   |
|
|
1 The words which Jacob, the brother of Nephi, spake unto the people of Nephi, after the death of Nephi:
Jacob has created a new entry on the plates. In this section he is copying a sermon that was previously given. In this case, he gives us the text of the sermon and the very minimum of an introduction to create the context for this particular entry.
2 Now, my beloved brethren, I, Jacob, according to the responsibility which I am under to God, to magnify mine office with soberness, and that I might rid my garments of your sins, I come up into the temple this day that I might declare unto you the word of God.
Social: We are justified in reading some social information into Jacob's declaration that this sermon is given on temple grounds. Jacob notes that he has "come up into the temple." Just as the land of Jerusalem included an area around the outside, the temple proper would consist of both the physical building and an attached area near the front of the temple. Since Jacob is speaking to an assembled body of his people it is most logical that the audience is congregated in this temple courtyard. Jacob himself would be at some vantage point closer to the temple, probably on steps of the temple. If the temple at this point in time had already shifted to the Mesoamerican model rather than the model of the temple of Solomon (and there is no indication that it did) it would be easy to see Jacob standing on the steps leading to the top of the pyramid. Even with the Solomonic model, there were probably steps which would elevate Jacob so that he could be seen by the audience. In any smaller village, we would expect that there would only be two buildings appropriate for a formal rhetorical event, the political seat and the religious seat. We need not wander far from the Solomonic temple model to understand that the temple would be considered a religious location, and there would be a separate building for political events. Thus this particular sermon occurs at the temple emphasizing the religious, not the political nature of the discourse. Indeed, there may not have been any formal legal regulations governing the topics Jacob will address. In particular, it is doubtful that Jacob's admonitions against the pride of wealth would have had any legal sanction. Thus Jacob is, by his position, and by his selected location, providing a moral and religious condemnation that may not have been represented in the legal code of the village at that time.
3 And ye yourselves know that I have hitherto been diligent in the office of my calling; but I this day am weighed down with much more desire and anxiety for the welfare of your souls than I have hitherto been. Jacob 2:4 4 For behold, as yet, ye have been obedient unto the word of the Lord, which I have given unto you.
The interesting part of Jacob's phraseology is the "as yet" in verse 4. This is both an indication that the subject of this sermon is not new, but that there will yet be hope. Jacob is giving a sermon of condemnation, but not one without hope. They may have not yet obeyed God, but Jacob clearly suggests that obedience is still an option, and therefore the reconciliation of the audience and Jacob, and the audience to their God.
5 But behold, hearken ye unto me, and know that by the help of the all-powerful Creator of heaven and earth I can tell you concerning your thoughts, how that ye are beginning to labor in sin, which sin appeareth very abominable unto me, yea, and abominable unto God.
These are people who are beginning to labor in sin - not because of what they are doing, but because of the way that their actions are altering their hearts.
6 Yea, it grieveth my soul and causeth me to shrink with shame before the presence of my Maker, that I must testify unto you concerning the wickedness of your hearts.
7 And also it grieveth me that I must use so much boldness of speech concerning you, before your wives and your children, many of whose feelings are exceedingly tender and chaste and delicate before God, which thing is pleasing unto God; Jacob 2:8 8 And it supposeth me that they have come up hither to hear the pleasing word of God, yea, the word which healeth the wounded soul.
In verse 8 Jacob notes that they have come to the temple "to hear the pleasing word of God." Jacob tells us more about Nephite practice here. The sermon Jacob is giving may be unusual in topic, but it is not in and of itself unusual. A sermon by the religious leader by the temple would not have been unusual. The people have an expectation of what they will hear, and that expectation must have been created by previous example. Therefore they arrive at a typical location to hear a sermon, and will suppose it to be a typical sermon. Such sermons may have been quite regular, such as every Sabbath, or they may have been periodic, occurring on special occasions. We may also ask how people would have known to come to the sermon. It is easy enough to suppose that within the village proper oral announcement would have been sufficient. However, if this is a sermon to be given to all of the Nephites, then it should also include those who are in the fields. It would be a more difficult task to inform those more distant members of the village (who would have made up an important part of the community at this point in its development) of a special event. The most likely scenario is that this sermon is part of a predictable occasion, either a Sabbath sermon, or perhaps a sermon attached to a festival. So far in the Book of Mormon we have relatively little information about formal sermon occasions. We have Jacob's sermon given at Nephi's behest (recorded in 2 Nephi 6-10) which itself notes that it was given over two days. I have speculated that the division between 2 Nephi 31 and 32 may also represent two parts of a sermon given on different days. The very fact of a population gathered to the village center on two consecutive days suggests a festival, and indeed Jacob's sermon was analyzed as a festival sermon by John S. Thompson (Thompson, John S. "Isaiah 50-51, the Israelite Autumn Festivals, and the Covenant Speech of Jacob in 2 Nephi 6-10." In: Isaiah in the Book of Mormon. FARMS 1981, pp. 123-150). We have determined that Jacob may have been in charge of writing on the small plates for over thirty years, and yet he selects only this one sermon as worthy of recording on the small plates. It would appear that it is most likely that formal sermons were reserved for festival occasions when the population could be gathered, and that Sabbath services were symbolically performed in the temple and in individual homes without a congregational setting that would lend itself to a sermon. The process of selecting a sermon would then not be quite as difficult, because there would be fewer to select from. Nevertheless, we have also noted that there is an expectation of periodicity in the sermon giving. Therefore we must understand that we do not have every sermon given in the public festival setting. What criteria have Nephi and Jacob used in selecting the sermons to record? It may be suggested that the recorded sermons are seminal discourses, those that have a purpose above and beyond the didactic and social functions of a public sermon. In the case of Jacob's sermon that Nephi records, while the doctrines are important for the modern reader, it appears that thematically the impact of the sermon was on a community struggling with meshing different ethnic groups (hence the emphasis on the salvation by the gentiles, a descriptive title that would fit the "others" that had joined with the Nephites). In Nephi's sermon, the seminal feature was the introduction of the baptismal covenant to a people who had not received that covenant in that way. In the current sermon, it is the departure from the "pleasing word of God" that they had been hearing. We may also presume that in the course of developing a society, most of the sermons would have been supportive of the group and fostering group cohesion. This sermon is very different in that it particularly addresses divisions in the group, and condemns them. Thus while supporting the group in its entirety, it is doing so by attacking those who have become among the most powerful in the group - the wealthy men. This is a dangerous tactic in a small social setting, and it would be this bold move so contrary to previous sermons, but demanded by the Lord, that warranted the inclusion on the small plates.
9 Wherefore, it burdeneth my soul that I should be constrained, because of the strict commandment which I have received from God, to admonish you according to your crimes, to enlarge the wounds of those who are already wounded, instead of consoling and healing their wounds; and those who have not been wounded, instead of feasting upon the pleasing word of God have daggers placed to pierce their souls and wound their delicate minds.
A possible reading of this verse might be that he is addressing men who have already begun to feel the call of repentance. However, it is not likely that this is the focus of his address to "those who are already wounded." He speaks of that set as having "delicate minds," a phraseology that we would not expect to be applied to men in a male-dominated society, but rather to women and children.
10 But, notwithstanding the greatness of the task, I must do according to the strict commands of God, and tell you concerning your wickedness and abominations, in the presence of the pure in heart, and the broken heart, and under the glance of the piercing eye of the Almighty God. Jacob 2:11 11 Wherefore, I must tell you the truth according to the plainness of the word of God. For behold, as I inquired of the Lord, thus came the word unto me, saying: Jacob, get thou up into the temple on the morrow, and declare the word which I shall give thee unto this people.
12 And now behold, my brethren, this is the word which I declare unto you, that many of you have begun to search for gold, and for silver, and for all manner of precious ores, in the which this land, which is a land of promise unto you and to your seed, doth abound most plentifully. Jacob 2:13 13 And the hand of providence hath smiled upon you most pleasingly, that you have obtained many riches; and because some of you have obtained more abundantly than that of your brethren ye are lifted up in the pride of your hearts, and wear stiff necks and high heads because of the costliness of your apparel, and persecute your brethren because ye suppose that ye are better than they.
Economics: Modern readers can easily make a mistake in reading these two verses. We may suppose that the finding of the precious ores is the very thing that has made them wealthy. While it is certainly related, it is not the possession of the precious ores that Jacob complains about, but rather the "costliness of your apparel." In order to understand why the "costliness of your apparel" is the problem rather than obtaining gold and silver, we need to understand more of the economics of the New World. As a first step, we need to understand the value of gold and silver to the Mesoamericans. Perhaps most intriguing is the word for both gold and silver in the language of the Aztecs: teocuitlatl "god excrement" (both Molina and Simeon agree on the basic meaning. There are extensions in Simeon that appear to give regnal value to gold, but since one of these uses the Spanish word corona "crown" all such references are suspect as later alterations of the value system through European contact). To a people like the Aztecs who used night-soil as a fertilizer, certainly there is some value to excrement that is much greater than for many a modern society. However, the very fact that there is a collective label for the two metals suggests that neither was of sufficient importance to warrant a specific name (much as many males would assume that "brown" and "purple" are sufficient, while their wives insist upon further distinctions into "taupe" and "mauve"). Mesoamerica was no a money economy, it was a barter economy. The closest thing to a universally accepted token of exchange was cacao beans. For anything else, the value of something depended entirely upon whether or not someone else wanted it. In this context, it is interesting to examine the Codex Mendoza, a tribute book for the Mexica (commonly called Aztecs) empire. The price of Mexica conquest over a city or village was an annual tribute. The types of items recorded in the tribute book show the types of goods valued by the empire. Most common are blankets are warrior uniforms and shields. Other items might include some foodstuffs, and large wooden beams. Incense was required as tribute. In most cases, the tribute is processed goods of a fairly pragmatic nature. To be sure, there are some inclusions of what might be termed luxury items - jade beads and bars of gold. However, since the Codex Mendoza was created after the conquest, it is not absolutely clear whether or not the gold was included for the Spaniards or for the Mexica. In any case, the emphasis of the tribute is on things other than gold, and the gold occurs in bars much like the large wooden beams appear as raw materials. The wood and the gold are raw materials to be worked later, not items of manufacture. Two exceptions to this occur for a list of several pueblos on plate 98 where a worked head band of gold and a breastplate of gold are listed ("Codex Mendoza" In: Antiguedades de Mexico. Secretaria de Hacienda y Credito Publico. 1964. 1:100). This worked form of gold fits better into the categories of worked goods that fit the majority of the tribute items, and I suspect it is more representative of the types of tribute that would have been required prior to the conquest. All of this simply points to a lesser value for gold and silver among the Mesoamericans than among the Europeans. The Lehites would have brought a tradition of value for gold and silver from the Old World. The question is whether the Mesoamerican or the Old World value for gold and silver is driving Jacob's discourse. I suggest that it must be the New World's relative value of the metals rather than the Old World intrinsic value. In the first place, Jacob notes in verse 12 that these ores are "abundant." Economic value is usually associated with scarcity. Consider the joke about the man who receives special permission to take something of value with him into the next life. As he approaches Peter at the Gates, Peter notices a suitcase, and asks the man what is in it. The man proudly announces that he had special permission to bring it, and opens the suitcase to show off bars of gold. Peter then asks him why he wanted to bring paving bricks. In much the same concept, the ease of finding the ores suggests again that the metal does not have an intrinsic value. If we remember that part of the value in the Old World is as a medium of measurement for the value of a monetary economy, which was absent in the New World, we understand a little more of the nature of gold and silver in the New World. They were abundant ores, and as something relatively abundant, they held no intrinsic value. This may be contrasted with jade, which in addition to an esthetic attraction, appears to have had a religious significance, and certainly an intrinsic value greater than either gold or silver for the Mesoamerican cultures. We should also note that while Jacob is going to chastise the men, he does not chastise them for looking for gold and silver. What he says is: "that many of you have begun to search for gold, and for silver, and for all manner of precious ores, in the which this land, which is a land of promise unto you and to your seed, doth abound most plentifully." This appears to indicate that the presence of the gold and silver are simply part of the land of promise. It is the next phrase that is the most important. Jacob notes that after the search for gold and silver "… the hand of providence hath smiled upon you most pleasingly, that you have obtained many riches." The finding of the ore leads to "many riches." So far, even the "many riches" are part of "the hand of providence" smiling on them. The first very point that Jacob makes is that the riches are not in and of themselves bad. We now must answer the question of how the discovery of the relatively unvalued ore has been transformed into "many riches." Of course we are once again in speculative territory, but understanding the nature of Mesoamerican economies in general can supply some important information. The Nephites have found ore that is abundant. Nephi has brought with him a knowledge of metal working. Thus the Nephite village perhaps has an advantage over other villages in their ability to extract the metals from the ore. In addition to refining the metals, Nephi also understands something of metal working, having made tools to build a boat (1 Nephi 17:9-11). Certainly once in the New World, Nephi again demonstrated both the ability to extract and work metal with the creation of the two sets of plates. Thus Nephi brings with him the ability to both extract the metal from its naturally occurring state, and to work that metal into something that is useful. We may therefore presume, without much of a leap of imagination, that the Nephites refined their gold and silver, and then made something from the metals. In a labor intensive society, finished goods are of much greater value than raw materials, and so it is most likely that the Nephites went as far as the creation of some type of object from the gold and silver they refined. With artisans in the Nephite colony making metal goods, does that make them wealthy? No. As Jacob will specifically note, wealth occurs only when there is a relative difference in the accumulation of valued goods. Since the Nephites had fairly easy access to the raw materials, and presumably each artisan would create more objects that could be used (or worn, in the case of objects of adornment) it is also quite likely that objects of gold and silver would be very common among the Nephites, and with easy availability comes depreciation in value. Jacob's distress is not over the accumulation of goods, but the social segregation that it is costing. Notice the particulars of his complaint in verse 13: " and because some of you have obtained more abundantly than that of your brethren ye are lifted up in the pride of your hearts, and wear stiff necks and high heads because of the costliness of your apparel, and persecute your brethren because ye suppose that ye are better than they." Jacob's problem is in their pride and the supposition of superiority held by those who are wealthy. Jacob's indicator of that wealth is "costliness" of apparel. This gives us yet another economic problem. How do we get costly apparel in a village of 300 households? In an ancient village, we must suppose that the village would need to be as self-sustaining as possible. In addition to raising sufficient food to feed their own population, they will need to make their own dwellings (as well as cooperate on public edifices). In addition, one would suspect that they would make their own clothing. Once again we enter the realm of raw materials. What is available to one is available to all. If all are making their own clothes, and all have access to the same raw materials, how could some garments be more "costly" than others? The only answer in ancient Mesoamerica is trade. Only in the exchange of goods between communities can we begin to make sense of Jacob's evidences. The scenario would be that the worked gold and silver pieces become trade items with other communities. It is very likely that many different types of goods were traded, as trade creates social networks and extended bonds that are as important as the trade goods themselves (Radin, Paul. The World of Primitive Man. London, Abelard - Schuman. 1953, p.130). However, in this case we are interested in the worked gold and silver. Worked gold and silver are luxury items, not because of the metal, but because any functional use can be replicated in other means. They might be made into cups, but many other substances may also be used for cups. They might be used to write on (as did Nephi and Jacob) but other materials were available, and perhaps easier to work with than the metal. Because the metals themselves held no intrinsic value, whatever was made of them was not a necessity, but an item of surplus and luxury. This excess in the Nephites would be traded for a similar excess item from another village. In this case, the evidence is that the trade was made for apparel. Being from another location, this apparel would have a different appearance, and perhaps be of different materials entirely. In any case, the necessity of having worked to produce an exchange good, travel to the trade community, and make the exchange, all increases the value of the apparel brought back to the land of Nephi. Anthropologists have long known that clothing serves a social function, with different types of clothing being appropriate to different classes. For instance, Jesus tells of a story about a rich man and a beggar. In the introduction to the story we learn: " Luke 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:" We are told that he is a rich man, but the rest of the verse answers the question "how rich was he?" Perhaps no modifier is more telling than that he was "clothed in purple." The purple dye was very difficult to come by, and therefore extremely expensive. Only those of great wealth could afford to wear purple. Indeed it was restricted to royalty in certain ages of England, hence the term "royal purple." Clothing is an immediate outward sign of a social segregation of class. Jacob's complaint is precisely this division into classes, that those who are wearing the "costly apparel" deem themselves better than others. Jacob had been with the Nephites from their formation, from a time when there were no such social divisions, from the time when Nephi would have fought with the sword of Laban in their defense. This unified society was now fragmenting through the trade connections that inevitably brought in differences in material goods, but just as inevitably outside ideas as well.
14 And now, my brethren, do ye suppose that God justifieth you in this thing? Behold, I say unto you, Nay. But he condemneth you, and if ye persist in these things his judgments must speedily come unto you.
The problem is, of course, that the men are justifying their actions that have led to the wealth, and Jacob is condemning the effect of that wealth on their attitudes to their fellowman. The wealth is not unjustified, but the assumption of superiority, and the establishment of classes within Nephites society is damnable.
15 O that he would show you that he can pierce you, and with one glance of his eye he can smite you to the dust! Jacob 2:16 16 O that he would rid you from this iniquity and abomination. And, O that ye would listen unto the word of his commands, and let not this pride of your hearts destroy your souls!
17 Think of your brethren like unto yourselves, and be familiar with all and free with your substance, that they may be rich like unto you.
Social: We need to delve deeper into the economic workings of villages to understand how Jacob sees his solution as being effective. Jacob is suggesting that those who are wealthy distribute their wealth - and then he suggests that all will "be rich like unto you." How is it that the dilution of wealth in the hands of a few will lead to a generally more wealthy population? A story is told about Andrew Carnegie, whether true or not. As a wealthy man he was frequently beset by those who wanted to share his wealth. As the story is told, a man approached him and noted that Mr. Carnegie was vastly wealthy, and that Mr. Carnegie's money should be redistributed. Mr. Carnegie is said to have turned to an associate and said: "give the man a dollar, that's his share." The point is that a distribution over a larger population decreases wealth. The very wide distribution levels the inequities, and while there is not as great an accumulation, more importantly, there is no differentiation in accumulation. So once again, Jacob's words seem somewhat unusual. What is different in the village economy is the distance a person is from the necessity of food production. If all must equally work at providing sufficient food, then all are reasonably equal, for there is no time to engage in other activities. Nephite society had clearly progressed to a point where there were some who could be distanced at least somewhat from food production. Nephi and Jacob were probably involved in production, but also probably not to the same extent as others. The building project of the temple indicates sufficient surplus of food that a labor force might be assembled and work through some period of time. The presence of trade also indicates that there are some who are able to be distanced from food production. The time it takes to create the trade goods, as well as the time required to take the trips to negotiate trade all presume a surplus of food such that there is time for these activities. Thus there must be in Nephite society those who are somewhat distanced from food production, but there are also very clearly a very large number who are still engaged completely in the task of food production. Jacob's hints are that this emerging merchant class valued their trade goods higher than the foodstuffs, even though they would be unable to operate without sufficient surplus food from their brethren. In the distribution of trade goods, Jacob is suggesting that there is value in the work of one's hands, both for food and trade items, and that by deeming fellows as themselves, these nouveau merchants would understand that they also have an obligation to trade for their food. Thus the goods are distributed, and all become wealthy not as opposed to each other, but as contrasted to other villages not having the clear benefits that the Nephites appear to have had. Paul Radin summarizes some of the reasons that food and manufactured goods might be seen in very different circumstances: " …the important fact to remember is that the idea of withholding food from anyone for any reason whatsoever, no matter what the status of the individual, what crime against the community he may have committed or how unwilling to work he may be, is, in a primitive community, simply unthinkable. It would be tantamount to denying his existence." (Radin, 1953, p. 113). Jacob's village was not that long removed from the egalitarian necessities of simple survival, and doubtless had incorporated a communal understanding about food such as Radin describes. With the introduction of trade goods, those who received them could easily presume that their scarcity held greater value than food, since food was not an item that would reasonably be withheld.
18 But before ye seek for riches, seek ye for the kingdom of God. Jacob 2:19 19 And after ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to do good—to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted.
Social and Economic: Jacob's solution to the problem of wealth is an egalitarian one. Jacob supposes that the wealth will be distributed as it is needed. Even though this solution is given in the context of a much less complex economy than our own, the concept of generosity still maintains. One may avoid the sin attached to wealth if one does not consider oneself superior because of the wealth. The demonstration of humility comes in the distribution of one's capabilities for the assistance of the less fortunate. Aside from the moral lesson, however, there is important social information in Jacob's description of the ways in which wealth might be used. Jacob gives us four categories, and three of them are very easily understood. We comprehend what it means to clothe the naked. We understand what it means to feed the hungry (though in Jacob's village this would almost assuredly be directed to the itinerant outsider, as other mechanisms would have fed those within the village). We also have some kind of understanding of what it might mean to administer relief to the sick and the afflicted - although where we think of medicines, it is most likely that this would simply mean care, as medicine was certainly not in an advanced state. The one that is fascinating, however, is that Jacob suggests that wealth might be used to "liberate the captive." With the stated history of the Nephites in conflict with the Lamanites (see, for example, 2 Nephi 5:34; Jacob 1:10) we can safely assume that this is a very real, and not a figurative possibility. The taking of captives become a central facet of Mesoamerican warfare. Schele and Freidel describe the later customs of the Classic Maya: "The presence of this captive documents the crucial role played by war and captive taking in early Maya kingship. The Maya fought not to kill their enemies but to capture them. Kings did not take their captives easily, but in aggressive hand-to-hand combat. A defeated ruler or lord was stripped of his finery, bound, and carried back to the victorious city to be tortured and sacrificed in public rituals. The prestige value a royal captive held for a king was high, and often a king would link the names of his important captives to his own throughout his life. Captives were symbols of the prowess and potency of a ruler and his ability to subjugate his enemies." (Schele, Linda, and David Freidel. A Forest of Kings. New York, William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1990, p. 143). Of course the evidence that Schele and Freidel are examining are both much later than Jacob's discourse, and deal with politically important captives. Later Mesoamerican practice still took captives, but more for their sacrificial value that their ransom. Nevertheless, Jacob at least presumes that ransom is an option for captured Nephites.
20 And now, my brethren, I have spoken unto you concerning pride; and those of you which have afflicted your neighbor, and persecuted him because ye were proud in your hearts, of the things which God hath given you, what say ye of it?
21 Do ye not suppose that such things are abominable unto him who created all flesh? And the one being is as precious in his sight as the other. And all flesh is of the dust; and for the selfsame end hath he created them, that they should keep his commandments and glorify him forever. Jacob 2:22 22 And now I make an end of speaking unto you concerning this pride. And were it not that I must speak unto you concerning a grosser crime, my heart would rejoice exceedingly because of you.
Rhetorical: Verse 22 is a transition between two topics. There were probably more topics treated (see Jacob 3:12), but we have only two recorded. Jacob's transition lacks art, but it is clear. He ends speaking on pride, and now picks up a new subject.
23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.
What is most interesting in Jacob's discourse against polygamy is that the terminology he uses to condemn the practice is problematic. While he is certainly talking about polygyny (having more than one wife) he uses terms that would suggest that what is happening has no justification. As an Old Word Jew, even though one who spent no time in Jerusalem, Jacob nevertheless is familiar with the brass plates and the multiple stories of the polygyny of the patriarchs. In spite of this, Jacob's language is strongly condemnatory. There is a subplot in this text that must be discovered. Jacob introduces the Nephite men's "grosser crime" as committing whoredoms. Jacob notes that the men are justifying their whoredoms by an appeal to David and Solomon. Taking the terms at their face value creates an interesting problem. Whoredom is a particular classification of sexual activity. Obviously all sexual activity is not a whoredom, so in what context would we find it? The easiest way to define it is to look at where the term would clearly not apply, and that is to the context or marriage. A man and woman married to each other do not commit whoredom with each other. It can’t happen. There is a definition involved which provides moral and legal sanctity to sexual acts performed inside a marriage. The most confusing aspect of Jacob's discourse will be this odd contradiction of definitions, where Jacob uses whoredom as a description of the same relationship for which he uses wife, a situation that should not exist. While we certainly understand that marriages may be sanctioned by the Lord, they are also a political/legal definition. Thus any marriage that carries the political or legal sanction defines the actions of those involved to be legal, and therefore outside of the realm of "whoredom." The definition of whoredom is therefore completely dependent upon the definition of marriage, because it refers to sexual activity outside of those defined bounds. This becomes most interesting because the term "whoredom" is applied to David and Solomon. While they did indeed have many partners, they had many legal partners. Those legal partners could not fall under the designation of whoredom, so what could this possibly mean? As a working proposition, there are two hypotheses. One is that even the legal sanction fails in the sight of the Lord once we exceed one man and one woman. The second is that something in the particulars of the marriages of David and Solomon created the condition of whoredom, but that reason would not have applied to all of the legal wives. The first hypothesis is hard to hold in the light of verse 30 below (30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things). Thus the number of wives can’t be the inherent problem. The second is still problematic because according to the laws of the time, David and Solomon did have legal wives. Still, there are complications with both David and Solomon that came from their desires for wives. David fell over Bathsheba, and Solomon's involvement with his foreign wives was also contrary to God's desires. Thus for both David and Solomon, while there were legal definitions that placed their wives and concubines in officially sanctioned categories, there were moral indiscretions that perhaps withheld God's sanction from those marriages. Thus they might have been married before mortal law, but in those cases, not married before eternal deity.
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old. Jacob 2:27 27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. Jacob 2:29 29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts. Jacob 2:33 33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.
We now have sufficient pieces of the puzzle to start to work out a solution. We must remember that this is a situation that has necessarily arisen after the accumulation of wealth. As we noted above, that accumulation of wealth presumes contact with other villages and the exchange of goods. I also noted that along with the goods come ideas and concepts. A simple instance of this is fashion. If there is trade for clothing, then the clothing of that "exotic" place becomes interesting, and fashionable. Thus in simple cases, conceptions of art and esthetics can move from location to location. In a Mesoamerican setting we have a long history of polygamy among the native populations. While the best evidence is for long after the Book of Mormon, there is no reason to suppose that polygamy would have been a late introduction. It is most probable that polygamy (specifically polygyny) was always an acceptable option, and exercised when a people (or person) had sufficient wealth to enter the practice. If we take a step back and attempt to reconstruct the way in which polygamy entered Nephite society, we can surmise some important points. The first is that the prohibition against multiple wives came from Lehi himself (Jacob 2:34). Therefore the earliest Nephites would have received the commandment directly from their patriarch. At the time the Lehites leave Jerusalem, the norm was monogamy, as the example of Lehi was monogamy (as well as that of the children in the family, according to the best reconstructions). Therefore we have a people who are not only commanded against polygamy, but who are probably culturally predisposed to be against polygamy. Certainly discussions with modern women about historic Mormon polygamy suggests that the strength of those cultural prohibitions is strong. In such a climate, what would make someone decide to take another wife (and the wife accept it)? Here is where the Mesoamerican context of the Book of Mormon can provide an answer to an otherwise very complicated problem. The accumulation of wealth in the Nephites necessarily required trade with other peoples, and it is very likely that there were some of those contacts who practiced polygamy. Because of the expense involved, we may easily assume that it was only the most wealthy and powerful of the trading villages/cities who had such a practice. It would be those wealthy cities that would provide the most desirable trade goods (having sufficient surplus to allow time for production of luxury items in sufficient quantity for trade). It would be the styles of these villages/cities that are being adopted in the costly apparel that the rich Nephite men are wearing (being a manufactured item, they would be in the style of the location that created them). It is a very short step form the admiration of the physical culture to the adoption of the trappings of that culture. If the traders encounter polygyny among the privileged wealthy in those villages, then they might have wanted to mimic those wealthy peoples in more than just costly apparel. In this possible context, let's return to the problem of "whoredom" and "chastity." Remember that it is the chastity of the women that is the issue, not the men! The Lord does not specifically deal with the infidelity of men, only the "whoredoms" or non-sanctioned unions that occur. When the Lord is most specific, he is protecting the women’s chastity! Since a legal marriage nicely protects chastity, the meaning here must be that the women are being given in marriages that do not have legal sanction in Nephite society. In most societies, the exchange of women between groups is a mode of strengthening relationships. Such political intermarriages have been the backbone of European politics for centuries. It is possible that what is happening with the women is that they are being given outside of the Nephite society into a society that allows polygamy. Thus they are given as polygamous wives to a society that accepts that practice. Since the practice was forbidden by Lehi, it would not be the sanctioned practice of the Nephites, and therefore falls outside of the legal definitions. From the Nephite view, it is a "whoredom" because it is not sanctioned. The wailings of the women would come from their forced entry into political unions not sanctioned by the Lord’s command to Lehi. This context also provides greater depth of meaning to the women being lead away into captivity, a situation more understandable if it actually describes the women being removed from Nephite society and into a different city/culture.
34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.
35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.
Redaction: It is important to remember that while there is chapter break in our current versions of the Book of Mormon, there was no chapter division here in the 1830 edition. This is important because we have in our current Jacob 2 an 3 a single discourse given at a specific location without any conceptual division. Had there been a division in the text on the plates themselves, we would be required to explain that division. In this case the division is artificial, unlike the division between 2 Nephi 31 and 32 which did exist on the plates, and therefore did require an explanation or the reason a division existed. |
||
| by Brant Gardner. Copyright 1999 |
Jacob
2:1
|
|
 |