Alma 30:6-10
From Feast upon the Word (http://feastupontheword.org). Copyright, Feast upon the Word.
The Book of Mormon > Alma > Chapter 30
| Previous (Alma 30:1-5) | Next (Alma 30:11-15) |
Contents |
Questions
Verse 6
- Apparently Korihor is not from the land of Zarahemla, as here he is described as coming "into the land". Where did Korihor come from?
- What is the exact meaning of the term "Anti"? We also see this term used in describing the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's who later became the people of Ammon.
Lexical notes
Verse 10
- This verse seems to be making a distinction between "stealing" and "robbery." Some have argued that this tracks a distinction in ancient Hebrew law between merely taking the property of someone else ("stealing") and attacking them on the highway and extracting property by threats of violence ("robbery").
Exegesis
Verses 7-10
Because these verses are the only place in the Book of Mormon where a specific legal rule is derived from a particular scriptural text they are an interesting place to gain insight into Nephite legal reasoning. In this case, the scriptural text is Josh 24:15, and the legal rule is that "if he [i.e. a man] did not believe in him [i.e. God] there was no law to punish him." This rule is contrasted with the prohibitions on murder, robbery, and adultery, all of which could be punished. (Note: The fact that adultery was punished gives lie to those who have attempted to interpret this as a libertarian proof text.)
Joshua 24 is sometimes referred to as the Shechem Covenant. It recounts how at the end of his life, Joshua gathered the Children of Israel at Shechem and rehearsed to them the history of God's dealing with them, how he brought them to the Promised Land and gave it to them. In Josh 24:15 (the verse relied on by the Nephite jurists), Joshua then asks the Children of Israel whether or not they will serve God. They reply in the affirmative, and Joshua then draws up an elaborate contract -- complete with legal formalities -- to make their promise binding.
The Shechem passage is interesting because it is one of the few places in the Old Testament where the Children of Israel are offered a choice of whether or not they will serve Yahweh rather than other gods. Elsewhere, the Children of Israel are chosen by God rather than vice versa. Hence, the passage is perhaps uniquely suited for providing a voluntarist justification for religious practice.
What is also interesting is that the Shechem passage contains explicitly legal materials, namely the covenant by Israel to follow God. Because of this, a more natural legal reading of the passage would be to construe the terms of this covenant as being binding upon all Israelites including, presumably, the Nephites. In that case, it would make sense to carefully analyze the terms of this contract to understand the resulting Nephite obligations. Instead however, the Nephites define their legal rule in reference to the Joshua passage as if they are themselves within the story having the same choice the Israelites there had.
Related links
- "Nephite Legal Reasoning" (post at Times & Seasons by Nate Oman)
- Post and comments on Korihor at the Alma 32 Experimental e-Seminary in Mormon Theology.
| Previous (Alma 30:1-5) | Next (Alma 30:11-15) |
