|
|
3 Nephi 10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 Nephi 10:1 1 And now behold, it came to pass that all the people of the land did hear these sayings, and did witness of it. And after these sayings there was silence in the land for the space of many hours; 3 Nephi 10:2 2 For so great was the astonishment of the people that they did cease lamenting and howling for the loss of their kindred which had been slain; therefore there was silence in all the land for the space of many hours.
3 And it came to pass that there came a voice again unto the people, and all the people did hear, and did witness of it, saying:
4 O ye people of these great cities which have fallen, who are descendants of Jacob, yea, who are of the house of Israel, how oft have I gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and have nourished you. 3 Nephi 10:5 5 And again, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, who have fallen; yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, ye that dwell at Jerusalem, as ye that have fallen; yea, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens, and ye would not. 3 Nephi 10:6 6 O ye house of Israel whom I have spared, how oft will I gather you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, if ye will repent and return unto me with full purpose of heart.
Matthew 23:37 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Luke 13:34 34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! Cultural: There is a high amount of repetition in the Book of Mormon account. The phrase that is repeated is the Lord’s lament that he has often wanted to gather them as a hen gathereth her chicks. The repetition suggests some kind of poetic structure or meaning, and the repeated imagery suggests that this is not simply a copy of a New Testament phrase, but rather an image that was current for the New World audience. For this last observation we should note that the New World would have been familiar with turkeys, but not chickens. Nevertheless, the imagery would be easily transferred. We might therefore expect that what these New World people heard was their word for turkeys, and Joseph Smith simply translated hen on the basis of the New Testament passages. Literary: The obvious repetition of the same phrase suggests that there may be more parallels in the text. Indeed, they may be extracted as follows: Stanza 1 O ye people of these great cities which have fallen, who are descendants of Jacob, yea, who are of the house of Israel, how oft have I gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and have nourished you. And again, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, who have fallen; yea, Stanza 2 O ye people of the house of Israel, ye that dwell at Jerusalem, as ye that have fallen; yea, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens, and ye would not. O ye house of Israel whom I have spared, how oft will I gather you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, if ye will repent and return unto me with full purpose of heart. The Book of Mormon passages may be scanned into two sections. The first has a chiastic form. The second set is a repeated parallel. The presence of the two different types of parallelisms suggests that we may have the poetic elements without a controlling overall poetic structure. That is, there is clearly a single theme, and these verses clearly belong together. They do not, however, form a cohesive poetic structure. In the first paralleled set, the emphasis is on the comparison between the New World and the Old World. In both cases there are “fallen” who are involved. In the New World it is people and cities that have literally fallen. In the Old World, it was Israel itself who was “fallen” because they would not accept their Messiah. In the second paralleled set there is a contrast between the Old World and the New. The Old World is “ye that dwell at Jerusalem, as ye that have fallen.” In the New World the address is to “ye house of Israel whom I have spared.” The contrast is heightened by the opposition of the “ye would not” and the “if ye will repent and return.” Even though the entire section does not have a poetic structure that governs the entire set, there is an interesting combination of paralleled and contrasting elements. In the first stanza we have a structure of opposition in the chiasm, but a parallelism in the meaning. In the second stanza we have a parallelism of structure, but an opposition in the meaning.
7 But if not, O house of Israel, the places of your dwellings shall become desolate until the time of the fulfilling of the covenant to your fathers.
It is right that this conclusion come after the hope. More emphasis is on the hope of the repentance and the gathering, and just this message to give the alternative. The threat that “the places of your dwellings shall become desolate” would be very real to these people after the destruction they had just witnessed. This concludes the second communication from the risen Lord. The first message introduced the Lord as the Atoning Messiah. This message concentrates on the offer of redemption. While atonement has been made, it is of no effect if we do not come unto him. This communication is the offer to come.
8 And now it came to pass that after the people had heard these words, behold, they began to weep and howl again because of the loss of their kindred and friends.
Notice how the experiences with the voice of the Lord are bracketed here. Just before they hear the world of the Lord, we have: 3 Nephi 8:23 23 And it came to pass that it did last for the space of three days that there was no light seen; and there was great mourning and howling and weeping among all the people continually; yea, great were the groanings of the people, because of the darkness and the great destruction which had come upon them. 3 Nephi 8:24 24 And in one place they were heard to cry, saying: O that we had repented before this great and terrible day, and then would our brethren have been spared, and they would not have been burned in that great city Zarahemla. 3 Nephi 8:25 25 And in another place they were heard to cry and mourn, saying: O that we had repented before this great and terrible day, and had not killed and stoned the prophets, and cast them out; then would our mothers and our fair daughters, and our children have been spared, and not have been buried up in that great city Moronihah. And thus were the howlings of the people great and terrible. The essential features of the introduction to the Lord’s statements are:
These will contrast with the quiet between the two utterances that came on this occasion. The ending bracket comes from verses 8 and 9 here.
Of course the people would still be in mourning, and it is understandable that they would return to mourning, but it is quite unlikely that the return happened immediately after the proclamation of the Lord. They had waited in silence for a space of time between the two utterances, and they would likely have remained as still after this one. The final bracketing of the return to mourning is the author’s way of telling us that this event has now ended. We have no more voice of the Messiah from this incident.
9 And it came to pass that thus did the three days pass away. And it was in the morning, and the darkness dispersed from off the face of the land, and the earth did cease to tremble, and the rocks did cease to rend, and the dreadful groanings did cease, and all the tumultuous noises did pass away. 3 Nephi 10:10 10 And the earth did cleave together again, that it stood; and the mourning, and the weeping, and the wailing of the people who were spared alive did cease; and their mourning was turned into joy, and their lamentations into the praise and thanksgiving unto the Lord Jesus Christ, their Redeemer.
The morning suggests that light returns. Whether or not it was related to the normal timing of sunrise is irrelevant to the author. After the symbolic three days, a new day dawns. The dissipation of the darkness is the signal that the destructions are over. Therefore there is a catalogue of the “healing” of the earth: “the earth did cease to tremble, and the rocks did cease to rend, and the dreadful groanings did cease, and all the tumultuous noises did pass away, and the earth did cleave together again, that it stood.” The earth began to heal and cease its noise. The people began to heal, and also did cease their noise. The lamentations began to be calmed, and the grief for the dead changes to thankfulness of the living. This transformation is centered on the Messiah who spoke to them. Textual:
This ends a unit in Nephi’s text. We know that this is the end because the structure
tells us that this is a conclusion to the text. We also understand both from
the description of events and the way the text was constructed that Nephi
crafted this description rather than simply reporting what he witnessed. The
information has been presented in such a way to let us know that the event was
more important that just the events that were witnessed.
11 And thus far were the scriptures fulfilled which had been spoken by the prophets.
First, we have the concluding statement of this unit; “Therefore for this time I make an end of my sayings.” Someone is declaring an end to their “sayings.” It is unlikely that it was Nephi, as Nephi still has the most marvelous story to tell. That story picks up in the next chapter, and the crafting of the rest of Nephi’s text suggests strongly that he would have continued directly into the appearance of the Savior. Nevertheless, we have this inserted text, a trait that we have seen before in Mormon’s editorial process. All factors therefore point to Mormon as the author of this inserted section. Mormon understands that the message of this part of Nephi’s record was the proof of the coming of the Atoning Messiah. Mormon emphasizes that message by noting that it fulfilled the scriptures as given by the prophets. Mormon is testifying that this is not only a witness by Nephi, but a witness by all of the prophets who had seen this event, long before it occurred.
12 And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints, who were spared— 3 Nephi 10:13 13 And they were spared and were not sunk and buried up in the earth; and they were not drowned in the depths of the sea; and they were not burned by fire, neither were they fallen upon and crushed to death; and they were not carried away in the whirlwind; neither were they overpowered by the vapor of smoke and of darkness. 3 Nephi 10:14 14 And now, whoso readeth, let him understand; he that hath the scriptures, let him search them, and see and behold if all these deaths and destructions by fire, and by smoke, and by tempests, and by whirlwinds, and by the opening of the earth to receive them, and all these things are not unto the fulfilling of the prophecies of many of the holy prophets. 3 Nephi 10:15 15 Behold, I say unto you, Yea, many have testified of these things at the coming of Christ, and were slain because they testified of these things.
The important information that Mormon sees is that the coming of the Messiah is associated with destruction. We know that these elements are associated with the Triumphant Messiah, and Mormon sees them as having fulfillment as well in the coming of the Atoning Messiah. The destruction of the wicked stands as a prophetic witness of the mission of the Atoning Messiah.
16 Yea, the prophet Zenos did testify of these things, and also Zenock spake concerning these things, because they testified particularly concerning us, who are the remnant of their seed.
17 Behold, our father Jacob also testified concerning a remnant of the seed of Joseph. And behold, are not we a remnant of the seed of Joseph? And these things which testify of us, are they not written upon the plates of brass which our father Lehi brought out of Jerusalem?
Genesis 48:8-20 8 And Israel beheld Joseph's sons, and said, Who are these? 9 And Joseph said unto his father, They are my sons, whom God hath given me in this place. And he said, Bring them, I pray thee, unto me, and I will bless them. 10 Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, so that he could not see. And he brought them near unto him; and he kissed them, and embraced them. 11 And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face: and, lo, God hath shewed me also thy seed. 12 And Joseph brought them out from between his knees, and he bowed himself with his face to the earth. 13 And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel's left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel's right hand, and brought them near unto him. 14 And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the firstborn. 15 ¶ And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day. 16 The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth. 17 And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head. 18 And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head. 19 And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations. 20 And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh. Mormon is specifically linking the prophecies of Zenos and Zenock to the people of the Nephites. Those promises were carried to them through time and space by the prophetic word on the brass plates as well as by specific blessing.
18 And it came to pass that in the ending of the thirty and fourth year, behold, I will show unto you that the people of Nephi who were spared, and also those who had been called Lamanites, who had been spared, did have great favors shown unto them, and great blessings poured out upon their heads, insomuch that soon after the ascension of Christ into heaven he did truly manifest himself unto them— 3 Nephi 10:19 19 Showing his body unto them, and ministering unto them; and an account of his ministry shall be given hereafter. Therefore for this time I make an end of my sayings.
Nephi’s text as we have it does not indicate the passage of time between the voice they heard and the physical coming of the Messiah. Mormon notes that there is a passage of time. The destruction has occurred in the “first month, fourth day” of the thirty-fourth year (3 Nephi 8:5). Now Mormon tells us that the next event will come “to pass… in the ending of the thirty and fourth year.” This method of inserting a time marker is typical of the editorial technique we have seen from Mormon in the past. This particular time marker has caused controversy among LDS scholars of the text. Sidney Sperry describes the basic conflict in interpretation of the timing of the visit of the resurrected Messiah to the Nephites in the New World: “In verse 18 of Chapter 10, Mormon anticipated the appearance of the resurrected Christ to his people, by pointing to the fact that he came apparently at the "ending of the thirty-fourth year." A comparison of this verse with 8:5 would seem to show that nearly a year passed by after the great three days of darkness and destruction before our Lord appeared to the Nephites. This conclusion would also seem to be borne out by a careful study of other facts in the record as written by Mormon. However, a consensus of Book of Mormon students would probably show that they feel it difficult to believe that the Savior would put off his appearance to the Nephites for a whole year after his resurrection.” (Sidney B. Sperry, Book of Mormon Compendium [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1968], 401 - 402.) The problem of timing is rather precisely as Dr. Sperry describes it. There is a textual statement that it comes later, but there is a desire to have it earlier. On the basis of the statement on timing alone we would see it as later. To understand an earlier appearance, we must somehow deal with that statement and make it less accurate. The most interesting discussion of this issue is found in an article by John Tvetdnes: “Horowitz has noted two ways in which people have read this passage [3 Nephi 10:18]; there are those who believe that Christ appeared in the New World “in the ending of the thirty and fourth year,” while others see this timing as indicative of when the historical entry was made. Horowitz supports the first of these views. In response to the second, he wrote, “This part of the Book of Mormon is not the record written at the time or nearly a year later but is an abridgment written by Mormon centuries later.” But that is precisely the point. It is apparent from a study of Mormon’s methodology that he took his material from dated Nephite annals. … There is no logical reason for Mormon to have listed year-numbers without recording events for them unless he was keeping a running tally of the annals he consulted. Third Nephi 10:18=-19 may be just such an entry, one in w3hich Mormon tells his readers that he will be recording the events through the end of the thirty-fourth year.” (John A. Tvetdnes. The Most Correct Book. Cornerstone, Salt Lake City and Phoenix, 1999, pp. 256-7). Tvedtnes cites this data on the “ending of the thirty and fourth year” as a means of establishing his case that it might be read as “before the end” or “by the end,” and therefore not as indicative of a later time, only a timeframe (John A. Tvetdnes. The Most Correct Book. Cornerstone, Salt Lake City and Phoenix, 1999, pp. 258). The problem the cited Horowitz and Tvedtnes both miss is that 3 Nephi 10:11-19 is all an addition by Mormon, and the earlier text was cited from Nephi. As noted, Nephi is not writing contemporaneous with these events, and what we have is a constructed text that in and of itself dictates time. The second issue is the one raised by Tvedtnes about Mormon’s use of the dated annals. He is correct that Mormon is using those dated annals, and that he uses time from those annals to provide some structure in his historical text. In this regard, we must also understand the caution that S. Kent Brown has noted about Mormon’s chronologies: “In reviewing Mormon’s huge effort represented in the Book of Mormon, we have to be impressed with his consistent attention to detail as he rewrote large segments of the material that came into his hands, particularly the large plates of Nephi. These sections have always exhibited a steady consistency. If we were to urge that Mormon erred in his chronological note in 3 Nephi 10:18, we would have to accept the consequent vciew that he committed a totally unexpected blunder while introducing the risen Jesus’ ministry, the major event narrated in his literary work.” (S. Kent Brown. From Jerusalem to Zarahemla. Brigham Young University, Provo, 1998, p. 148-9). Of course Tvedtnes’ argument is more subtle than calling Mormon’s chronology into error. Tvedtnes is simply altering the time-meaning of “the ending.” However, his effort to do so violates the very structural argument he uses contra Horowitz. Mormon does mark the years, but he uses the year markers as ending notes. The most frequent usage of the year markers in the text is to note whole years. We do have a special case here where Mormon is indicating a relative timing within the year, but to assume that he means “before the end” contradicts the rather detailed information that he gives for the date at the beginning of the year. We are safest when we take Mormon at his word that it was near the end of the thirty fourth year. Is there any other statement that might want to see the date pushed earlier? Scholars have noted that there is another text that complicates the issues. We have this very verse 18: 3 Nephi 10:18 18 And it came to pass that in the ending of the thirty and fourth year, behold, I will show unto you that the people of Nephi who were spared, and also those who had been called Lamanites, who had been spared, did have great favors shown unto them, and great blessings poured out upon their heads, insomuch that soon after the ascension of Christ into heaven he did truly manifest himself unto them— In the same passage that we have “in the ending of the thirty and fourth year,” we have “soon after the ascension.” Those two statements appear to contradict each other. Tvedtnes reconciles them by reading the first as the less determinate time. The problem, however, really lies in the second notation of time. We understand the timing of the ascension from the New Testament. That is, obviously, an Old World document, and it records an event from the Old World. There is no textual information in the Book of Mormon that tells us that the Nephites had any dating for the ascension. It did not occur on their continent, and the only way they could have had the timing of it was for the Savior to have noted that timing to them, something that seems of rather lesser importance than the message that was recorded. Certainly Mormon knew that Christ must have ascended, but there is little historical way that he could have known the timing of that event. Therefore, we have a statement from Mormon about the timing relative to the ending of the year which he could easily have known, and we have a “soon after” an event whose timing he could not have known. Given the difference between these two factors, the strength of the dating should weigh in with the dating that Mormon clearly could receive from his annals. Both Tvetdnes and Brown discuss circumstantial evidences that might suggest a longer or shorter time, with Brown holding for the longer, and Tvetdnes discounting the circumstantial evidence presented by Brown. In the end, both miss the constructed nature of Nephi’s text. Nephi is writing after the fact, and collapsing events that are widespread in time and space. Using this constructed text to determine precise timing without attempting to discern what is constructed and what is reported leads to arguments that might be supported on either side, but supported by evidence that is essentially weak because it rests upon this constructed text. Mormon’s cutting of Nephi’s text obscures the time boundaries that Nephi might have had. In the absence of the original, we have only Mormon’s statement, and that should be sufficient for us. He knew where in the time record these events were placed, and Mormon places them at the end of the year. Since the only reason to push the timing of the appearance of the Savior earlier is because we think is should have been earlier does not constitute a very powerful argument. Textual: This is the end of a chapter in the 1830 edition. This is one of the most logical of all chapter breaks in that Mormon will begin a new physical chapter with the appearance of the Savior in the new world, an event that literally opens a new chapter in Nephite history as the Nephites who have been destroyed as a people will be renewed as a people through this Messiah who comes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Brant Gardner. Copyright 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
