Minute Details

I noticed something funny about Alma 39 today while reading it with the family.

Corianton is the third son.

Helaman and Shiblon are his older (and by Alma's comments, "wiser") brothers.

Now you may wonder why that even matters, or why this is even noteworthy. It's definitely not a very astute observation. After all, it's clear from the context and the verses this is the case, and I've always known Corianton was young, and really it has nothing to do with Corianton at all, but with my own sensitivities and the way the Book of Mormon starts.

Laman was a first-born. Sure Lemuel was a close second, but they're really not known as Lemuelites. Laman pretty much receives most of the credit when it comes to much of the misery and misunderstanding in the Book of Mormon--a whole people is named after him. Nephi makes a big deal about this, and he's not off base to feel slighted. Considering the jewish tradition of birthright, Laman had certain responsibilities that he never lived up to.

Being the first-born, I've always kind of had a sort of unconscious/conscious dislike for that aspect of the Book of Mormon. Maybe it's due to some extrapolation or lecturizing a parent might have done, the insinuation that the first born can be a bad egg. Maybe it's just a sensitivity of personal weakness. But having read today, I realized that it's a stupid thing to be sensitive about one's position in family. Whether you're born first or last, and even when your dad's a prophet, there's no real garantee that your kids end up living up to or rejecting the Gospel. It's a matter of personal choice and so it is with Corianton.

Heck, Mosiah had four sons that were all bad, until an angel intervened.

I suppose it's a silly little thing, but somehow I do think it's of interest to note that there's no real significance in holding a grudge (or by contrast holding in favor) for any particular position in the family. We're all free to make and break choices...

--Ray

A Prophecy in Alma

Today we read Alma chapter 36. There's an interesting prophecy that Alma states about the records that he entrusts to Helaman. He states in verse 4 that these plates should be "kept and handed down" (exact wording: "they should be kept and handed down from one generation to another, and be kept and preserved by the hand of the Lord until they should go forth unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, that they shall know of the mysteries contained thereon."

I was thinking about how brave and convinced a man like Alma had to be to state this so affirmatively. He had to have had some kind of personal revelation regarding this. I had to wonder what others of his day thought of these records. Were they more trouble than they were worth? Alma had seen firsthand in Alma Chapter 14 the Ammonihahites destroy the records and believers. Perhaps it led him to consider the longterm safety of his own records.

Whatever the case, his discussion with Helaman leads him to state one of my all-time favorite scriptures in all the Book of Mormon... Alma 37: 6-7

6 Now ye may suppose that this is foolishness in me; but behold
I say unto you, that by small and simple things are great things brought to pass; and small means in many instances doth confound the wise.
7 And the Lord God doth work by means to bring about his
great and eternal purposes; and by very small means the Lord doth confound the wise and bringeth about the salvation of many souls.

Good stuff! And I love how Alma defers to his ponderings as possible "foolishness" in him. He did not expect his own spiritual speculations and personal insights to be some hard set rule that Helaman had to defer to unquestioningly. He allowed his son the possibility of seeking to know according to Helaman's own faith. In fact in verse 11 he states that he doesn't know the end of all these things, or the full significance of the records that he is passing on to his son, thus Alma stops speculating at that point. (A very spiritually mature thing to do... how many of us stop speculating at the boundary of what has and has not been revealed to us personally?)

At the same time, he impresses upon Helaman (in following verses 12-20) the strict command that he keep God's commandments, especially pertaining to the records. It is interesting that Alma does not fully understand the NEED for the commandment, though clearly he has received a witness of much of what these records would and could accomplish in the lives and faith of others, but he still insists upon obedience. How often must we know why we obey, before we'll obey? It is to Alma's (and Helaman's) credit that they did not fully understand the importance of these records to us in our day, yet acted in good faith nonetheless.

I am led to wonder, "What acts in good faith have I donethat will have a lasting import to future generations?"

Finally, something funny, I asked Katie, who was pretty sleepy to read the second to last verse. She was yawning when she read the first sentence.

46. O my son, do not let us be slothful because of the easiness of the way; for so was it with our fathers; for so was it prepared for them, that if they would look they might live; even so it is with us. The way is prepared, and if we will look we may live forever.

There's a lengthy sermon that I'm not willing to go into about slothfulness, and the ease of the way... In many ways the simple day to day, boring, dull, or should I more rightly say, PREDICTABLE, life of faith, obedience and enduring to the end, might lead some of us to occasionally wander a little from the path... for a little bloodcurdling danger, I suppose... or just to check up on old weaknesses, or for whatever reason... yet... Alma points out the goal is eternal life, and all it takes is a little more gratitude and a little less complacency.

I suppose that's easier said than done... cuz it's so easy! Hehehe...

--Ray

More 0n Korihor

This morning we read the first part of Alma Chapter 30 as a part of our family scripture discussion. Sondra made a germaine point that I, for some funky reason, had always interpretted differently. In verse 19-20 Korihor preaches to the Anti-Nephi-Lehites or as the Nephites called them, the People of Ammon, who were converted Lamanites. The narrative observes:

verse 19 states: "But behold they were more wise than many of the Nephites; for they took him, and bound him, and carried him before Ammon, who was a high priest over that people."

I always figured the commentator was observing that the wisdom was evidenced by how they handled the problem of Korihor, because of the conjunction "for", and I had never really made the connection that they as a people might be collectively more "wise". Certainly both ways of looking at the verse are fine. They were wise to cast him out. Sondra delved deeper into "why" the people as a whole were considered wise. She stated that the reason the Lamanites were not fooled or enticed by Korihor was that they had lived the lifestyle he espoused. The preaching of Korihor would most likely have horrified them, and as a result they were wise because of the life they had left behind. They had actual wisdom due to their life experience (which more correctly fits the traditional definition of wisdom).

This is a strong statement as to the benefit of true conversion and change from a life void of light to one filled with the light of the Gospel. There really is a wisdom bestowed upon folks as to how to handle things like the destructive beliefs of those who espouse differing philosophies. They were those "who had been there and done that."

They didn't take for granted their gift or blessed state. They had actually used the atonement of Christ in miraculous terms, and cherished just how rare and precious it was. They actually sacrificed for it. Knew of Christ's power to change their life, and as a result they could not be deceived by the seductive chant of a man who espoused what the world might view as a pragmatist's philosophy of Occam's Razor.

Oh that I might likewise have such wisdom, rather than returning again and again to seductive notions that usurp faith for doubt and supplant testimony for acrimony.

It is also interesting to me, also, how this chapter sets up the dillemma of Korihor, by noting (in verses 7-12) at some great length, that all people were upon equal ground because they afforded their people the freedom of belief. Because they believed in the free exchange of ideas, they were vulnerable to freedom's exploits. Therefore, the consequence to freedom of belief is a Korihor, A man who claims to fervently believe what he believes--that there is no God, that one cannot believe in God, that all God-like testimony is really the result of what Scrooge (in the Christmas Carol, by Dickens) blamed on indigestion.

I often read the sequence of events in the Book of Mormon in principle/consequence or happenstance/consequence pairs. There are a lot of unstated sermons in observing simple statements and the consequence of those statements.

For example, when the King of the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's dies and names his son King is when the Amulonites and Amalekites make their move for power and stir up the other Lamanites to war. Over and over again, though the Book of Mormon really never states it outright, it consistently tells of how when one leader changes to another, there is a cycle of contention.

Another interesting consequence is this one of freedom of belief, leading eventually to King Men, leading eventually to the Title of Liberty, leading to the quashing of the King Men rebellion, leading to Pahoran's children fighting for the throne and Paanchi's execution, leading eventually to the secret combinations of Kishkumen, leading to the entire destruction of the government. Though the cycle takes generations to complete, it appears to run hand in hand, and make strong commentary about the corrupting nature of power and the importance of righteous leadership.

These are unstated sermons that are nevertheless fascinating to me. When I think of how contentious the last election was, I can't help but think that again the Book of Mormon teaches us directly applicable lessons for today.

--Ray

How do you read the Book of Mormon in the morning, before school with your kids, without the urge to kill them rising to kill the Spirit? In our family, we have taken up the challenge to finish the Book of Mormon as a family before the end of the year to commemorate the 200th Birthday of Joseph Smith, and to honor Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley's council.

Ironically, we have been reading every day already, usually in the evening. Sondra suggested we change the reading time to early morning. At first I was resistant to the notion. Though it is true we are more organized in the morning, rather than at the evening, but it is harder to get certain factions to congeal at the beginning of the day. I have to confess that one of the reasons evening scripture reading was easier to accomplish is because my youngest two daughters often fall asleep during the time we read.

Thing is, in the morning, I'm not entirely certain that folks are entirely in the best spirits to receive the good Lord's word. It just seems that certain folks are a little stressed out. They are focused on getting out the door, to the bus stop, hair brushed, chores done, waking up, last minute homework, and so forth. There just isn't time to enjoy the scriptures as a family. Is this how you teach your children to read the scriptures?

Is it something you do because you have to? Is it something you do because you love it?

I wonder if the kids couldn't do their chores when they get home from school, or if there might be some way to relax before scripture time started. The funny thing is, if they miss the bus, and I'm there, heck, I can take them to school. I just don't understand why it has to be so contentious. It's something that has been bothering me for a while now, perhaps because I love scripture time so much. I love talking about them, perhaps too much. Heaven knows, I talk the walk more than walk the walk.

It is funny, the kids want to read more and more. They want their share of verses to read through. Katie (in 3rd grade) and Becca (in 2nd grade) often try to out-do each other. Sondra and I also get drawn into this. Sometimes it is torturous as we stumble over the language. Certain readers seem somewhat hostile to stopping and discussing confusing passages, again, I sometimes think we've become fixated on the objective to get done, rather than the point of opening the book in the first place.

I think of Pres. Hinckley's promise that there will be a greater outpouring of the Spirit, should we take up his challenge and read as a family... this morning, I am afraid that outpouring was of a different kind of spirit.

--Ray