|
MDC Contents
|
|
|
 Mosiah 18:1
1 And now, it came to pass that Alma, who had fled from the servants of king Noah, repented of his sins and iniquities,
and went about privately among the people, and began to teach the words of Abinadi-
We are not told of
the process of repentance that Alma went through, but we may understand that it was complete. Alma has been completely
converted by Abinadi, in the true sense of "converted," that is, that he has been changed from one state
to another. Where Alma was once a firm supporter of the king and the king's religious doctrine, he is now a proponent
of the gospel as Abinadi had explained it.
Alma must also have known that his life was in danger, but in spite of that, he "went about privately among
the people." It may have been that people were willing to listen to Alma where they did not listen to Abinadi
precisely because it had cost Alma so much to follow God. He had lost position and rank, he had certainly lost
wealth, and was in danger of losing his life. Alma was an obvious walking testimony to the power Abinadi's message
had in his life.
Mosiah 18:2
2 Yea, concerning that which was to come, and also concerning the resurrection of the dead, and the redemption
of the people, which was to be brought to pass through the power, and sufferings, and death of Christ, and his
resurrection and ascension into heaven.
Mormon is frustratingly
obtuse in his first declaration. Alma teaches: "that which was to come." What was that? Was this the
calamities that Abinadi had foretold? It was the coming of the atoning Messiah. That was the essence of Abinadi's
message. It was the understanding of the atoning Messiah that had converted Alma, and the rest of the passage confirms
it. Alma is preaching of Christ.
Mosiah 18:3
3 And as many as would hear his word he did teach. And he taught them privately, that it might not come to the
knowledge of the king. And many did believe his words.
We do not know how
Alma found those who "would hear his word." He would certainly have to be careful so as not to draw attention
to himself. He would have to be very careful to teach only those he could trust would not turn him over to the
king's men. When we read that they were taught "privately" we may also assume "secretly." This
was a careful and clandestine preaching of the gospel. Abinadi had already died for this gospel, and Alma was under
a death sentence for his part in it. It is very probable that the people understood that they too would share that
fate if caught. It is a strong testimony to the power of faith in these first converts that they were not only
willing to believe, but to believe under such harsh circumstances.
Mosiah 18:4
4 And it came to pass that as many as did believe him did go forth to a place which was called Mormon, having received
its name from the king, being in the borders of the land having been infested, by times or at seasons, by wild
beasts.
Geographical:
The people go to a place called Mormon. This is an appellation give to an entire region, as we later hear: Mosiah
18:30 "And now it came to pass that all this was done in Mormon, yea, by the waters of Mormon, in the forest
that was near the waters of Mormon; yea, the place of Mormon, the waters of Mormon, the forest of Mormon…"
This verse contains several important pieces of information. The first is that the people who believe Alma leave
their homes and go to a place of gathering. The descriptions of Mormon appear to support the idea that these people
did not leave for another organized city, but rather for a wilderness life. They gave up their material lives for
the sake of the gospel, and placed themselves under condemnation of their government, witnessed by the fact that
they went to the "place which was called Mormon" to avoid detection.
Second, we learn that this land was called Mormon "having received its name from the king." We can read
this two different ways. One would be that the king declared the name to be Mormon, and second that the king's
name was Mormon, which he gave to the area. We know that Mormon is can be a man's name, and so it is possible that
the king was named Mormon (though our Mormon-the-abridger was named after the land, not specifically a person -
see 3 Nephi 5:12). If the king were named Mormon, which king was it? I was no king of Zarahemla, as Mosiah I leaves
the area and our genealogies since Mosiah I have no Mormon.
It was probably not a pre-Mosiah I Nephite king, as those kings should have been called Nephi's (see Jacob 1:11,
though Mormon might have been the birth name). It is quite probable that Mormon was the name of a Lamanite king,
and that Alma deliberately leads his people out of the lands controlled by Noah. They may have been lands unassociated
with the ancestral Nephites - in other words, a territory into which Noah was not likely to follow for long, both
because of a lesser knowledge of the area and the possibility of angering neighboring Lamanite populations.
Third, it is described as "having been infested, by times or at seasons, by wild beasts." The word "infested"
suggests that this was not the same as a hunting ground. These wild beasts were not for food. In fact, the connotation
might be rather that the wild beasts might hunt people for food. Mesoamerica is home to a number of larger cats,
with the most powerful being the jaguar. The jaguar was sacred to most of the peoples of Mesoamerica. While it
would probably not have been common for the jaguar to take human prey, it also would not have been unlikely that
it had ever happened. The forests of Mormon might easily have been home to jaguars or other large cats, such as
the ocelot. For these reasons, it may have been an unfavorable location for much population, characteristics that
would make it idea for Alma's purposes.
Mosiah 18:5
5 Now, there was in Mormon a fountain of pure water, and Alma resorted thither, there being near the water a thicket
of small trees, where he did hide himself in the daytime from the searches of the king.
Geographical:
- "The waters of Mormon "in the borders of the land" of Nephi (Mosiah 18:4, 31) was [the] rendezvous
[for Alma's people]. This spot had to be far enough from the city of Nephi that reports of what they were up to
would not readily get back to Noah's court. Events demonstrated that Mormon was located on the Zarahemla side of
Nephi. We know this because when the time came that Alma's group had to flee, they got on their way to Zarahemla
from Mormon with a significant head start over Noah's army, which pursued them. Alma at Mormon got word about the
approaching force after they were en route, yet the people still had time to pack up and make an unhindered escape
in the direction of Zarahemla (Mosiah 18:34). Approximately two days of routine travel, or one and a half under
pressure, seems satisfactory for the distance from Nephi to Mormon.
The relationship of Nephi and Mormon becomes clearer when we look at the geography of highland Guatemala. With
the city of Nephi at Kaminaljuyu (Guatemala City), the only body of water in the direction of Zarahemla that could
serve as the waters of Mormon was Lake Atitlan. It is about nine by four miles in dimension. Only a sizable lake
would do as the Book of Mormon "waters," for two reasons: (1) the same body of water, it appears, later
rose enough to submerge the city of Jerusalem (3 Nephi 9:7), a Lamanite center built after Alma's departure, and
(2) it was "away joining the borders of Mormon" (Alma 21:1), implying that the two spots were some little
distance apart. The distances and directions relating Nephi, Mormon and Jerusalem are appropriate if the latter
two were on Lake Atitlan. Nephi at Kaminaljuyu would be approximately 40 air miles from Lake Atitlan" (Sorenson,
John L. An Ancient American Setting For The Book Of Mormon. FARMS 1985, page 176 ).
Anthropological: Sorenson takes particular note of the phrase "pure water" that is used to describe
the waters of Mormon. He notes that the next community Alma founds is also to be noted for its "pure water"
(see Mosiah 23:4). Sorenson suggests that this emphasis is related to a Mesoamerican concern with the waters of
the underworld, which were considered sacred (Sorenson 1985, pp. 176-9).
The conception of waters underneath the surface of the earth is widespread. In the Old World it underlay the mythology
of Babylon and other Levantine civilizations (see Widengren, Geo. The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near
Easter Religion. Uppsala: A.-B Lundequistaska Bokhandeln. 1951, p. 35 and Clifford, Richard J. "The Temple
and the Holy Mountain." In: The Temple in Antiquity. Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1984,
p. 111). This Levantine conception of the construction of the earth was also adopted by Israel.
- "The biblical reflexes of the Ugaritic traditions of El's dwelling are not hard to discern… El's residence
as the source of all fertilizing waters is echoed in Genesis 2:10-14, which discusses the four rivers that rise
in Eden, and in Ezekiel 47:1-12, describing the river that flows from the temple on the mountain." (Clifford
1984, p. 111).
John Lundquist expands on the connection between the temple and the waters:
- "The temple is often associated with the waters of life which flow from a spring within the building itself
- or rather the temple is viewed as incorporating within itself such a spring or as having been built upon the
sprint. The reason such springs exist in temples is that they were perceived as the primeval waters of creation,
Nun in Egypt, abzu in Mesopotamia, tehom in Israel. The temple is thus founded upon and stands in contact with
the waters of creation. These waters carry the dual symbolism of the chaotic waters that were organized during
the creation and of the life-giving, saving nature of the waters of life." (Lundquist, John M. "The Common
Temple Ideology of the Ancient Near East." In: The Temple in Antiquity. Religious Studies Center, Brigham
Young University, 1984, p. 66).
These Ancient Near Eastern conceptions would have blended well with the general water/mountain/temple symbolism
of Mesoamerica. This conception of a connection with the "pure" waters of the underworld persists to
the Maya present. Note the nature of the water in this description of a modern Maya rite:
- "All participants brought the dough made with corn ground by their womenfolk for the sacred breads that
are layered, like heaven and the underworld, on the altar, as well as the cooked meats, and the "wine"
made from honey and "virgin water" from a deep natural well." (Freidel, David, Linda Schele, and
Joy Parker. Maya Cosmos. William Morrow and Company, 1993, p. 31).
Just as this modern "virgin water" came from a deep natural well, there may have been something about
the nature of the particular waters that Alma found that he described as "pure waters." They were locations
that could be understood to be sacred. Whether drawing upon the more immediate Mesoamerican understanding, or a
visceral remembrance of the Old World meanings through the brass plates makes little difference. Alma would easily
have understood the sacred relationships of mountains and waters, and founding a religious community in such a
sacred place would be more than appropriate, it would be fortuitous.
Mosiah 18:6
6 And it came to pass that as many as believed him went thither to hear his words.
Mosiah 18:7
7 And it came to pass after many days there were a goodly number gathered together at the place of Mormon, to hear
the words of Alma. Yea, all were gathered together that believed on his word, to hear him. And he did teach them,
and did preach unto them repentance, and redemption, and faith on the Lord.
Alma has preached to
the people of Noah in their homes, and in secret. While this was apparently essential, it would also be very unsatisfactory
for those who believed him. Believing would inevitably stir a desire to participate in a community of believers,
to share their common understandings. The gathering of larger numbers of believers in the politically charged atmosphere
of Lehi-Nephi would likely be nearly suicidal. In order to be able to openly live their new understanding of their
religion, the believers would have to leave their established community and begin a new one. Note that those who
are going to the land of Mormon are those who already believe, not those who are interested and simply want to
learn more. It is most likely that the location of the community was also kept secret, and was known only to the
faithful, lest a spy give them over to the king's men.
Just as Joseph's earliest converts found that gathering to a new community gave them the opportunity to openly
share their religion with others of the same beliefs, so did this community of Alma's believers. They have removed
themselves from their homes, and gone to a relative wilderness, not to seek riches, but to seek the kingdom of
God. They left home and perhaps family for a place that might be beautiful, but was at least somewhat dangerous
(see the comment on the wild beasts, verse 4). The process of the gathering takes multiple days. Some of that time
would be in travel, some was taken up in the preparations for that travel. Eventually four hundred and fifty people
join Alma (see verse 35). We may presume that this count is likely to be of adults only, as children are not mentioned,
and converted families would certainly bring their families. If the count is four hundred and fifty adults, there
would probably be somewhat more than half of that number as households, which would create a hamlet. Of course
if the count follows the general Old World custom of counting adult males only (a distinct possibility since the
Book of Mormon is so studiously quiet about women) then we have a much more sizeable village. Either number would
have created a noticeable departure from Lehi-Nephi, and would certainly have generated official governmental concern,
as is indicated in the history we will see unfold.
Our quick introduction to the essential difference in what Alma taught from that which they might have learned
in Lehi-Nephi is found in the final sentence of verse 7. They learn "repentance, and redemption, and faith
on the Lord." These phrases are sufficiently common for modern Christians that it is easy to gloss over their
significance for Alma's community. What Alma preaches is the atoning Messiah, precisely the message that Abinadi
delivered, but which was not believed in Abinadi's ministry. The conversion of Alma by Abinadi succeeded in doing
what Abinadi had been unable to do, to convert some of the people of Noah to the true understanding of the connection
between the Law of Moses and the coming atoning Messiah, Christ the Lord.
It is equally probable that modern LDS miss the newness of Alma's preaching. With Alma we see the first clear evidences
of the modern church in the Book of Mormon. With Alma we will see an organization of the community of believers
that was not only innovative, but revolutionary. What begins in this small group will later become the pattern
for all Nephite religious practices. While Alma begins with the message of Abinadi that echoed the Christological
message of the Nephi, he adds to this timeless message his own revelatory expansion and development. As we see
the story of Alma develop, we will see Alma as the most important religious and political innovator in Nephite
history. See Daniel C. Peterson's "Priesthood in Mosiah." The Book of Mormon: Mosiah, Salvation Only
Through Christ. Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1991, pp. 187-210 for an important discussion of priesthood and
church in this period of the Book of Mormon.
Mosiah 18:8
8 And it came to pass that he said unto them: Behold, here are the waters of Mormon (for thus were they called)
and now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, and are willing to bear
one another's burdens, that they may be light;
Mosiah 18:9
9 Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, and
to stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places that ye may be in, even until death,
that ye may be redeemed of God, and be numbered with those of the first resurrection, that ye may have eternal
life-
Mosiah 18:10
10 Now I say unto you, if this be the desire of your hearts, what have you against being baptized in the name of
the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep
his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?
Historical:
The development of Christian Baptism: These verses introduce us to Alma baptizing in the waters of Mormon. Alma's
baptism is a rather modern conception of baptism, and so we may easily miss the revolutionary nature of what Alma
is doing. To understand Alma's innovation we need to understand more of what he is doing, and particularly why
this might be important enough for Mormon to record it.
First, we should clearly understand what Alma is doing. He introduces baptism to his believers. Because it is called
"baptism" it is very easy to presume that we know exactly what the idea meant in this ancient context.
That would be too simple. First, we must remember that the conception of a whole-body washing for personal purity
was long a part of Israelite religion. The miqveh was a rite of washing for the cleansing of the person. It is
probably this native Jewish rite that John the Baptists expands into his baptism. In the Old World, this Baptist
immersion that dates to before Jesus' ministry is adopted by the Christian community and undergoes a theological
evolution when it becomes associated with the death and resurrection of the Lord, a symbolism it could not have
had in the hands of the Baptist.
In the New World baptism was clearly taught by Nephi, as indicated in 2 Nephi 31:4-5. This commentary on those
verses discusses the possible nature of that baptism. To review, the Jewish ritual washing by immersion was performed
to symbolize a state of purity, using the cleansing power of water in a symbolic cleansing. Christian baptism retains
this symbolism as a means of cleansing from sin. That, however, is only one of the symbolic associations of the
Christian baptism. The next element of Christian baptism is a formal covenant of entry into a community of believers.
This element was clearly part of the washing of John and those performed by the writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls
which describe very specifically the baptism as an entrance covenant (see Vermes, G. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English.
Penguin Books, 1975. P. 45). In the earlier discussion of Nephi's baptism it was noted that this was a symbolic
point that distinguished Nephi's baptism from the later baptisms by John and the Qumran community. Where they baptized
for entrance into a community, Nephi's community already existed as distinct entity, and the baptism was added
on to the whole community's belief structure.
It is precisely at this point that Alma's baptism differs from Nephi's, and follows that of John and the Qumranians.
Alma is very clearly baptizing into a separate community. Both he and the people who have followed him have separated
from their homes and repaired to a completely separate location. They have already been a part of a community religion,
and are now accepting a new revelation of that religion, accepting the atoning messiah as an integral part of their
Mosaic observances and beliefs. As a covenant not only of cleansing, but also of entrance into this specialized
community and religion, they accept baptism. We should see Alma here in his role as a major religious reformer,
not that he was teaching a gospel that was unknown, but that Alma begins a social structure for organizing that
religion that is unknown in the Book of Mormon until this time.
Daniel C. Peterson notes:
"Although Nephi makes it clear that baptism is the first step on the path toward eternal life (2 Nephi
31:9,18), it is not self-evident that baptism has always signified entrance into a church, or that entrance to
a church has always been a part of that path.
- I propose that before the ordinance of baptism signified membership in the Church the early Nephites found
their primary social and religious identification in the very fact that they were Nephites. In the earliest days
of the Nephites in the New World, following Nephi required a deliberate commitment which demanded sacrifice from
those who made it. Baptism was preached, and, indeed, stressed to these early Nephites as something pleasing to
God and as a necessity for salvation in his kingdom - but it would be easy for unbaptized Nephites to think of
themselves as members of God's people strictly because of their heritage." (Peterson, Daniel C. "Priesthood
in Mosiah." The Book of Mormon: Mosiah, Salvation Only Through Christ. Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1991,
pp. 202).
From this beginning of the integration of a people into a religious community forcibly extracted from the dominating
culture, Alma will proceed to organize other sub-communities that will be selected from the larger cultural body,
and held together by common beliefs that are covenantally witnessed by a baptism that symbolizes both the cleansing
of the individual and the joining with the community of believers. Alma will establish churches for the first time
in the Book of Mormon. In the larger populations represented by the communities attached to Zarahemla, this innovation
of baptism as an entrance into a church will allow for the coexistence of differing religious ideas in the land
of Zarahemla, as well as account for the specific missions to bring dissidents back to the fold. This will be further
discussed in the context of that creation in Zarahemla in later chapters.
Before leaving the topic of baptism, there is one further symbolism attached to Christian baptism that we should
examine if only briefly. Paul very clearly associates baptism with the death and resurrection of Christ, using
that death and rebirth as a model for the effect of baptism on the follower of Christ:
Rom. 6:3-11
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the
glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth
we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Note how completely the imagery of Christ's death and resurrection is spread throughout Paul's usage. From at least
Paul's time, therefore, one of the attached symbolic elements of baptism has been the burial and resurrection theme.
When one enters the water, it is not only the water of cleansing, but the grave, from which a resurrected/renewed
soul arises. What is important about this symbolic aspect of baptism is that it absolutely requires that the death
and resurrection of Christ be an important theme, and that it has already been accomplished. What is most fascinating
about Book of Mormon baptismal symbolism is that it never mentions this particular symbolic aspect. This is clearly
in keeping with the time period so long prior to Christ's earthly mission, and in keeping with the emphasis on
the atoning savior rather than Paul's dying savior.
Mosiah 18:11
11 And now when the people had heard these words, they clapped their hands for joy, and exclaimed: This is the
desire of our hearts.
Textual: We
have specific words from Alma in the midst of description from Alma. We may presume that we are now reading Mormon's
rewriting of Alma's record. While the only firm indication we have that Alma created a record is Mosiah 17:4 that
specifically mentions Alma writing about Abinadi, we may safely presume that Alma also wrote a record of his efforts
with those who followed him to Mormon.
Mormon's interest in Alma's writings begins with the words of Abinadi, both because of their effect upon Alma and
their firm declaration of the essentiality of the atoning Messiah. When Mormon turns to the events at Mormon, he
chiefly records events rather than specific discourses. This would be consistent with a record that chiefly recorded
events rather than discourses.
We can speculate somewhat on the nature of Alma's record based on the way Mormon treats it. We know that Mormon
is quite willing to record an original document such as we have with the copied record of Zeniff (beginning in
Mosiah 9). We know that Mormon is willing to record a long but important discourse such as Abinadi before the priests.
In the current text we also have some cited passages such as these that give the essential baptismal covenant Alma
pronounced. What we also have is a large amount of descriptive text. This description rather than citation continues
through the end of this chapter and includes a synopsis of Alma's post-baptismal sermon rather than a citation.
Why doesn't Mormon cite the full sermon? The topics appear to be important, and in similar instances, Mormon has
allowed Alma and others to speak for themselves. It is possible that we are seeing an artifact of the source that
Mormon worked with. It may well be that Alma did not record his words extensively, but that most of his record
was narrative description. That is the type of material that Mormon could easily condense, and would produce precisely
the type of text we have. Where Alma's record clearly included important copies of discourses, Mormon stays true
to his editorial nature, and enters them into his abridgement. Where Alma simply told what he said, as opposed
to writing down the text of what he said, Mormon again stays true to form and gives us a synopsis rather than a
copy from the original source.
Historical: The simple explanation of this verse is very straightforward; the people respond enthusiastically
to the offer of baptism. That simple answer, however, does not seem to fit all of the information we have presented
to us.
Most interesting is the description of the people's reaction to the invitation to baptism. It is interesting not
in that they want to be baptism, but that they clap their hands for joy. This reaction of the crowd invites speculation
on what would cause the people to clap their hands. The incident is recorded as a collective action. As we saw
in the discussion of Benjamin's speech, collective action can either be ritual or spontaneous. Which might this
one be?
While it is possible that there was some cultural indication that one should clap at certain times, it really seems
unlikely that Alma records, and Mormon writes, about an action that was an expected ritual event. It is much more
likely that this is a spontaneous action, and is remarkable in its spontaneity and therefore worthy of note in
both Alma and Mormon's records. We know that this clapping of hands for joy can be a very natural human reaction,
and this strengthens our declaration that this was an unplanned public event.
Declaring that it is spontaneous is fine in and of itself, but the real question is why it was a spontaneous event.
The clapping of hands is not only connected to joy, but to surprise. Little children at Christmas time might clap
hands for joy when they see something that really excites them. When they see that same thing later, they may continue
to be excited, they may continue to have joy, but the hand-clapping that accompanied the original instance is not
repeated. The hand-clapping occurs at the original instance of something that is not only joyful, but unexpected.
In the case of the converts of Alma, what is unexpected? It is Alma's invitation to baptism. The converts in the
land of Mormon do not expect that they will be baptized with they follow Alma. They great this offer not only with
delight, but also with a spontaneous hand-clapping indicating that it is an unforeseen delight. As indicated above,
the introduction of Christian baptism by Nephi would have supplanted the ritual washing of the mikveh. However,
it appears that the rite of baptism may not have been widely practiced. Even presuming that Christian baptism would
have been removed from Noah's religion, we cannot suppose that all who followed Alma were so young as to not have
been alive during Zeniff's reign. During that time they apparently were not taught of a redemptive baptism, and
therefore this opportunity to expunge their sins from their most recent life came as a most welcome opportunity.
They were certainly convinced that they had been wrong, now they had the opportunity to clean the slate and start
over again before God. That would have been a powerful offer.
They had followed Alma because they had come to understand the atoning Messiah who would come in some perhaps distant
future. In spite of that far future event, Alma was offering them immediate access to the atonement that they had
recently come to understand. They had given up all of their lives for their understanding of this atonement. Now
they had the opportunity to participate in it directly and personally. No wonder the offer of baptism was not only
surprising, but also an occasion of tremendous joy.
Mosiah 18:12
12 And now it came to pass that Alma took Helam, he being one of the first, and went and stood forth in the water,
and cried, saying: O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart.
Mosiah 18:13
13 And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having
authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are
dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal
life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world.
Mosiah 18:14
14 And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth
out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit.
Socio-cultural:
The waters of Mormon are described as a "fountain of pure water" in verse 5. In Jacobean English,
the "fountain" might have been a stream. John L. Sorenson has made his case that the waters of Mormon
could have been Lake Atitlan. There is a significant difference between a spring and a lake. While the evidence
that Sorenson cites indicating that Jerusalem which was in the borders of the land of Mormon was submerged appears
to lean toward the lake as the waters of Mormon, they may be insufficient grounds for a complete determination.
There is an interesting difference, however, in Old World and New World conceptions about bodies of water that
may have some relevance. The Didache (a "church manual" dating to soon after 100 AD) indicates that one
should be baptized in running water:
"Now about baptism: this is how to baptize. Give public instruction on all these points, then "baptize"
in running water, "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." If you do not have
running water, baptize in some other. If you cannot in cold, then in warm." ("Didache." In: Early
Christian Fathers. Macmillan Publishing Company. 1970, p. 174.)
This in the Old World, the symbolism of the water was one that was natural (cold, not warm) and "living"
in that it had a current. It was "alive" rather than stagnant. In the New World, the conceptual meanings
favored the still water rather than the running water:
"A common divination method directly linked to this function and to water was scrying. This technique involved
interpreting the light seen on reflective surfaces such as natural bodies of pooled water (particularly those found
within caves), the liquid in a bowl and a circular mirror which was often placed in the bottom of a bowl. In addition,
the lots used in divination casting were sometimes placed in a bowl of liquid. As the reflective surfaces of these
circular divination tools represented the pooled water of the sea, the implication is that divination knowledge
was linked to the waters of the sea and, by extension, to the creator grandparents who lived there…
The belief that water plays a fundamental role in divination is found in the world view, initiation rituals and
divination methods of the modern Quiche. Like many traditional Maya communities, the Quiche of Momostenango have
sacred mountains that define their community. They also have four sacred lakes, one for each direction (B. Tedlock
1982:139). Their directional nature and locations at the edges or beyond the limits of the Momostenango community
strongly suggest that each lake represents one quadrant of the mythological sea (Bassie 1996:69-70)…. Dreaming
of a lake is one indication that the ritual specialist is ready to receive divination knowledge (B. Tedlock 1982:54,
139). The lake is described as a mirror. (Bassie, Karen. From unpublished MS 1999, personal communication).
With this cultural background, it is quite possible that Alma would have preferred to baptize in a lake rather
than a stream. Just as the river in the Old World held important symbolic connotations, so too would the lake in
the New World. Since the people that were being baptized were some who had been under the influence of Noah's more
apostate version of religion, it would not be surprising at all if they had absorbed at least the general conception
of the lake as a sacred location with greater connections to the divine than a stream or a river.
Historical: We are introduced to Helam (verse 12) with the phrase "he being one of the first…"
Because he clearly is the first to be baptized, this reference to being one of the first cannot refer to Helam's
order of baptism. When combined with the naming of the land of Helam after him (see Mosiah 23: 19) we may presume
that Helam was a man of some importance in Lehi-Nephi - an importance sufficient to warrant right of first place
in the order of baptism, as well as right of name in the naming of the land. See the comments on Mosiah 23:19 for
more assumptions on the nature of Helam the man.
Scriptural: One of the questions that has been raised concerning these verses is the source of Alma's authority
and his possible previous baptism. Joseph Fielding Smith suggests:
- "We may conclude that Alma held the priesthood before he, with others, became disturbed with King Noah.
Whether this is so or not makes no difference because in the Book of Mosiah it is stated definitely that he had
authority…
If he had authority to baptize that is evidence that he had been baptized. Therefore, when Alma baptized himself
with Helam that was not a case of Alma baptizing himself, but merely as a token to the Lord of his humility and
full repentance. In Alma 5:3 we learn that Alma was consecrated the high priest over the Church under his father.
Now Alma did not organize the Church with the idea that they had no church before that time. They had a church
from the days of Lehi and Alma only set things in order.
Remember that the Book of Mormon is an abridgment of former records, and like the Bible, does not furnish many
details. If I remember correctly, there is no reference to the baptism of Alma the elder or Helaman nor of Nephi
and his brother Jacob, but we know they were baptized as were all the faithful members in the Church (Smith, Joseph
Fielding. Answers to Gospel Questions. Deseret Book. 1960, v.3, p. 203).
Daniel Ludlow examined the same verse, and suggests:
- "The Book of Mormon does not specifically state whether or not Alma had been baptized before or how he
got his authority to baptize. The record merely says that Alma immersed himself in the water when he baptized Helam
(Mosiah 18:14-15) and that "Alma, having authority from God, ordained priests." (Mosiah 18:18.) Alma
may have been ordained by Abinadi, but the record is not clear on this point (Ludlow, Daniel H. A Companion To
Your Study Of The Book Of Mormon. Deseret Book 1976, p. 188).
The first point where both authors are clear, and the basis upon which this discussion must rest, is that there
is no definitive answer. The Book of Mormon is not clear on this subject, and so all answers are speculative, and
must be based on the information gleaned from the text. In the case of Joseph Fielding Smith, his interpretive
model is very clearly the modern church, and therefore he must presume that "We may conclude that Alma held
the priesthood before he, with others, became disturbed with King Noah….," and "we know they were baptized
as were all the faithful members in the Church."
Just as does Joseph Fielding Smith, Daniel Ludlow also suggests the possibility of an ordination. For Ludlow, the
ordination may have occurred through Abinadi. In my reading of the historical situation in Lehi-Nephi, neither
of those possibilities appears to be probable. First, we must remember that Alma was a priest of Noah, and therefore
was not one of the priests of Noah's father, Zeniff. All of Zeniff's priests had been deposed; "For he put
down all the priests that had been consecrated by his father, and consecrated new ones in their stead, such as
were lifted up in the pride of their hearts" (Mosiah 11:5).
As one of the appointed priests of Noah, Alma could not have been a priest (the position, not the priesthood meaning
here) of his father. Even had Alma received the priesthood prior to his appointment by Alma, it would have been
a hollow ordination as Alma followed Noah's view of the law of Moses rather than the one that emphasized the atoning
Messiah. This was precisely the reason Abinadi preached to the priests, to deliver the message that they were in
error. Had Alma ever received the priesthood, he would have been in an apostate state during his time as a priest
of Noah. Since the D&C declares:
D&C 121:36-37
36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of
heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride,
our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any
degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when
it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
Priesthood ordination and priesthood power and authority are not necessarily one and the same. Alma's apostate
state would have placed him in a position where his effective priesthood had been withdrawn, regardless of any
prior ordination.
If Alma could not have carried over his ordination from the days prior to his appointment as a priest of Noah,
could he have received it later, under the hands of Abinadi, as Ludlow suggests? The only way this would be possible
is if Abinadi were to have been able to preach to and convert Alma prior to Abinadi's arrest and trial before Noah
and the priests. There was certainly no possibility of any ordination occurring after that time, as Alma had fled
and Abinadi was put to death. This scenario appears unlikely also, as Abinadi would have had little access to Alma
prior to that tribunal. Indeed, from the Lord's standpoint, it would appear that Abinadi's very mission was to
convert Alma, else his death had no meaning whatsoever. If Alma had already been converted, Abinadi stood before
the court and went to his death for no overarching reason. The events appear to indicate that Alma was indeed in
a state of apostasy, and that Abinadi's preaching converted Alma.
That brings us back to Alma's authority and baptism. First, Alma does declare the source of his authority in verse
13; "having authority from the Almighty God." There is no reason to doubt him. This is the same issue
as the nature of the priesthood for Nephi, who was not of the lineage of Levi. To him to whom God gives authority,
we need not question any other source. That the circumstances of the ancient world might have been different and
that the provision of priesthood and authority may have come in multiple ways should not surprise us. It is quite
possible that Alma received his authority from some angelic visitor, though Alma declares that it comes directly
from "Almighty God."
Peterson separates the initial priesthood ordination into the aspect of ordination and divine authority. For Peterson,
even a corrupt ordination would hold validity for the possession of the legalistic authority. The sanctification
would come through God. Thus for Alma, he might have been legitimately "ordained" by Noah, but have his
true authority through God (see Peterson, Daniel C. "Priesthood in Mosiah." The Book of Mormon: Mosiah,
Salvation Only Through Christ. Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1991, pp. 197-198).
What of Alma's prior baptism? Joseph Fielding Smith indicates that he must have been baptized because he was a
faithful member of the church. This is too simple a reading of the historical situation presented in the Book of
Mormon. Baptism does not appear to have been quite the same, as has been noted above, and discussed as part of
Nephi's introduction of baptism. Alma was creating a new entity in the New World, and he established baptism as
a new covenant of entry into the new community of Christ. The very fact that he baptized himself suggests that
even had he ever been baptized before, he saw it as important that he be baptized into this new covenant along
with the rest of those who joined his "church." The baptism of Alma and Helam in these verses has direct
parallel to the experience of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery:
JS-H 1:68-71
68 We still continued the work of translation, when, in the ensuing month (May, 1829), we on a certain day went
into the woods to pray and inquire of the Lord respecting baptism for the remission of sins, that we found mentioned
in the translation of the plates. While we were thus employed, praying and calling upon the Lord, a messenger from
heaven descended in a cloud of light, and having laid his hands upon us, he ordained us, saying:
69 Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys
of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of
sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto
the Lord in righteousness.
70 He said this Aaronic Priesthood had not the power of laying on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, but that
this should be conferred on us hereafter; and he commanded us to go and be baptized, and gave us directions that
I should baptize Oliver Cowdery, and that afterwards he should baptize me.
71 Accordingly we went and were baptized. I baptized him first, and afterwards he baptized me-after which I laid
my hands upon his head and ordained him to the Aaronic Priesthood, and afterwards he laid his hands on me and ordained
me to the same Priesthood-for so we were commanded.
There are more details in Joseph Smith's account than we have for Alma, but the baptism of the first two is clearly
similar. While Alma and Helam entered the water together and Joseph and Oliver baptized each other, the conditions
are similar in that we have the previously unbaptized performing a baptism. Joseph Smith is explicit in that the
authority to perform the baptism is given to then, and the record in the Book of Mormon in silent, but there is
no reason to doubt that the Lord could easily have provided the necessary authority in the same way. The similarities
in form suggest a similarity that goes beyond the form, and suggests a similarity of occasion as well. Both of
these occasions were the introduction of the priesthood-authorized baptism to a new generation.
Scriptural: Baptism and the Spirit: One of the distinguishing differences between the baptism of John
and the baptism of Jesus was the accompaniment of the "baptism" by the Spirit:
"…it may be that in the early Gentile Church John's baptism was counted with Christian
baptism as being in some way initiatory. A Gentile understanding of the gospel stories could easily have led to
this assumption. In Acts, John's baptism seems to have been considered adequate for participation in the community
of Jesus' first disciples, though after Pentecost and the reception of the Holy Spirit, distinctive Christian baptism
had a different, two-pronged character: it involved water and the Holy Spirit, as opposed to water alone (though
Philip was permitted to continue a water-only baptism by full immersion, as long as apostles such as Peter and
John made sure to follow in his tracks). The idea that being immersed with the "immersion of John" gave
one a certain status in the community of Jesus' disciples is reflected in the story that the man chosen to replace
Judas had to be someone who had been with Jesus and the others "beginning with [or:from] the immersion of
John" (Acts 1:22; cf. John 1:35-51). Yet there is the idea that those who were baptized by John - or were
immersed in accordance with the kind of baptism John performed - and only an inferior sort of immersion and had
to be baptized again with the Holy Spirit. The Pentecost experience apparently completed the process, so that those
immersed were immersed not only in water but also by the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4)." (Taylor, Joan E. the Immerser:
John the Baptist within Second Temple Judaism. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1997. p. 71-72).
When verse 12 has Alma say: "O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with
holiness of heart," we may see a direct invocation of this later conception of baptism. Alma does not have
a separate ordinance of baptism and then a laying on of hands, but does at least invoke the Spirit in a way that
uses a form of water imagery to describe the effect of the Spirit; "pour out they Spirit…."
There is insufficient data here to know if Alma's baptism precisely foreshadowed the Christian double-pronged "immersion"
in water and spirit. Even if Alma was not precisely conferring the Spirit, he was certainly invoking the presence
of the Spirit. This may be a small difference, but is important in the understanding of the development of the
baptism ideology in the Book of Mormon.
Translation: The printer's manuscript for verse 12 contains the name Helaman rather than the current
Helam. This change occurs in changes to the printer's manuscript. Thus the change is made quickly, and appears
in the first edition of the Book of Mormon as Helam. This precise change from Helaman to Helam occurs 12 times
in the corrections to the printer's manuscript: Mosiah 18:12,13,14; Mosiah 23: 19, 20, 25, 26, 29, 35, 37, 38,
39 (see Book of Mormon Critical Text. FARMS. 1987, pp. 453-4, 475-479).
Up to this point in the text, each reference to Helaman was changed to Helam. This pattern in the printer's manuscript
changes with the next two references to our current Helam: Mosiah 27:16, Alma 24:1 (see Book of Mormon Critical
Text. FARMS. 1987, pp. 497, 670).
The pattern here indicates that the first twelve occurrences of Helaman were an error, which was caught by the
time the printer's copy was written up to Mosiah 27:16. Finding that error, all of the "errors" were
corrected simultaneously to the correct Helam.
What does this say about the translation process? Absolutely nothing for certain, because the information comes
in the printer's manuscript in a portion where we cannot check it against the original. Since the printer's manuscript
was a copy, it is entirely possible that Oliver simply misread the name and made a substitution based upon the
Helaman who has his own book later in the text.
The only argument against this scenario is the massive repetition of the error. We expect scribal errors to be
localized and more limited. While the change does centralize in two locations, those locations are separated by
a fair amount of text. If, and only if, the transcription of Helaman accurately reflected the original manuscript,
this would call into question some of the evidence from the original that is used to show that there was close
control over the spelling (see Skousen, Royal. "Evidence from the Original Manuscript." In: Journal of
Book of Mormon Studies. 7:1:27). We cannot know, however, what was on the original, and what the source of this
mis-transcription was. In the absence of any other hypothesis, the copying error from the original to the printer's
manuscript is probably the best answer.
Mosiah 18:15
15 And again, Alma took another, and went forth a second time into the water, and baptized him according to the
first, only he did not bury himself again in the water.
When Alma baptizes
the next person he does not enter the water himself as he did with Helam. This is further confirmation that the
form of baptism was required for the entrant into this new church (and certainly for the remission of sins, looking
forward to the atonement) and that Alma's baptism fulfilled that requirement with his single immersion. Following
his own baptism with Helam, it was no longer required for Alma to be immersed, because he had been baptized at
that first instance.
Mosiah 18:16
16 And after this manner he did baptize every one that went forth to the place of Mormon; and they were in number
about two hundred and four souls; yea, and they were baptized in the waters of Mormon, and were filled with the
grace of God.
Alma similarly baptizes
"every one that went forth to the place of Mormon." At this point in time, this would be all of those
who had followed him out of Lehi-Nephi. Mormon clearly tells us that this little band of people numbers "two
hundred and four souls." Mormon gives us little more of the history of this community until their departure
from this land, but he will note that when they leave, they will number "four hundred and fifty souls"
(see verse 35). While we do not know of the length of time they spend in the land of Mormon, it would appear to
be unrealistic that this more than doubling of the population occurred by new births only. There must have been
some mode of communication to friends and loved ones left behind in Lehi-Nephi, and a sort of mini-mission to convert
them to the new church. Whether through their active missionary efforts, or the spirit leading new people to Alma,
this large increase in population suggests that the numbers were augmented by converts. Since the land of Mormon
was uninhabited, being the reason that Alma and his people went there, these converts must have come from Lehi-Nephi.
Mosiah 18:17
17 And they were called the church of God, or the church of Christ, from that time forward. And it came to pass
that whosoever was baptized by the power and authority of God was added to his church.
Sociological:
We have in this verse a very similar historical event to that referred to in Acts 11:25: "26 …And the disciples
were called Christians first in Antioch." In the Old World, the earliest designation of the followers of Christ
was "The Way" (Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. Doubleday, 1997, p. 81). Paul
clearly uses this term to denote the gospel before Felix:
"However, I admit that I worship the God of our fathers, as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect…"
(Acts 24:14, New International Version).
The shift from "the Way" to "Christians" signaled not only an internal/external designation,
but a recognition of a more formalized structure to those who followed "the Way," or those who were "Christians."
Horsley and Silberman note:
- "Just as the acolytes of the imperial cult were known as Augustiani, and just as the adherhents of the
various mystery religions were known by the name of the patron deities who were invoked in their secret, communal
meals and ceremonies, the faithful followers of Jesus in the city - both Jews and Greeks - came to be known as
Christianoi, or "Christians," to the people of Antioch" (Horsley, Richard A. and Neil Asher Silberman.
The Message and the Kingdom. Grosset/Putnam, 1997, p. 128).
Just as a shift in terminology in the old world formalized the outward perception of the Christian community
into a "church," so with Alma is there a creation of a new entity. In this case it is very specifically
the "church of God," or "the church of Christ." We must also understand this new designation,
as the word typically translated "church" in the New Testament is the Greek ekklesia, and that Greek
term could not be the word that Mormon wrote on the plates. Indeed, some have suggested that the mere presence
of the concept of "church" prior to the time of Christ is an anachronism. What is it doing here in the
Book of Mormon?
Jeff Lindsay writes:
"… we read of Alma establishing a church in the land nearly a century before the birth of Christ, and some
critics feel this represents a major blunder in the Book of Mormon. But the concept of a church - a convocation
of believers - was had among the House of Israel prior to the coming of Christ. I quote from the outstanding Bible
scholar, Alfred Edersheim, who is not LDS, as he discusses the meaning of Christ's statement to Peter about building
His church (Matt. 16:15-18):
- "Nor would the term 'Church' sound strange in Jewish ears. The same Greek word [ecclesia], as the
equivalent of the Hebrew Qahal, 'convocation,' 'the called,' occurs in the Septuagint rendering of the Old Testament,
and in 'the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach' (Ecclus, 24.2) and was apparently in familiar use at the time. In Hebrew
use it referred to Israel, not in their national but in their religious unity. (Alfred Edersheim, The Life and
Times of Jesus the Messiah, Hendrickson Publ., Peabody, Mass., 1993, pp. 531-532)
As one of many examples, Psalms 89 speaks of praising the Lord "in the congregation of the saints" (v.
5) and says that God is to be feared (respected, revered) "in the assembly of the saints." Why not call
such a congregation or assembly of worshipful believers a church? In fact, the Septuagint does, using the Greek
word "ecclesia" which is translated as "church" when it occurs in the King James Version of
the New Testament."(Lindsay, Jeff. http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_BMProblems.shtml#church).
Any argument based upon specific words in the Book of Mormon, such as church ignore the problems of translation.
We do not know what the original word was that Mormon wrote. We know only that Joseph Smith translated that word
as "church." In modern terms, "church" means as much a specific organization as it does anything
else. There is a sense of that in Alma. As has been noted before, religion and life in the ancient world were inextricably
intertwined. The conception of belonging to a religion was foreign to most of the ancient world. Religion provided
their definition of reality, it was their science, and their definition of the way the world worked. Particularly
in smaller communities, everyone would have the same world view, the same religion. What we see happening with
Alma is the formalization of a particular type of belief, the understanding that the Mosaic laws must be seen in
the light of a coming atoning Messiah. That community of believers separated from their larger community, and in
that separation created a subset of society. They were a people sharing the same language and material culture,
but no longer the same set of beliefs about how the world worked. As a separated community with a covenant of entry
(baptism) they fit the definition of "church" regardless of the way we might read the word or surmise
the underlying "Nephite" word.
Alma's community is created from very specific social pressures. The response to those pressures was to create
a religio-political structure that could define his new community both as its own entity and in opposition to the
greater culture from which it was derived. While the earliest existence of this community was as a separate town,
when it is integrated into Zarahemla society, it brings with it the ability to define a subset of a community that
is defined by religion rather than economic status. This is an important distinction that was probably not available
in most Mesoamerican communities at the time. King Benjamin's speech instituting social reform in Zarahemla followed
a time of social unrest and the removal of the dissenters to the Lamanites. In Benjamin's case, there was no mechanism
for establishing internal divisions that could remain separate, yet part of the community. It is precisely this
conception of a separate entity that might exist within a community that Alma creates as his religious innovation,
an innovation that he will take with him and institute formally in Zarahemla. As we will see in that setting, it
allows for the continuation of the body of believers amidst a larger cultural setting that does not always uniformly
adhere to those beliefs, even though there may be a political tie to Zarahemla.
Mosiah 18:18
18 And it came to pass that Alma, having authority from God, ordained priests; even one priest to every fifty of
their number did he ordain to preach unto them, and to teach them concerning the things pertaining to the kingdom
of God.
Social: In the
creation of Alma's church he simultaneously is creating a community. What he organizes is a system not only of
religious teachings, but of communal care. When a single priest is assigned to every fifty, Alma is also organizing
his people in a way that they can be cared for and governed. The number fifty provides a reasonable division of
his people (there would only be four priests and four "fifties" at this point in time) and the formulation
provided for growth in the community. The reason for the fifty might be a remembrance of the general use of the
number fifty in the Old Testament, and perhaps a specific reference to the times that "fifty" was used
as part of the construction of the tabernacle (see Exodus 26:5-6; Exodus 27:12-13).
Mosiah 18:19
19 And he commanded them that they should teach nothing save it were the things which he had taught, and which
had been spoken by the mouth of the holy prophets.
Mosiah 18:20
20 Yea, even he commanded them that they should preach nothing save it were repentance and faith on the Lord, who
had redeemed his people.
Mormon gives a brief
description of Alma's religious teachings. While it is tempting to see the admonition to "preach nothing save
it were repentance and faith on the Lord" as a command to preach only the basics, in the historical context
of Alma's community, these verses have a deeper color.
Alma had been a priest of Noah, and had preached to the people a gospel that denied the atoning Messiah. Alma is
making sure that what is taught among his people, in his "church" is the correct message of God, as the
prophets had received it, as Abinadi had declared it, and as Alma had come to know it. When Alma commands that
they preach "nothing save it were repentance and faith on the Lord" we must see that as a positive command,
not a negative one. Alma is not telling to them to stop teaching other things, but to emphasize the mission of
the atoning Messiah, of the Lord that Abinadi had declared so forcefully. These were people who were acquainted
with the law of Moses, but who had previously believed it in a version that denied the Savior. Alma wants to make
sure that his congregation understands the critical mission of this coming Savior. Therefore, his people are to
preach nothing else.
Mosiah 18:21
21 And he commanded them that there should be no contention one with another, but that they should look forward
with one eye, having one faith and one baptism, having their hearts knit together in unity and in love one towards
another.
Mosiah 18:22
22 And thus he commanded them to preach. And thus they became the children of God.
Textual: It
is tempting to see Mormon excerpting a phrase from a record of Alma. When Mormon states that Alma commanded that
"there should be no contention one with another, but that they should look forward with one eye, having one
faith and one baptism, having their hearts knit together in unity and in love one towards another" this is
either Mormon's synopsis of the intent of Alma's teaching, or a direct quotation. With Mormon's clear (and deserved)
admiration for Alma, one would suspect that Mormon took the opportunity to insert some of Alma's words here. It
is most likely a referenced citation, one that says what Alma said, not one that inserts the precise wording.
Of course the "one faith, one baptism" phrase also echoes Ephesians 4:5: "One Lord, one faith, one
baptism." We cannot tell whether or not this particular phrasing in the Book of Mormon owes a debt to Joseph's
Smith understanding of Paul, but the sentiment of unity through the community of baptism is completely at home
in Alma's context. Even should the specific wording owe a debt to Paul, the meaning is Alma's, and describes Alma's
creation of this new community.
Scriptural: Mormon indicates that through the unity of their faith and baptism that the people became "children
of God." We cannot tell whether or not this is a phrase that was original to Alma, or added by Mormon. The
nature of this part of the text suggests that it is Mormon's phrase, his synopsis of the conversion process the
people underwent. If that is correct, then we may see in this Mormon's understanding that the people of Alma have
undergone the great change that Benjamin describes in his roughly contemporary sermon in Zarahemla:
"And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons,
and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed
through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters." (Mosiah
5:7)
Mosiah 18:23
23 And he commanded them that they should observe the sabbath day, and keep it holy, and also every day they should
give thanks to the Lord their God.
It is not clear why
Mormon chose to include this command to Alma's people. We might expect that they had observed the Sabbath as part
of their observance of the laws of Moses. However, it is possible that Sabbath observance had become corrupted
along with other concepts, and this is a call for renewed commitment. It is important to note, however, that Sabbath
observance was not to be seen as a separation from their religious lives. They were not to live six days secularly
and reserve the seventh for the Sabbath. On the other days they were also to give thanks to their Lord. Alma's
people were to renew their covenant to become God's people, honoring the Sabbath, but honoring God every day.
Mosiah 18:24
24 And he also commanded them that the priests whom he had ordained should labor with their own hands for their
support.
While this command
echoes King Benjamin's declaration that he had supported himself with is own labor (Mosiah 2:14), this command
comes more directly as a counterpoint to the principles on which Noah's priesthood (as an organization, not meaning
authority here) was organized. Noah's priests had clearly accumulated wealth at the expense of the people (Mosiah
11:4-6). Alma was directly reacting against that kind of a socially segregated priestly class. He would have priests
as teachers, not priests as superiors.
Mosiah 18:25
25 And there was one day in every week that was set apart that they should gather themselves together to teach
the people, and to worship the Lord their God, and also, as often as it was in their power, to assemble themselves
together.
This part of Mormon's
description of the functional organization of Alma's church is somewhat problematic in that he has previously noted
Sabbath observance as a feature of the church (verse 23). We cannot tell from this verse whether the "one
day in every week that was set apart that they should gather themselves together" was the Sabbath or another
day. It is quite possible that it was a day in addition to the Sabbath.
In addition to the decreed day of assembly/teaching, they were also "as often as it was in their power, to
assemble themselves together." Alma is creating social structures that emphasize both the community and the
religious foundation of the community. Rather than the social segregation of Noah's reign, Alma is fostering a
sharing group, one that sees themselves as equals, rather than one that sees hierarchies of social status. The
social division is only one of teacher/student. There is expressly no distinction of economic-producer/consumer.
In fact, it is quite the opposite, as Mormon describes below.
Mosiah 18:26
26 And the priests were not to depend upon the people for their support; but for their labor they were to receive
the grace of God, that they might wax strong in the Spirit, having the knowledge of God, that they might teach
with power and authority from God.
Textual: This
verse repeats the information contained in verse 24. There is no structural or poetic parallelism that makes sense
of this repetition. Indeed, what we appear to have here is Mormon distilling a record into a much shorter rendition.
It is most likely that this repetition comes because the sources for the two phrases were much further apart in
Mormon's source, and they come this close only through the great condensing that he is doing. At the beginning
of the next verse we find the introductory phrase "and again…" This appears to suggest that Alma is reading
a set of regulations for the community, and simply relating them to us.
Mosiah 18:27
27 And again Alma commanded that the people of the church should impart of their substance, every one according
to that which he had; if he have more abundantly he should impart more abundantly; and of him that had but little,
but little should be required; and to him that had not should be given.
Mosiah 18:28
28 And thus they should impart of their substance of their own free will and good desires towards God, and to those
priests that stood in need, yea, and to every needy, naked soul.
Sociological:
In spite of the impossibility of Alma having heard King Benjamin's sermon, the similarities in their social programs
for their people are remarkably similar. King Benjamin tells his people in Zarahemla:
Mosiah 4:16
16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance
unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain,
and turn him out to perish.
Mosiah 4:17
17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will
not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are
just-
Mosiah 4:18
18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth
of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.
In both communities, the economic order was one of communal sharing. If we can read more into the thin hints we
are given, there is a slight difference between the two. As we have already seen, Benjamin's commands were instituted
to level a society that had become economically stratified. While those who joined Alma might have been equally
stratified in Lehi-Nephi, once they left that city they also left everything behind that had created that economic
differentiation. In this new community, all members were starting over, on virtually the same footing.
The difference hiding amid the similarities is that Alma's people were sharing from virtual economic necessity.
In the establishment of a new community there would be those who had been able to bring some material goods and
food with them. In the course of time, all would be required to till the ground for their own support, but as all
farmers know, the land is anything but fair and egalitarian. Alma's people faced the necessity of communal sharing
for simple existence, as they had no one else upon whom to rely. It should be noted that Benjamin advocated imparting
to the needy, but not the complete communal ownership of goods that Alma's community was practicing.
Indeed, the communal sharing of the early Jerusalem Christian community may have flowed from a similar necessity.
Of course the major difference was that the Jerusalem Christians existed as separate entities within the larger
Judean population, but the economic/physical needs of the dispossessed were similarly provided through a gospel-based
change from selfishness to selflessness (see Horsley, Richard A. and Neil Asher Silberman. The Message and the
Kingdom. Grosset/Putman. 1997, pp. 102-3). Similar to the difference between Benjamin and Alma was the economic
activity of Jerusalem and the Pauline Gentile communities. While we have clear evidence for the Jerusalem communalism
(and a trend of communalism that is also witnessed by the community of the Dead Sea Scrolls - see Schiffman, Lawrence
H. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls. Doubleday, 1995, pp. 106-110 ) there is no indication that the Pauline communities
practiced a similar pooling of resources.
Nevertheless, the Pauline communities did stress the communal/fraternal nature of the church and participated
in a project to send financial aid to the Jerusalem Christian poor (see the analysis of koinonia "community
or fellowship" Brown, Raymond. An Introduction to the New Testament. Doubleday. 1997, 286-8).
Of course there are other social benefits of such communalism. The interpersonal concern required to allow one
to impart of their surplus for the benefit of a neighbor also teaches God-like love and compassion. Quite apart
from pragmatic foundations, these principles also instruct in the necessary meaning of the gospel, providing a
very important and real context in which the gospel might be implemented on a very personal level.
Mosiah 18:29
29 And this he said unto them, having been commanded of God; and they did walk uprightly before God, imparting
to one another both temporally and spiritually according to their needs and their wants.
Scriptural:
Notice how Mormon states this last point. He has been speaking of communal sharing in what might be considered
a rather temporal context, yet here he explicitly extends their sharing from the physical to the spiritual. In
addition to sharing food, they shared the gospel; in addition to sharing meals, the shared spiritual understanding.
In any community, some will have more economic goods, and some more spiritual understanding. All shared each as
they were able to build up both body and soul.
Mosiah 18:30
30 And now it came to pass that all this was done in Mormon, yea, by the waters of Mormon, in the forest that was
near the waters of Mormon; yea, the place of Mormon, the waters of Mormon, the forest of Mormon, how beautiful
are they to the eyes of them who there came to the knowledge of their Redeemer; yea, and how blessed are they,
for they shall sing to his praise forever.
Literary: The
area in which these people congregated and became a community was an area called Mormon. In this verse, Mormon
(the writer) is not satisfied with a simple designation of place. He uses repetition to describe the general area.
Thus it is "Mormon, yea, by the waters of Mormon, in the forest that was near the waters of Mormon."
This is a literary expansion, where the initial statement is expanded by modifiers, a process we have seen in later
Mexica poetry.
Once the place is set, Mormon has completed the concept of locating the people in a place. However, Mormon's interest
is not geography, but spirituality. To make a transition from the more mundane conception of physical location,
he repeats the triune description. In this second repetition, however, he launching from the physical into the
spiritual. Rather than a location of water, trees, and land, this second triple description becomes a spiritual
location. The words are the same, but they are metaphorically expanded by the phrase "how beautiful are they
to the eyes of them who there came to the knowledge of their Redeemer."
We cannot know how much of the joy of the people Mormon read about, or how much he simply surmised from his own
experience with coming to the knowledge of the Redeemer. Regardless of the source, he was likely quite accurate
in describing the excitement of this new community.
Mosiah 18:31
31 And these things were done in the borders of the land, that they might not come to the knowledge of the king.
The threat of death
that hung over Alma would likely be extended to any of those who believed on Alma's words. Since Alma was now preaching
against the social, religious, and economic rule of Noah and his remaining priests, he would be even more hated
and hunted than when he first fled the court during Abinidi's sham trial.
The "borders of the land" had to include Mormon, since we are told explicitly that they were in Mormon.
However, Mormon is still apparently attached as part of the greater land associated with, or beholding to, Lehi-Nephi.
They have gone far away to avoid problems, but not so far away that they have completely lost connection with the
city, as we will see in the next verse.
Textual: This verse is a transition from the story of Alma's people to the next story, the destruction of
Noah. It uses the idea of the remote location of Alma's people as tie that moves to the armies of Noah searching
for them.
Mosiah 18:32
32 But behold, it came to pass that the king, having discovered a movement among the people, sent his servants
to watch them. Therefore on the day that they were assembling themselves together to hear the word of the Lord
they were discovered unto the king.
The nature of Alma's
community receives a little more explanation in this verse. What Noah sees is a "movement among the people."
We must first understand what Noah saw. It might be that he would describe Alma's new church as a "movement,"
but his actions suggest that what he saw was a physical movement, or a number of people who were leaving the city
to meet with Alma. It is this movement of people that he notices, and sends spies to trace. Thus when they had
met "they were discovered unto the king," meaning that their place of hiding was uncovered because the
spies had followed them.
This movement of people in the city to Alma in the land of Mormon raises a question about the nature of his community.
Was this a community separate in physical location, or only of spiritual belief and intra-community interactions?
Our clarification of this point comes much later in the text, in Mosiah 23:1:
"Now Alma, having been warned of the Lord that the armies of king Noah would come upon them, and having made
it known to his people, therefore they gathered together their flocks, and took of their grain, and departed into
the wilderness before the armies of king Noah."
This verse is very clear in its representation of a separate community. We must therefore return to the "movement"
of people. It would appear from this evidence that Alma's preaching created did not create an irrevocable separation
from Lehi-Nephi. There were those who stayed in Mormon, and those who returned to Lehi-Nephi while remaining spiritually
connected to Alma. It is these "commuters" that were seen leaving the city, and who were followed to
the meeting place.
As was noted earlier, the expansion of adherents from two hundred to four hundred and fifty in a relatively short
time requires missionary work in Lehi-Nephi. In this "movement" of people we see the mechanism of the
missionary work. Whether overtly or covertly, those who had accepted their Redeemer returned to Lehi-Nephi and
found others would were willing to accept the atoning Messiah. Those accompanied them to Mormon, and were baptized
there into the church of God.
Mosiah 18:33
33 And now the king said that Alma was stirring up the people to rebellion against him; therefore he sent his army
to destroy them.
There is nothing in
the recorded preaching of Alma that directly supports Noah's contention that Alma was stirring up rebellion. Nevertheless,
it was true in that what Alma preached was antithetical to the religious and political order of Noah and his priests.
Even had Alma not preached open rebellion, the teachings themselves would have caused a schism, and some type of
rebellion was inevitable. At this point, the only "rebellion" was the removal of some of Noah's people
from Lehi-Nephi to Mormon as converts to the church.
Mosiah 18:34
34 And it came to pass that Alma and the people of the Lord were apprised of the coming of the king's army; therefore
they took their tents and their families and departed into the wilderness.
This verse is the temporal
equivalent of Mosiah 23:1:
"Now Alma, having been warned of the Lord that the armies of king Noah would come upon them, and having made
it known to his people, therefore they gathered together their flocks, and took of their grain, and departed into
the wilderness before the armies of king Noah."
Each tells precisely the same events and story. Mosiah 23:1 must repeat this information because is it physically
removed from the story, and there is the insertion of a different story (that of Limhi) which will move to its
completion before Mormon returns to Alma and his people.
Mosiah 18:35
35 And they were in number about four hundred and fifty souls.
As noted earlier, Alma's
group has grown from the original converts to over double the original size. While many of the members of the church
would have lived with Alma, many still lived in Lehi-Nephi, as discussed above. In this instance, however, they
have all gathered for one of the sacred days (probably not the Sabbath as they would not be traveling on the Sabbath).
They were therefore all together when the revelation came for them to flee.
Textual: There is no break at this point in the 1830 edition. While modern readers see a clear break between the
stories of Alma and the next one of Limhi, Mormon did not separate them. Perhaps he linked them together because
of the similarity to time. The army that is sent to destroy Alma's people causes Alma's people to leave, but is
also the same that figures in the story of Limhi. This near simultaneity of action may be indicated by placing
the stories in the same chapter.
|
