesus raised this very issue:

Matthew 6:5

5 ¶ And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

For the people Alma is addressing, this is very much appropriate to their situation. The very structure of the Zoramite worship was a prayer specifically designed to be seen of men. With this verse, Alma highlights the very problem this people have with the Zoramites, their exclusion from the public prayer, and shows it to be a false worship. The true worship is internal, and is a worship to which they have full access.

Alma 33:9

9 Yea, O God, thou hast been merciful unto me, and heard my cries in the midst of thy congregations.

Context for Zenos: In Zenos’ construction, he has taken the imagery of prayer from one of being distant to being centered in the home. In each of those cases, the imagery was one of being alone. Now he has shifted to a location where there are others present. In the last verse he noted that personal prayer was more effective that public prayer that is designed to be public. Now he places this individual prayer in a public context. God hears his individual cries even when he is in the midst of others who are praying to be seen of others.

Context for Alma’s discourse: If we presume, as we have earlier, that the exclusion from the Zoramite open-air synagogue was social and not legal, then Alma may be telling them that they may also worship in the synagogue among the Zoramites. They may prayer even in the location where the Zoramite prayer is being give, because God can hear them in the midst of the larger congregation of more public prayer-offerers.

Alma 33:10

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

Context for Zenos: The reversal of direction continues. Zenos begins in local congregations, and now moves to the location of his enemies, from whom he was cast out. The literary sense of this passage is a reversal of directions, where the prayerful worship moves from the outside in, and once firmly established internally, supports Zenos as his body moves from the inside to the outside, with the presence among enemies as the farthest outside.

Context for Alma’s discourse: The tie for these farmers under Zoramite control is obviously the concept of being cast out. Of course there is a difference between the general conception of “enemy” as used in Zoram and for these farmers. For Zenos, the “enemy” was another people. Israel would have been the people of God, and the Gentiles would be the enemies. For Alma’s context, the Zoramites were not enemies in precisely the same way. They were still nominally under the Nephite hegemony, but their religious apostasy had made them enemies to God in a different way.

Alma 33:11

11 And thou didst hear me because of mine afflictions and my sincerity; and it is because of thy Son that thou hast been thus merciful unto me, therefore I will cry unto thee in all mine afflictions, for in thee is my joy; for thou hast turned thy judgments away from me, because of thy Son.

Textual: This verse is problematic when compared to other extant texts from the Old Testament that would be comparable to the time period of Zenos. The sentiment of the address to God is similar, but this verse redirects the mercies of God through an intermediary, the Son. We may assume that this abbreviated title “thy Son” is shortened for “son of God,” though that is an ambiguous phrase in the Old Testament. The only time we find the expression “son of God” in the Old Testament is in Daniel, which is a later text than Zenos:

Daniel 3:25

25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God

In the case of the text in Daniel, the term “Son of God” is applied to an angel, and there is no indication that anything is meant other than to distinguish the form of the angel from the human forms of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in the furnace.

Easton’s Dictionary provides the following information:

“Son of God The plural, ""sons of God, "" is used (Gen. 6:2, 4) to denote the pious descendants of Seth. In Job 1:6; 38:7 this name is applied to the angels. Hosea uses the phrase (1:10) to designate the gracious relation in which men stand to God.

In the New Testament this phrase frequently denotes the relation into which we are brought to God by adoption (Rom. 8:14, 19; 2 Cor. 6:18; Gal. 4:5, 6; Phil. 2:15; 1 John 3:1, 2). It occurs thirty-seven times in the New Testament as the distinctive title of our Saviour… When used with reference to creatures, whether men or angels, this word is always in the plural. In the singular it is always used of the second Person of the Trinity, with the single exception of Luke 3:38, where it is used of Adam." (M.G. Easton. Illustrated Bible Dictionary).

As we will see below, the reaction of the people to whom Zenos and Zenock preached was rejection of the message. What Zenos and Zenock preached was not the standard understanding of the people at that time.

S. Kent Brown astutely notes that both Zenos and Zenock use the title “son” but do not specifically extend that title to “son of God,” as Alma does:

“In my view, however, Alma (in Alma 33:11, 13, 16) brought together the passages from the writings of these two men which proved a point about the Son of God. Zenos and Zenock called the Messiah Son whereas Alma called him Son of God (Alma 33:14, 17ff. Had Alma known of a passage in which either Zenock or Zenos mentioned the Son of God, he surely would have used it to make his point to the Zoramites.” (Lehi's Personal Record: Quest for a Missing Source by S. Kent Brown, BYU Studies, vol. 24 (1984), Number 1 - Winter 1984, Footnote.)

This verse ends the citation from Zenos.

Alma 33:12

12 And now Alma said unto them: Do ye believe those scriptures which have been written by them of old?

Alma 33:13

13 Behold, if ye do, ye must believe what Zenos said; for, behold he said: Thou hast turned away thy judgments because of thy Son.

Alma again bolsters his position with scripture. The Zoramites do not believe in the Atoning Messiah, and these people do not appear to believe either, as that is one of the things Alma is teaching them. He indicates that if they believe the scriptures, then they must believe in the Atoning Messiah for he is spoken of in those scriptures. Alma once again cites Zenos from memory.

Zenos’ testimony of the Atoning Messiah is very strong and specific:

1 Nephi 19:10

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.

Alma does not use the specific prophecies, however, because they are still in the future, and therefore do not have probatory impact.

Alma 33:14

14 Now behold, my brethren, I would ask if ye have read the scriptures? If ye have, how can ye disbelieve on the Son of God?

Alma hammers home his point. If they believed scripture, then they must believe in the Atoning Messiah. This argument tells us more about the nature of religion in this region before the arrival of the Zoramites, since we understand that this particular group of people would have been in the land prior to that arrival.

The first thing that is important is that Alma suggests that if they had read the scriptures, then they would have believed. When Alma makes the suggestion, he is specifically speaking of two brass plate prophets. The evidence from the brass plate prophets hinges on the phrase “Son of God” which we have seen to have been ambiguous in the Old World context. For Alma there would have been nothing ambiguous about this because he was a man of the New World, and had access to Nephi’s teachings which were very clear about the birth of the Savior. Alma had all of the other Nephite prophets who had been very clear about the nature of the Son of God. What we learn from Alma’s discourse here is that he relies upon brass plate scriptures, not on any of the Nephite prophets.

We have seen that there has been in the Book of Mormon a seeming trend to accept the brass plates, but not the later Nephite prophets. Certainly this describes what we saw in the court of King Noah, and subsequent Nephite apostate groups such as the Nehors appear to have accepted the brass plate religion, but rejected Nephite “additions” to that religion, and very specifically the belief in the coming of the Atoning Messiah.

Finally, Alma’s teaching emphasis is on the Atoning Messiah here, and all of this part of the discourse comes in answer to the request of this people as to whether they must believe in “one God” (verse 1). It becomes quite clear that this “one God” is the Atoning Messiah, and that this people is one who has an understanding of the brass plates, but not of subsequent Nephite prophets. We do not know if this group’s religion was apostate Nephite, or whether their understanding of the brass plates might have come from a different source. In any case, their religious foundations are not recent, as Alma is not speaking of anything they have rejected from their religion, but rather an understanding of the Atoning Messiah that isn’t in the religion. This further substantiates our assertion that this people have been in place prior to the arrival of the Zoramites.

Alma 33:15

15 For it is not written that Zenos alone spake of these things, but Zenock also spake of these things—

Alma 33:16

16 For behold, he said: Thou art angry, O Lord, with this people, because they will not understand thy mercies which thou hast bestowed upon them because of thy Son.

This is a citation from Zenock. Zenock’s citation plays an Old Testament theme of the anger of God against a rebellious Israel. It is in that context that we should see the anger of God. The important piece of information is once again the intermediary function of the Son. This more explicit teaching may have been unique to the Northern kingdom.

Application to Alma’s discourse: This verse is important for being the second brass plate prophet to mention the Son, and the importance of the Son. This gives these farmers two witnesses besides Alma. The anger of the Lord is not applicable in this case, indeed, the Lord would be quite pleased with the humility of the people. How might they have understood the anger of the Lord? They would likely have interpreted this verse in this context as an anger at their unbelief in the Son, and the reason for the arrival of Alma to teach them of the Atoning Messiah.

Alma 33:17

17 And now, my brethren, ye see that a second prophet of old has testified of the Son of God, and because the people would not understand his words they stoned him to death.

Context for Zenock: Alma emphasizes that there is a second prophet who has testified of these things, and then adds information about Zenock. Zenock was stoned to death, apparently right after, and on account of, the sermon from which Alma extracted this passage. This tells us more of the world in which Zenock preached. We have noted that the more common understanding of Son of God did not related specifically to the Atoning Messiah, although Zenock is certainly describing the Atoning Messiah. There are two important pieces of the Old World context here, the first is the anger of God, and the second is the stoning. Both of those aspects tell us that the larger number of people to whom Zenock preached did not have a belief that allowed for the particular interpretation that Zenock is giving. The anger of the Lord tells us that the people were unbelievers, and the stoning tells us that the people thought Zenock to be a blasphemer. It is interesting in this context to note that Zenos was also slain for his testimony (Helaman 8:19). This was not a popular doctrine in the Northern kingdom.

This picture of a people who did not understand the role of the Atoning Messiah in the Old World fits our understanding of the historical situation there, and explains that perhaps both Zenos and Zenock were reforming prophets, who were attempting to bring the correct understanding of the Atoning Messiah to a people who were not willing to accept it. This historical situation makes it a little easier to understand the rather complete Nephite understanding of the Atoning Messiah. This was not a new revelation to the world. The Lord had attempted to offer such an understanding to ancient Israel through Zenos and Zenock (and imagery in other prophets, as Alma will point out next) but that information was rejected, and Zenock was stoned and Zenos was slain.

In the New World, however, we have the beginnings of a people whose very foundation was built upon direct revelation and dramatic spiritual transformation of not only their hearts, but of their culture and place. The early Nephites were in a unique position to accept this teaching, and to embrace it, as they did, and of which they have left us such great testimony.

Alma 33:18

18 But behold, this is not all; these are not the only ones who have spoken concerning the Son of God.

Alma 33:19

19 Behold, he was spoken of by Moses; yea, and behold a type was raised up in the wilderness, that whosoever would look upon it might live. And many did look and live.

Alma further strengthens his scriptural case for the Atoning Messiah by interpreting an episode from Moses that has become a clear Messianic symbol, but which would not have been understood as such prior to the crucifixion of the Savior. Alma is referencing Numbers, but this association may have been suggested because Zenos also references the Son being “lifted up” (1 Nephi 19:10).

Numbers 21:5-9

5 And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.

6 And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.

7 ¶ Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.

8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.

9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

The essential elements of this incident are: the affliction with poisonous serpents; the raising of an image of a poisonous serpent raised on a pole; the healing of all who would look. What is interesting is the different ways in which these essential pieces of information are interpreted in Alma and later by John. Both John and Alma use this incident as a foreshadowing of Christ. Notice how the story appears in John:

John 3:14-15

14 ¶ And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

In John the highlighted element is the “lifted up.” This is directly related to “even so must the Son of man be lifted up.” For John, the essential fact of Jesus’ crucifixion was the most important connection to the incident in Moses. The story of the raising of the serpent image on the pole becomes a foreshadowing of the raising of the body of Christ on the cross. While modern Christianity has long accepted the cross as a symbol of the atoning sacrifice of the Savior, and placed the symbol prominently in worship, the ancient context of the cross was anything but worshipful. In John’s time, the cross was shameful, and the Christian use of the cross was a defiant exaltation of this symbol from shame to glory through the sacrifice of just one who died on that foul instrument. In John, the tremendous irony of the Son of God dying on a shameful cross was the most important image, and his reference to Moses indicated that out of an evil may come a good. In John’s context, the essential symbolism in both “raising ups” was the contrast between the apparently evil symbol and the good that came from it.

Moses raised up the image of the serpent that had been afflicting his people. That would not have been a popular image, it would have been a fearful reminder of the plague they were experiencing. Nevertheless, good came from it when they looked upon the image of that evil on the pole. In the case of Christ, the cross is the evil, not the image upon it, of course. However, the notion is the same. The crucifixion of the Savior would not have been a popular image, but rather the fearful reminder of the power of the Romans over the people of Israel. Nevertheless, out of this fearful and shameful symbol, good came when they “looked upon it.”

Alma’s use of Moses is similar in the emphasis on the healing by looking upon the symbol. What is missing in Alma is the emphasis on the “raising up.” While Nephite prophets had a prophetic knowledge of the future crucifixion of the Savior (1 Nephi 19:13; 2 Nephi 6:9; 2 Nephi 10:3; 2 Nephi 25:13; Mosiah 3:9), they did not have direct experience with the crucifixion nor its social implications, as did John. In the case of this farmer clan listening to Alma, their reliance on the brass plates meant that they did not have even that prophetic understanding of the future importance of the “raising up.” For this reason, that symbolic association which is so important for John is entirely missing in Alma’s analysis.

Alma 33:20

20 But few understood the meaning of those things, and this because of the hardness of their hearts. But there were many who were so hardened that they would not look, therefore they perished. Now the reason they would not look is because they did not believe that it would heal them.

Alma emphasizes the simplicity of the healing process in this incident. The people were bitten by poisonous serpents, and all they had to do was look, but many were disbelievers that something so simple and symbolic could heal anything as real and deadly as the bite of a poisonous snake. Their disbelief prevented them from looking, and prevented them from being healed. Alma emphasizes this point because he has just told these farmers that they have also refused to “look.” Alma has pointed out that the belief in the Atoning Messiah, the “one God” is in the brass plate scriptures, but that they have failed to “see” that evidence. This people is a direct corollary to those of ancient Israel who had the source of healing in their midst, but did not “see” it. These farmers also have had the source in their midst (the teachings of Zenos and Zenock) but they have not “seen” or understood those verses.

Alma 33:21

21 O my brethren, if ye could be healed by merely casting about your eyes that ye might be healed, would ye not behold quickly, or would ye rather harden your hearts in unbelief, and be slothful, that ye would not cast about your eyes, that ye might perish?

Alma now turns his discourse from instruction to pleading. He takes this incident where some in Israel failed to take advantage of what was offered, and he uses it to make an offer of his own. His audience could not fail to understand that he is asking them to similarly look to the evidence before them, and to believe in this “one God,” or the Atoning Messiah.

Alma 33:22

22 If so, wo shall come upon you; but if not so, then cast about your eyes and begin to believe in the Son of God, that he will come to redeem his people, and that he shall suffer and die to atone for their sins; and that he shall rise again from the dead, which shall bring to pass the resurrection, that all men shall stand before him, to be judged at the last and judgment day, according to their works.

Here is the offer, look to the Son of God, and live.

Alma 33:23

23 And now, my brethren, I desire that ye shall plant this word in your hearts, and as it beginneth to swell even so nourish it by your faith. And behold, it will become a tree, springing up in you unto everlasting life. And then may God grant unto you that your burdens may be light, through the joy of his Son. And even all this can ye do if ye will. Amen.

Here is the next step in the incipient faith of these farmers in Zoramite lands. This is the seed they are to plant, the seed which they must exercise a particle of faith (Alma 32:27) to believe. Alma tells them that faith will begin when they plant in their hearts the possibility of the Atoning Messiah. That is the doctrine on which they are to develop faith, that is the seed that will begin to swell in their hearts. That is the thing that will ultimately make their burdens light. In this case, it is the understanding that will allow their God into their fields, their homes, their closets, and their hearts.

Textual: There is no chapter break in the 1830 edition.