Site:SS lessons/BOM lesson 37

From Feast upon the Word (http://feastupontheword.org). Copyright, Feast upon the Word.
Jump to: navigation, search

This page allows you to see all the commentary pages together for this Book of Mormon Gospel Doctrine lesson. Click on the heading to go to a specific page. Click the edit links below to edit text on any pages.


3 Ne 8:1-5

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 8:6-10

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 8:11-15

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 8:16-20

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 8:21-25

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 9:1-5

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 9:6-10

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 9:11-15

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 9:16-22

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 10:1-5

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 10:6-10

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 10:11-15

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 10:16-19

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapters 8-10
Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Third Nephi. The relationship of Chapters 8-10 to the rest of Third Nephi is discussed at Third Nephi.

Story. Chapters 8-10 consists of ____ major sections:

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Chapters 8-10 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:1-2. It appears that there may have been some uncertainty as to what year Christ was born. But they assume that since a righteous individual recorded 33 years, that that must be correct.
  • 3 Ne 8:25. As in verse 25, today we are not physically stoning the prophets, but we are symbolically stoning them when we neglect and do not heed unto their words. Yet in Chapter 10:12 it states that "it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not" that were spared. Perhaps, they were speaking for their city as a whole...
  • 3 Ne 9:2. The Lord tells the people that the devil and his angels laughed when the Lord destroyed the wicked people. We might have thought that in the battle between good and evil when the Lord destroys the wicked, the Lord gets ahead and the devil takes a set back. This isn't the case. The devil rejoices when the Lord punishes the wicked. If we rejoice in the punishment of the wicked, we take the same position the devil does.
  • 3 Ne 9:9-11: Destruction of the wicked. These verses explain how the Lord intervenes to destroy the wicked when they kill or cast out the righteous. This concept is addressed at length in the discussion of Hel 13:14. The statement in 3 Ne 9:11 that there were none righteous among the people recalls the conversation between Abraham and the Lord in Gen 18:23-33 in which Abraham asked "Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" and Alma 62:40 in which Mormon, as narrator, explains that the Nephites were not at that time destroyed for the sake of the righteous who were among them.
  • 3 Ne 9:11-12: Silence. I'm thinking a little bit about the point of this pause for several hours between what the Lord says to the people in chapter 9 and what he says to the people in chapter 10. I'm guessing the purpose of the pause was to give them some time to think about what he says. It is interesting that before the Lord speaks in chapter 9 the people are mourning. Then they are so amazed that they are quiet. After the Lord speaks a second time the people begin mourning again. Just comparing the two, the first speech is more angry (it certainly starts that way). The second is more mourning. The first speech ends with a promise: if they will repent they will be saved (3 Ne 9:13-21). The second speech has the same promise near the end too (if they will repent they will be saved) but ultimately ends with a warning: they will be wiped out if they don't repent (3 Ne 10:7).
  • 3 Ne 10:4-6. The Lord addresses three groups of people. First he addresses "ye people of these great cities which have fallen." The fallen are those the Lord has killed because of their wickedness (see 3 Ne 9:3-12). In verse 5 he addresses "ye that dwell at Jerusalem." Then in verse 6 he addresses those of the hose of Israel whom I have spared. The first two groups are, of course, not present to hear what is being said. So why is he addressing them? Part of what seems to be going on is the Lord mourning for his people (similar to Moses 7:32-41). Here the Lord specifically seems to be mourning how easy it would have been for them to repent--and yet they did not.
  • 3 Ne 10:4: As ye that have fallen. This phrase compares those at Jerusalem who the Lord has not destroyed with those in the great cities of the Nephites and Lamanites that he has destroyed. With the phrase "as ye that have fallen" the Lord is comparing them to the wicked Nephites and Lamanites which teh Lord wanted to gather, but they would not.
  • 3 Ne 10:7: Covenant of their fathers. In verse 7 the covenant of their fathers is associated with the covenant Enos made with God in Enos 1:12-18. This covenant says that God will preserve the record of the Nephites and even after they are destroyed and bring forth the record in a future day unto the Lamanites that they will be brought unto salvation. It seems that this is the future day when there are so many missionaries in Central and South America and they are converting many people.

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 8:3: People began to look for the sign that Samuel gave of Christ's death. How was this instance similar to the way people acted at the time of Christ's birth?
  • 3 Ne 8:3: How did they know that the sign of his death would come after 33 years? I can't find any place where Samuel specified when the Savior would die, only that it would be accompanied by a sign.
  • 3 Ne 8:5ff: Is there any way to know how much permanent destruction was caused to the "face of the land" during these events?
  • 3 Ne 9:1: To what group of people is Mormon referring when he says "among all the inhabitants of the earth"?
  • 3 Ne 9:13: The Lord compares the survivors' righteousness with that of those who were slain. How should we read this? Should we assume that every person still alive was more righteous than each person who died? What is the purpose of this comparison? Is it ever helpful for us to compare individual's righteousness or worthiness with others'?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Is Christ's introduction in this verse a considerably literal fulfillment of the prophecy in Mosiah 3:8?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "was with." Is this subtle use of past tense Christ's way of indicating that, up until the time of his earthly ministry, he and Heavenly Father were pretty much inseparable?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: "from the beginning." Is Christ saying this because he was the firstborn and therefore he has spent more time with Heavenly Father than any of the rest of us?
  • 3 Ne 9:15: What does it mean when Christ says "I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
  • 3 Ne 9:15: Glorified his name." Is Christ saying that Heavenly principally or exclusively achieves glory through his firstborn son? Doesn't God receive glory when the rest of his children follow his ways? Or is it all still through Christ because all of the rest of us can only bring glory to God insofar as we partake of the atonement?
  • 3 Ne 9:20: The Lamanites were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and "they knew it not." What does that mean? Why wouldn't they know if they had such faith, and why would the Savior make mention of it in this context just before appearing to the Nephites for the first time?
  • 3 Ne 10:7: In verse 7, what is the covenant of their fathers?
  • 3 Ne 10:16: So was Lehi a descendant of Zenos and Zenock?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

"I once had an opportunity to accompany President Spencer W. Kimball to a distant land. We were given a tour of the various sites in the area, including underground catacombs—burial grounds for people who had been persecuted by Christian zealots. As we came up the dark, narrow stairs of that place, President Kimball taught me an unforgettable lesson. He pulled my coattail and said, 'It has always troubled me what the adversary does using the name of our Savior.' He then said, 'Robert, the adversary can never have joy unless you and I sin.'"
  • 3 Ne 9:14. Anne C. Pingree, "To Look, Reach, and Come unto Christ," Ensign, Nov 2006, pp. 113–15. Sister Pingree said: "His promise invites us not only to reach towards Him but also to take the all-important next step: to 'come unto' Him."

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.




Previous page: Chapters 6-7                      Next page: Chapter 11

3 Ne 11:1-5

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 1-7
Previous page: Chapter 11                      Next page: Verses 11:8-17


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 1-7 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Third Nephi 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 1-7 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:1. It really is a curious detail that the people are gathered around the temple when Christ comes again. Of course there are obvious reasons to see this as significant: the temple is the place of theophany, etc. But for what reason exactly they are gathered there is somewhat elusive. The phrasing of verse 1 seems to make allusion to the Day of Atonement, or at least to King Benjamin's speech: "a great multitude gathered together, of the people of Nephi, round about the temple" (cf. Mosiah 2:5). A Day of Atonement connection would be rather interesting, though it must be admitted that there are some difficulties in reading the Day of Atonement into the situation, especially since Christ had just publically announced the cessation of all animal sacrifice (3 Ne 9:19), and animal sacrifice was at the very heart of the Day of Atonement. Perhaps more fruitful is the obvious connection to King Benjamin's speech, already mentioned. There are other explicit connections between the two events (verse 5 here, for example, parallels Mosiah 2:9 rather closely). But then, it is clear from hints that run through the whole of Mosiah 1-6 that Benjamin's speech was intimately connected with the Mosaic Day of Atonement. Perhaps the close ties to Benjamin's speech are meant, to some degree at least, to summon to the mind of the reader the themes of the Day of Atonement.
In the end, it is reading the Day of Atonement into the background of this story that opens up some of its implicit richness, and not so much because the events of 3 Nephi follow the ritual so closely, but precisely because they continually transgress the ritual. (In fact, there may be reason to read the events of 3 Nephi as transgressing the broad underlying theme of King Benjamin's speech as well: on one reading, Benjamin's speech is a broad "demythologization" of sorts of the Nephite Day of Atonement rites, an emphatic shift from the Abrahamic focus that seems to have accompanied the rites early on. If Benjamin was doing this, then 3 Nephi, moving inexorably towards the great discourse on the Abrahamic covenant, undoes King Benjamin's speech, in a way.) The most significant transgression of the Day of Atonement happens, in fact, right from the beginning: Christ is not sitting on the throne in the Holy of Holies at the temple, and the High Priest does not emerge from the temple at the climactic moment of the ritual; rather, Christ simply descends directly into the midst of the people, and He teaches them outside of the temple. This point cannot be missed: significant as it may seem that Christ comes to the people at the temple, it cannot be missed that He does so outside of it, transgressing the confining house by simply coming among the people as a whole. This "universalization" of sorts might be in itself an explicit transgression of the Law, which was embodied by the temple's confining structure. At any rate, whatever "former things" sorts of themes might be read into the story, it is clear that Christ's visit transgresses them all, that whatever precedent might be brought to bear on the experience can only be brought to the scene to be, precisely, transgressed.
It may be, in the end, for this reason that Mormon (or Mormon's source) passes so quickly over the details of the gathering. There is enough mention of the fact that one can draw connections between this event and Benjamin's speech or the Day of Atonement, but Mormon (or Mormon's source) is not, in the end, particularly interested in developing the connection at any real length: this experience goes beyond all the earlier ones, and the reader is perhaps to feel a sort of newness about the experience, a transcending spirit that leads the reader beyond everything that has gone before. New things are afoot, and the reader is alerted to the fact from the very start.
It is perhaps of some significance as well that the event takes place in Bountiful and not in Zarahemla. Obviously, a major reason for this is the fact that Zarahemla had been destroyed during the disasters preceding Christ's visitation (see 3 Ne 9:3). Right up until that destruction, the governmental center of Nephite and eventually even of Lamanite activity seems to have been Zarahemla (as late as 3 Ne 6:25 there is reference to Zarahemla as the seat of the chief judge). Certainly while the monarchy remained (the Mosiah-Benjamin-Mosiah dynasty), Zarahemla was the ritual center of the kingdom as well, based on the only temple in the Nephite lands at the time. With the development of the churches under Alma, there seems to have been a sudden proliferation of temples throughout the land (see Alma 16:13, for example). Whether this democratization of the temple marked a relativization of the Zarahemla temple or not is not clear from the Book of Mormon, but that the single temple at Bountiful becomes a central location for this visitation is of some significance: a single temple emerges as the ritual center of the Nephite/Lamanites lands, perhaps as a marker of the return of a sort of monarchy (now under Christ as King?). That, as was pointed out above, the temple rites are--at the very same time--transgressed (perhaps as a token of the fulfilled Law of Moses) is somewhat ironic: there is clearly a gathering at a temple, but perhaps the temple only marks the spot now, as opposed to its previous role of containing God and covering His presence.
The significance of the topic of discussion is unclear: why does Mormon (or Mormon's source) seem intent on making such a big deal of what the people are speaking of? Perhaps more curious still is that their conversation about Jesus Christ is added afterward as a sort tack-on: apparently of more central concern (whether to the people or to the narrative) is the question of teh "great and marvelous change which had taken place." Why this emphasis?

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:1: Why might the people in this verse be gathered around the temple?
  • 3 Ne 11:1: Why is it that the temple in Bountiful is apparently spared, while the temple in Zarahemla is apparently destroyed?
  • 3 Ne 11:3-6: Why did it take 3 times before the people understood the voice?
  • 3 Ne 11:3: The voice is soft yet reaches the hearts of all. How is that?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • User:Bhardle explains how the beginning of this chapters shows the importance of listening to the spirit here.
  • See 1 Kgs 19:11. Compare Elijah's experience with the Spirit to the the voice of the Father here.

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: Chapter 11                      Next page: Verses 11:8-17

3 Ne 11:6-10

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 1-7
Previous page: Chapter 11                      Next page: Verses 11:8-17


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 1-7 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Third Nephi 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 1-7 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:1. It really is a curious detail that the people are gathered around the temple when Christ comes again. Of course there are obvious reasons to see this as significant: the temple is the place of theophany, etc. But for what reason exactly they are gathered there is somewhat elusive. The phrasing of verse 1 seems to make allusion to the Day of Atonement, or at least to King Benjamin's speech: "a great multitude gathered together, of the people of Nephi, round about the temple" (cf. Mosiah 2:5). A Day of Atonement connection would be rather interesting, though it must be admitted that there are some difficulties in reading the Day of Atonement into the situation, especially since Christ had just publically announced the cessation of all animal sacrifice (3 Ne 9:19), and animal sacrifice was at the very heart of the Day of Atonement. Perhaps more fruitful is the obvious connection to King Benjamin's speech, already mentioned. There are other explicit connections between the two events (verse 5 here, for example, parallels Mosiah 2:9 rather closely). But then, it is clear from hints that run through the whole of Mosiah 1-6 that Benjamin's speech was intimately connected with the Mosaic Day of Atonement. Perhaps the close ties to Benjamin's speech are meant, to some degree at least, to summon to the mind of the reader the themes of the Day of Atonement.
In the end, it is reading the Day of Atonement into the background of this story that opens up some of its implicit richness, and not so much because the events of 3 Nephi follow the ritual so closely, but precisely because they continually transgress the ritual. (In fact, there may be reason to read the events of 3 Nephi as transgressing the broad underlying theme of King Benjamin's speech as well: on one reading, Benjamin's speech is a broad "demythologization" of sorts of the Nephite Day of Atonement rites, an emphatic shift from the Abrahamic focus that seems to have accompanied the rites early on. If Benjamin was doing this, then 3 Nephi, moving inexorably towards the great discourse on the Abrahamic covenant, undoes King Benjamin's speech, in a way.) The most significant transgression of the Day of Atonement happens, in fact, right from the beginning: Christ is not sitting on the throne in the Holy of Holies at the temple, and the High Priest does not emerge from the temple at the climactic moment of the ritual; rather, Christ simply descends directly into the midst of the people, and He teaches them outside of the temple. This point cannot be missed: significant as it may seem that Christ comes to the people at the temple, it cannot be missed that He does so outside of it, transgressing the confining house by simply coming among the people as a whole. This "universalization" of sorts might be in itself an explicit transgression of the Law, which was embodied by the temple's confining structure. At any rate, whatever "former things" sorts of themes might be read into the story, it is clear that Christ's visit transgresses them all, that whatever precedent might be brought to bear on the experience can only be brought to the scene to be, precisely, transgressed.
It may be, in the end, for this reason that Mormon (or Mormon's source) passes so quickly over the details of the gathering. There is enough mention of the fact that one can draw connections between this event and Benjamin's speech or the Day of Atonement, but Mormon (or Mormon's source) is not, in the end, particularly interested in developing the connection at any real length: this experience goes beyond all the earlier ones, and the reader is perhaps to feel a sort of newness about the experience, a transcending spirit that leads the reader beyond everything that has gone before. New things are afoot, and the reader is alerted to the fact from the very start.
It is perhaps of some significance as well that the event takes place in Bountiful and not in Zarahemla. Obviously, a major reason for this is the fact that Zarahemla had been destroyed during the disasters preceding Christ's visitation (see 3 Ne 9:3). Right up until that destruction, the governmental center of Nephite and eventually even of Lamanite activity seems to have been Zarahemla (as late as 3 Ne 6:25 there is reference to Zarahemla as the seat of the chief judge). Certainly while the monarchy remained (the Mosiah-Benjamin-Mosiah dynasty), Zarahemla was the ritual center of the kingdom as well, based on the only temple in the Nephite lands at the time. With the development of the churches under Alma, there seems to have been a sudden proliferation of temples throughout the land (see Alma 16:13, for example). Whether this democratization of the temple marked a relativization of the Zarahemla temple or not is not clear from the Book of Mormon, but that the single temple at Bountiful becomes a central location for this visitation is of some significance: a single temple emerges as the ritual center of the Nephite/Lamanites lands, perhaps as a marker of the return of a sort of monarchy (now under Christ as King?). That, as was pointed out above, the temple rites are--at the very same time--transgressed (perhaps as a token of the fulfilled Law of Moses) is somewhat ironic: there is clearly a gathering at a temple, but perhaps the temple only marks the spot now, as opposed to its previous role of containing God and covering His presence.
The significance of the topic of discussion is unclear: why does Mormon (or Mormon's source) seem intent on making such a big deal of what the people are speaking of? Perhaps more curious still is that their conversation about Jesus Christ is added afterward as a sort tack-on: apparently of more central concern (whether to the people or to the narrative) is the question of teh "great and marvelous change which had taken place." Why this emphasis?

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:1: Why might the people in this verse be gathered around the temple?
  • 3 Ne 11:1: Why is it that the temple in Bountiful is apparently spared, while the temple in Zarahemla is apparently destroyed?
  • 3 Ne 11:3-6: Why did it take 3 times before the people understood the voice?
  • 3 Ne 11:3: The voice is soft yet reaches the hearts of all. How is that?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • User:Bhardle explains how the beginning of this chapters shows the importance of listening to the spirit here.
  • See 1 Kgs 19:11. Compare Elijah's experience with the Spirit to the the voice of the Father here.

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: Chapter 11                      Next page: Verses 11:8-17

3 Ne 11:11-15

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 8-17
Previous page: 3 Ne 11:1-7                      Next page: Verses 11:18-30


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 8-17 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Third Nephi 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 8-17 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • In these verses, the Nephites meet Christ at the temple and are given a way to identify him by feeling the "the prints of the nails" in his body. This allowed the Nephites to "know" the Lord (verse 14) and "bear record" of him (verse 15). In modern revelations, we are told that this knowledge of God only comes through the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, which are performed in temples (D&C 84:19-22).
  • In 3 Ne 17:25 we learn that there were 2,500 people at this event. Assuming it took at a minimum 10 seconds for everyone to "one by one" feel his side and his hands then this would have taken at least seven hours, and probably much longer given how some people would have probably not let go too quickly. What would have been your thoughts and emotions while you were waiting in this line?
  • Verses 17 & 19: Here the people "did fall down at the feet of Jesus" and Nephi "bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet." Presumably, this was done out of a sense of reverence and worship. The act of bowing occurs in several places in the Book of Mormon (see cross-references at the link below). Many of these instances are in regard to a king. However, kings had not been common among the Nephites for many generations. How might this cultural fact change the significance of the act of bowing? In our non-king, egalitarian-conscious culture, how is the significance of bowing (e.g. when we pray) different than it might be in a society with a king? How is the significance of bowing different in western cultures than in eastern cultures? How might these differences affect our susceptibility to different spiritual temptations?

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • Why would the Lord have people come forward to touch the prints in his hands and feet (verse 14)?
  • How did feeling the Lord's wounds help the Nephites identify Christ and "know that [He was] the God of Israel" (verse 14)?
  • When might modern Latter-day Saints have occasion to similarly meet Christ in the temple and feel "the prints of the nails" in his body?
  • Why were the people asked to "thrust" their hands into the sword scar in his side and only "feel" the scars in his hand?
  • Why was the scar on his side significant when we know he was already dead before he was pierced?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: 3 Ne 11:1-7                      Next page: Verses 11:18-30

3 Ne 11:16-20

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 8-17
Previous page: 3 Ne 11:1-7                      Next page: Verses 11:18-30


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 8-17 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Third Nephi 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 8-17 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • In these verses, the Nephites meet Christ at the temple and are given a way to identify him by feeling the "the prints of the nails" in his body. This allowed the Nephites to "know" the Lord (verse 14) and "bear record" of him (verse 15). In modern revelations, we are told that this knowledge of God only comes through the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, which are performed in temples (D&C 84:19-22).
  • In 3 Ne 17:25 we learn that there were 2,500 people at this event. Assuming it took at a minimum 10 seconds for everyone to "one by one" feel his side and his hands then this would have taken at least seven hours, and probably much longer given how some people would have probably not let go too quickly. What would have been your thoughts and emotions while you were waiting in this line?
  • Verses 17 & 19: Here the people "did fall down at the feet of Jesus" and Nephi "bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet." Presumably, this was done out of a sense of reverence and worship. The act of bowing occurs in several places in the Book of Mormon (see cross-references at the link below). Many of these instances are in regard to a king. However, kings had not been common among the Nephites for many generations. How might this cultural fact change the significance of the act of bowing? In our non-king, egalitarian-conscious culture, how is the significance of bowing (e.g. when we pray) different than it might be in a society with a king? How is the significance of bowing different in western cultures than in eastern cultures? How might these differences affect our susceptibility to different spiritual temptations?

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • Why would the Lord have people come forward to touch the prints in his hands and feet (verse 14)?
  • How did feeling the Lord's wounds help the Nephites identify Christ and "know that [He was] the God of Israel" (verse 14)?
  • When might modern Latter-day Saints have occasion to similarly meet Christ in the temple and feel "the prints of the nails" in his body?
  • Why were the people asked to "thrust" their hands into the sword scar in his side and only "feel" the scars in his hand?
  • Why was the scar on his side significant when we know he was already dead before he was pierced?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: 3 Ne 11:1-7                      Next page: Verses 11:18-30

3 Ne 11:21-25

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 18-30
Previous page: Verses 11:8-17                      Next page: Verses 11:31-41


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 31-41 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Chapter 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 31-41 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:25. Here Jesus provides the Nephites with the precise wording He would have them use in performing baptisms. The wording is significant, as it draws into baptism the question of the "trinity" (a term understood here in the broadest, non-creedal manner). The theme of the trinity does not arise as a theme in the Book of Mormon between 2 Nephi 31 and 3 Nephi 11: though the three are mentioned once in Alma 11:44 (in a reference that might contextually be understood as a threefold description of one God anyway), all other references to the Father and the Son between 2 Nephi and 3 Nephi are discussions of Jesus Christ as both the Father and the Son (as in Abinadi's rather difficult discourse on the subject). That here, as in Nephi's early discourse on the subject, the three are tied together in their several roles is significant. More significant still, they will be taken up in chapter 16, and then again in chapters 20-26, in terms of the Abrahamic covenant. The "return" of the trinity is of utmost significance.
But what remains to be discussed here is the fact that the trinity returns as part of the theme of baptism: if Jesus goes on to explain the meaning of the trinity in the next few verses, it is because of the role of the trinity in the ordinance of baptism. Perhaps this is no surprise, since Nephi's discussion of the trinity back in 2 Nephi 31 was within the same context (and that discussion is perhaps the only place to begin to explore the trinitarian themes of the present chapter). If the trinity is later a question of the Abrahamic covenant, there seems to be at least the hint that the ordinance of baptism is tied to the covenant in some manner. (It is likely significant that only two people in scripture are recorded explicitly as having received the sign of the Holy Ghost in the form of a dove: Jesus Christ, at His baptism, and Abraham when He received the fulness of the priesthood... in baptism?) At the very least, the implicit connection between baptism, trinity, and the Abrahamic covenant must guide all thought concerning the following chapters.
Rather than simply listing the three members of the trinity/Godhead here in the traditional order—the Father first, then the Son, then the Holy Ghost—in the baptismal prayer, the authority of Jesus Christ is first invoked before reference to each member of the Godhead. The mention of the name Jesus coupled with the title Christ may be a significant reference to the role of mediator that Christ plays. That is, it is Christ's atonement that makes it possible for the person being baptized to enter into the relationship of oneness that the Godhead shares.
  • 3 Ne 11:27. As Jesus states quite clearly that this is the prescribed manner of baptism, He reinterprets the mention of the "trinity" in a rather subtle manner: "after this manner shall ye baptize in my name." He effectively reduces the "trinity" to His very own name. On the surface, this verse looks like a sort of apologetic for a duplicit description of baptism (be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ; be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost): since "the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one," to be baptized in the name of all three amounts to the same as being baptized in just the name of Jesus Christ. This apologetic feel of the verse is not accidental. Jesus is trying to work out, as He makes quite clear in the next verse, a difficulty that has been the subject of some disputation among the Nephites. The disputations that must be laid to rest are apparently questions of the "trinity." That the doctrine will be explored at length beginning in verse 31 is certainly helpful, but perhaps a word or two might be offered even here concerning this problem.
The explicit command that follows in verse 28 makes it very clear that there has been some disputation about whether one should be baptized in the single name of Jesus Christ or the threefold name of the "trinity." That Jesus sees fit to collapse the two into one here is ultimately His answer to the problem, but the problem itself might be clearer. The difficulty arises perhaps in light of 2 Nephi 31:11-12. There, Nephi hears a voice from the Father commanding baptism in the name of the Son, and then he hears a voice from the Son commanding baptism in His own name, thus doubling the command of the Father. It is interesting that the question of the "trinity" disappears between 2 Nephi 31 and the present discourse (see the comments at 3 Ne 11:25), and the suggestion is that Nephi's rather complex words caused a great deal of confusion over the many Nephite years. The difficulty seems to have been how one should understand the "trinity." To feel the difficulty quite profoundly, one need only turn to 2 Nephi 31 and read the whole discourse through: without some explanation, the words there are quite a chore to work through.
But Christ offers here a rather simple explanation: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one. They should not be understood as being separate. But even this is subject to terrible misrepresentation and misunderstanding, and it is perhaps for this reason that Jesus goes on to describe the situation at some length in the following verses. Perhaps all that is necessary to recognize here is that the doctrine begins with unity, with oneness (the final point in Nephi's discussion), and only then can there be some discussion of separation. Perhaps another point must be made very clear: the disputations among the Nephites that are commanded to stop in the very next verse are ultimately all concerning one single question. The disputations concerning the manner of baptism seem to be a question of the name in which one is to be baptized, and the disputations concerning Christ's doctrine (which He goes on to declare starting with verse 31) are a question of the "trinity." In other words, baptismal disputations and doctrinal disputations center on the question of the "trinity." That the "trinity" as a theme disappears for so long is significant: the prophets were not quite ready to jump into such a serious question (having, perhaps, other more pressing matters at hand). (Another reading of the silence concerning the "trinity" is to read it as no silence at all: every word concerning the Father or the Son--though each is clearly a discussion of just Jesus Christ--shows the interim teachings concerning the "trinity," that the prophets understood as three members of the "trinity" to be Jesus Christ. Answers to the questions these difficulties raise can only be understood by exploring the actual discourse beginning with verse 31.)
  • 3 Ne 11:28. The word "disputations" occurs only twice in the New Testament (KJV), but in nine verses in the Book of Mormon (the word "dispute" is much more commonly used in both books). A dictionary definition seems to indicate that a disputation is a more than a mere disagreement, and usually involves a more formal verbal contest with parties arguing for and against a stated position. As such, a disputation may be more like a public debate than an argument.
  • 3 Ne 11:28. Jesus states quite explicitly here that, concerning the manner of baptism and concerning the points of Christ's doctrine, "there shall be no disputations among you." The word, "disputation," is used both positively and negatively in the New Testament, sometimes as a work of the messengers of God (e.g., Acts 9:29), and sometimes as a work of the enemies of the gospel (e.g., Acts 6:9). In the Book of Mormon, however, the word is universally used in a negative sense, often in parallel with "contentions," apparently, then, as a synonym for "contentions." The command in this verse, then, seems to be universal in some sense: "there shall be no disputations among you." Certainly, the commandment, read thus, would be entirely justified. The next verse seems to ground such a reading by making what is undeniably a universal commandment.
On the other hand, it should be noted that Jesus only specifically commands--if the context is kept in mind--that disputations concerning the manner of baptism and the points of His doctrine (which He will go on to describe beginning with verse 31) cease. In other words, read carefully, the command is very specific and can only with some (minor) violence be read as a universal command. Since the verse is negative, the command cannot be read as a commendation of disputation in other circumstances either, but there does not seem to be any particular reason to see such disputations specifically condemned here.
These comments should be understood to point towards what Christ has just taught and towards what Christ is about to teach. If Christ does not want the people to dispute about the manner of baptism, they have only to look to the verses immediately preceding the command, and if He does not want them to dispute about His doctrine, they have only to look to the verses immediately following the command. The commandment offered here is, in the end, quite localized: do not dispute about this manner of baptism, nor about this doctrine I now call "mine."
  • 3 Ne 11:29. Jesus goes on to explain why He does not want his disciples to dispute about the manner of baptism or about other points of His doctrine. Whereas the specific command is not universal, the reasoning Jesus offers to ground it is universal: contention is apparently always "of the devil." What this means, and how it relates to the commandment concerning disputation, is perhaps somewhat more difficult. But at least this much is clear: behind the commandment not to dispute is a sort of question of loyalty. In other words, if one disputes in a spirit of contention, then one is "of the devil," has the devil for a "father," and so has left off the Christ entirely. When Jesus goes on to explore His doctrine, beginning with verse 31, He makes it a question also of coming from a father, in fact, from the Father. This contention/disputation business is at the very least, if reduced to the absolutely necessary, a question of whom one claims as a father.
With this point made clear, it is perhaps more understandable why Jesus offers this deeper explanation of His commandment concerning disputations. Rather than providing just a rule to be followed (do not dispute these two things), Christ takes the opportunity to explain in depth the question of covenant relation, of being/becoming a son (in the Son) to the Father, and just so leaving of the father of contention. The question of contention is not so much a question of one's relation to others, but of one's relation to the Other of Others, to God or (unfortunately, it must be said) to Satan. The point is this: contention, or the lack of it, flows from one's relation to deity, or the lack of it. Whereas the commandment of verse 28 suggests a sort of regulation of one's affairs among men, the universal reasoning behind it, offered in verse 29, recasts the regulation as a question of one's devotion to God. This realignment of relation, this adjustment of one's directedness toward others so that it is a directedness toward God, sets the stage quite wonderfully for the explication of the "doctrine of Christ," which is, as Jesus teaches it, the doctrine of the "trinity." What all of this means can only be explained in considering those particular verses.
The reason Christ gives is that the spirit of contention is not from him but rather, from the devil. It may be that the type of disputations that Christ is referring to in verse 28 are those where there is a spirit of contention. Under that interpretation there is nothing wrong with debating points of Christ's doctrine so long as we do it without the spirit of contention. Alternatively, we might interpret Christ as saying that we shouldn't dispute at all--even if we can do so without a spirit of contention--because it can lead to a spirit of contention. This wouldn't mean that Christ is asking us to agree with people who preach the wrong form of baptism or other points of his doctrine. That wouldn't make any sense. But under this interpretation Christ is telling us not to debate with others the points of his doctrine. In that case we would want to draw a line between explaining and testifying (both ok) and debating (not ok).

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:21-28: After allowing the people to witness that he is Jesus Christ (vv 10-17), Jesus begins teaching Nephi and the other apostles he calls about baptism. Why is baptism the first thing he talks about here (vv 21-28)?
  • 3 Ne 11:21: Why does Jesus give Nephi the power to baptize (v 21)? Didn't he already have this power?
  • 3 Ne 11:28: What does Christ mean when he says there should be no disputations? Is every disagreement a dispute?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: Verses 11:8-17                      Next page: Verses 11:31-41

3 Ne 11:26-30

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 18-30
Previous page: Verses 11:8-17                      Next page: Verses 11:31-41


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 31-41 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Chapter 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 31-41 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:25. Here Jesus provides the Nephites with the precise wording He would have them use in performing baptisms. The wording is significant, as it draws into baptism the question of the "trinity" (a term understood here in the broadest, non-creedal manner). The theme of the trinity does not arise as a theme in the Book of Mormon between 2 Nephi 31 and 3 Nephi 11: though the three are mentioned once in Alma 11:44 (in a reference that might contextually be understood as a threefold description of one God anyway), all other references to the Father and the Son between 2 Nephi and 3 Nephi are discussions of Jesus Christ as both the Father and the Son (as in Abinadi's rather difficult discourse on the subject). That here, as in Nephi's early discourse on the subject, the three are tied together in their several roles is significant. More significant still, they will be taken up in chapter 16, and then again in chapters 20-26, in terms of the Abrahamic covenant. The "return" of the trinity is of utmost significance.
But what remains to be discussed here is the fact that the trinity returns as part of the theme of baptism: if Jesus goes on to explain the meaning of the trinity in the next few verses, it is because of the role of the trinity in the ordinance of baptism. Perhaps this is no surprise, since Nephi's discussion of the trinity back in 2 Nephi 31 was within the same context (and that discussion is perhaps the only place to begin to explore the trinitarian themes of the present chapter). If the trinity is later a question of the Abrahamic covenant, there seems to be at least the hint that the ordinance of baptism is tied to the covenant in some manner. (It is likely significant that only two people in scripture are recorded explicitly as having received the sign of the Holy Ghost in the form of a dove: Jesus Christ, at His baptism, and Abraham when He received the fulness of the priesthood... in baptism?) At the very least, the implicit connection between baptism, trinity, and the Abrahamic covenant must guide all thought concerning the following chapters.
Rather than simply listing the three members of the trinity/Godhead here in the traditional order—the Father first, then the Son, then the Holy Ghost—in the baptismal prayer, the authority of Jesus Christ is first invoked before reference to each member of the Godhead. The mention of the name Jesus coupled with the title Christ may be a significant reference to the role of mediator that Christ plays. That is, it is Christ's atonement that makes it possible for the person being baptized to enter into the relationship of oneness that the Godhead shares.
  • 3 Ne 11:27. As Jesus states quite clearly that this is the prescribed manner of baptism, He reinterprets the mention of the "trinity" in a rather subtle manner: "after this manner shall ye baptize in my name." He effectively reduces the "trinity" to His very own name. On the surface, this verse looks like a sort of apologetic for a duplicit description of baptism (be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ; be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost): since "the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one," to be baptized in the name of all three amounts to the same as being baptized in just the name of Jesus Christ. This apologetic feel of the verse is not accidental. Jesus is trying to work out, as He makes quite clear in the next verse, a difficulty that has been the subject of some disputation among the Nephites. The disputations that must be laid to rest are apparently questions of the "trinity." That the doctrine will be explored at length beginning in verse 31 is certainly helpful, but perhaps a word or two might be offered even here concerning this problem.
The explicit command that follows in verse 28 makes it very clear that there has been some disputation about whether one should be baptized in the single name of Jesus Christ or the threefold name of the "trinity." That Jesus sees fit to collapse the two into one here is ultimately His answer to the problem, but the problem itself might be clearer. The difficulty arises perhaps in light of 2 Nephi 31:11-12. There, Nephi hears a voice from the Father commanding baptism in the name of the Son, and then he hears a voice from the Son commanding baptism in His own name, thus doubling the command of the Father. It is interesting that the question of the "trinity" disappears between 2 Nephi 31 and the present discourse (see the comments at 3 Ne 11:25), and the suggestion is that Nephi's rather complex words caused a great deal of confusion over the many Nephite years. The difficulty seems to have been how one should understand the "trinity." To feel the difficulty quite profoundly, one need only turn to 2 Nephi 31 and read the whole discourse through: without some explanation, the words there are quite a chore to work through.
But Christ offers here a rather simple explanation: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one. They should not be understood as being separate. But even this is subject to terrible misrepresentation and misunderstanding, and it is perhaps for this reason that Jesus goes on to describe the situation at some length in the following verses. Perhaps all that is necessary to recognize here is that the doctrine begins with unity, with oneness (the final point in Nephi's discussion), and only then can there be some discussion of separation. Perhaps another point must be made very clear: the disputations among the Nephites that are commanded to stop in the very next verse are ultimately all concerning one single question. The disputations concerning the manner of baptism seem to be a question of the name in which one is to be baptized, and the disputations concerning Christ's doctrine (which He goes on to declare starting with verse 31) are a question of the "trinity." In other words, baptismal disputations and doctrinal disputations center on the question of the "trinity." That the "trinity" as a theme disappears for so long is significant: the prophets were not quite ready to jump into such a serious question (having, perhaps, other more pressing matters at hand). (Another reading of the silence concerning the "trinity" is to read it as no silence at all: every word concerning the Father or the Son--though each is clearly a discussion of just Jesus Christ--shows the interim teachings concerning the "trinity," that the prophets understood as three members of the "trinity" to be Jesus Christ. Answers to the questions these difficulties raise can only be understood by exploring the actual discourse beginning with verse 31.)
  • 3 Ne 11:28. The word "disputations" occurs only twice in the New Testament (KJV), but in nine verses in the Book of Mormon (the word "dispute" is much more commonly used in both books). A dictionary definition seems to indicate that a disputation is a more than a mere disagreement, and usually involves a more formal verbal contest with parties arguing for and against a stated position. As such, a disputation may be more like a public debate than an argument.
  • 3 Ne 11:28. Jesus states quite explicitly here that, concerning the manner of baptism and concerning the points of Christ's doctrine, "there shall be no disputations among you." The word, "disputation," is used both positively and negatively in the New Testament, sometimes as a work of the messengers of God (e.g., Acts 9:29), and sometimes as a work of the enemies of the gospel (e.g., Acts 6:9). In the Book of Mormon, however, the word is universally used in a negative sense, often in parallel with "contentions," apparently, then, as a synonym for "contentions." The command in this verse, then, seems to be universal in some sense: "there shall be no disputations among you." Certainly, the commandment, read thus, would be entirely justified. The next verse seems to ground such a reading by making what is undeniably a universal commandment.
On the other hand, it should be noted that Jesus only specifically commands--if the context is kept in mind--that disputations concerning the manner of baptism and the points of His doctrine (which He will go on to describe beginning with verse 31) cease. In other words, read carefully, the command is very specific and can only with some (minor) violence be read as a universal command. Since the verse is negative, the command cannot be read as a commendation of disputation in other circumstances either, but there does not seem to be any particular reason to see such disputations specifically condemned here.
These comments should be understood to point towards what Christ has just taught and towards what Christ is about to teach. If Christ does not want the people to dispute about the manner of baptism, they have only to look to the verses immediately preceding the command, and if He does not want them to dispute about His doctrine, they have only to look to the verses immediately following the command. The commandment offered here is, in the end, quite localized: do not dispute about this manner of baptism, nor about this doctrine I now call "mine."
  • 3 Ne 11:29. Jesus goes on to explain why He does not want his disciples to dispute about the manner of baptism or about other points of His doctrine. Whereas the specific command is not universal, the reasoning Jesus offers to ground it is universal: contention is apparently always "of the devil." What this means, and how it relates to the commandment concerning disputation, is perhaps somewhat more difficult. But at least this much is clear: behind the commandment not to dispute is a sort of question of loyalty. In other words, if one disputes in a spirit of contention, then one is "of the devil," has the devil for a "father," and so has left off the Christ entirely. When Jesus goes on to explore His doctrine, beginning with verse 31, He makes it a question also of coming from a father, in fact, from the Father. This contention/disputation business is at the very least, if reduced to the absolutely necessary, a question of whom one claims as a father.
With this point made clear, it is perhaps more understandable why Jesus offers this deeper explanation of His commandment concerning disputations. Rather than providing just a rule to be followed (do not dispute these two things), Christ takes the opportunity to explain in depth the question of covenant relation, of being/becoming a son (in the Son) to the Father, and just so leaving of the father of contention. The question of contention is not so much a question of one's relation to others, but of one's relation to the Other of Others, to God or (unfortunately, it must be said) to Satan. The point is this: contention, or the lack of it, flows from one's relation to deity, or the lack of it. Whereas the commandment of verse 28 suggests a sort of regulation of one's affairs among men, the universal reasoning behind it, offered in verse 29, recasts the regulation as a question of one's devotion to God. This realignment of relation, this adjustment of one's directedness toward others so that it is a directedness toward God, sets the stage quite wonderfully for the explication of the "doctrine of Christ," which is, as Jesus teaches it, the doctrine of the "trinity." What all of this means can only be explained in considering those particular verses.
The reason Christ gives is that the spirit of contention is not from him but rather, from the devil. It may be that the type of disputations that Christ is referring to in verse 28 are those where there is a spirit of contention. Under that interpretation there is nothing wrong with debating points of Christ's doctrine so long as we do it without the spirit of contention. Alternatively, we might interpret Christ as saying that we shouldn't dispute at all--even if we can do so without a spirit of contention--because it can lead to a spirit of contention. This wouldn't mean that Christ is asking us to agree with people who preach the wrong form of baptism or other points of his doctrine. That wouldn't make any sense. But under this interpretation Christ is telling us not to debate with others the points of his doctrine. In that case we would want to draw a line between explaining and testifying (both ok) and debating (not ok).

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:21-28: After allowing the people to witness that he is Jesus Christ (vv 10-17), Jesus begins teaching Nephi and the other apostles he calls about baptism. Why is baptism the first thing he talks about here (vv 21-28)?
  • 3 Ne 11:21: Why does Jesus give Nephi the power to baptize (v 21)? Didn't he already have this power?
  • 3 Ne 11:28: What does Christ mean when he says there should be no disputations? Is every disagreement a dispute?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: Verses 11:8-17                      Next page: Verses 11:31-41

3 Ne 11:31-35

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 31-41
Previous page: Verses 11:18-30                      Next page: Chapters 12-15a


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 31-41 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Chapter 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 31-41 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:31. Christ states quite bluntly that He is about to delare His "doctrine." The phrase, "my doctrine," might well be connected with 2 Ne 31:2, where Nephi states that he is about to declare "the doctrine of Christ." In both cases (2 Nephi 31 and 3 Nephi 11), the doctrine in question seems to be the interrelation of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (see especially 2 Ne 31:21). The term "doctrine" is interesting. Though the term is used in a number of different circumstances in the Book of Mormon as translated, it might be significant that one of these is a quotation of Isaiah (specifically of Isa 29:24, also found in 2 Ne 27:35). The context here seems similar to that in Isaiah in that the true doctrine of Christ is given after an errant version has been mentioned. In particular, the spirit of contention described in verses 28-30 will now be contrasted with the unified relationship between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Also, if Isaiah's text might be understood as a point of departure for understanding the Nephite use of the term, the Hebrew word lqh comes into play (this is the word in the Hebrew text of Isaiah 29). The word is translated "learning" elsewhere in the KJV, but it means quite literally a "take" on things, a way of "taking" things up. If there had been disputations to this point on Christ's doctrine, He here offers His take on things, His way of taking them. While it might be said that this makes "doctrine" a rather subjective thing, it might well be responded that Christ invites one to come to Him, not to some objective reality He discusses. That Christ explicitly states here that this is "my doctrine" makes the point clear: one is to trust Him here, one is to follow Him, whether or not what He says conforms to some scientific or otherwise objective view of the world.
  • 3 Ne 11:32. With this verse, the "doctrine of Christ" begins to unfold. It begins with a move that at once more radically subjectivizes the doctrine than the last verse and yet objectivizes it just as much. The "doctrine" is Christ's and the Father's. In fact, it is a doctrine given to the Son by the Father. More radically subjective: subjective enough that the Son could only receive it from another person (as it were), not from objective criteria. Yet objective: the doctrine is held by at least two now, a real take offered through the Son to all. This double way of understanding the role of the "doctrine" here offers a sort of criticism of the categories of subjectivity and objectivity: the "doctrine of Christ" outstrips these categories entirely. The doctrine is beyond questions of subjectivity and objectivity.
All of this opens onto the question of the interrelation of the Father and the Son, as well as the role of the Holy Ghost. And here, the doctrine of the trinity begins to unfold. Proceeding on, then, to the "doctrine" itself, a major difficulty arises out of the series of "and’s" that make up the passage comprising this "doctrine." Since every single phrase begins with an "and," it seems impossible at first to see where the actual discussion of the "doctrine" begins and where it ends. It in fact appears at first as if there is no discussion of the "doctrine" whatsoever, because, every phrase starting with an "and," there is the grammatical suggestion that every phrase is a continuation or extension of the sentence introducing the "doctrine." In other words, since every phrase is grammatically subordinate to the introductory phrase, the introductory phrase ultimately introduces nothing, and it appears as if there is no explanation of the "doctrine" in the passage. However, verse 35 makes it clear that, somewhere between that verse and verse 31, there must be read an explanation of the doctrine, since verse 35 essentially repeats the introduction of verse 31 and the beginning of verse 32, but in a confirmatory way. The difficulty is as to where to read it, and how to read it.
There is a hint, however, in verses 37-39, and perhaps a hint that clinches the matter. There, Jesus repeats in paraphrase the content of verses 33-34 twice and then says, quite explicitly, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, this is my doctrine...." The lack of the "and" before that conclusive phrase (in verse 39) is telling: the baptismal commandment is the key to the doctrine, is the doctrine. With that clear, the contents of the discourse on the subject might be approached. Before approaching it, perhaps a word concerning the trinity is in order: the comments above have hinted repeatedly that the "doctrine of Christ" is a question of the trinity, whereas here it has been apparent that the "doctrine of Christ" is a question of baptism. A reply to this point is rather simple: how is it that one feels to draw so careful a distinction between the two, between the trinity and baptism (see the comments at verse 25)? The question of baptism is the question of baptism, that much is clear.
In light of this last clarification, the remainder of this verse becomes rather interesting: the "and’s" that hold this verse together, paralleling the "and’s" at the opening of this verse and the "and’s" at the openings of the following two verses, mean at once to tie the remaining phrases to the introductory "this is my doctrine" and to the actual "doctrine" as it is laid out in verses 33-34. The remainder of this verse, in short, is provided as a clarification at once of the "doctrine" and of the introduction of the "doctrine." What this accomplishes interpretively for the verse must be seen next.
First, there is a threefold record-bearing: the Son of the Father, the Father of the Son, and the Holy Ghost of the Father and the Son. Perhaps at the core of these phrases is the very phrase "to bear record." The phrase in English is fascinating enough; that is represents universally in the KJV the Greek martyreo only doubles the fascination: anyone can see in the Greek term here the English derivative, "martyr." While it is often pointed out that the English "martyr" (or, indeed, the eventual Greek just as well) extends the original meaning of the word (only coming to include the concept of death or persecution in the tradition after the New Testament), it should certainly be noted that the richer concept of the "martyr" is implicit in the original Greek word, as used before the Christian era. The best way to think this question is to look at the English translation, where the KJV translators recognized that some form of the word "martyr" would be perhaps to add too much meaning to the original Greek: they translated the verb as "to bear record."
To bear: to hold up, to carry, even to support a burden (the etymological tie between "bear" and "burden" is rather obvious). The word also, of course, is used for labor: to bear is to give birth (again, the etymological tie is rather obvious). To hold up, to carry, to support, even to give birth to: a record. A record: a seconding (re-) of the heart (-cord) of the matter, a doubling of what is witnessed, a setting out in a physical object (perhaps even plates of gold) what would otherwise disappear with the passing of the event. The word "record" usually translates, in the Old Testament, the word zykrwn, a remembrance, a re-enactment, even a memorial: the record re-calls into the present what otherwise would pass away, re-presents what otherwise would slip into the past. To bear record: to hold up, carry, even give birth to what otherwise would disappear into the past. To bear record: to hold in the present what is liable to slip away into the past, to present it or even re-present it. Martyreo: to present physically (even in one’s physical body—and here the question of martyrdom is already implicit) the event that otherwise would slip into oblivion, the irretrievable past. In short, to bear record is to offer oneself as a physical re-presentation of an event (or, at times, of another person).
All this said, what does it mean to say, for example, that the Son bears record of the Father? The implication is that if it were not for the physical reality of the Son, the knowledge of the Father would pass away, that the Son’s person presents (makes present) the otherwise unknowable reality of the Father. But, then, what of the Father bearing record of the Son? It seems that this would mean that without the confirming witness of the Father—the voice from the heavens, for example—the divine reality of the Son would fade, and He would go unrecognized, would be thought other than what He is, would cease to be Himself as He is. This reciprocal record, the re-presentation of the Father by the Son and the presentation of the Son by the Father, is finally said to be presented or re-presented by the further record of the Holy Ghost. This last record is perhaps the most difficult one to handle, precisely because the record—unquestionably "borne"-—is always to be physical, not merely spiritual. But no sooner is this point made than the difficulty passes away: the dichotomy between the physical and the spiritual is Greek, not scriptural, and the witness of the Spirit is, in the end, more physical perhaps than the vision of the Father or of the Son. In its physical witness, the Spirit presents and re-presents the double relation of the Father and the Son.
But perhaps all of this sounds too "Trinitarian." Even so, it all seems to be what Jesus is talking about quite clearly. None of this yet breaches the implied relationship that underlies the double record-bearing work of the Father and the Son, and none of this yet explores how it is that the Holy Ghost is to be understood as playing into that relationship: the doctrine might well become far more "Trinitarian" than it already is. At any rate, there is certainly a good deal at work here.
Drawing from the abstract (if it can indeed be called abstract) question of record-bearing, Jesus mentions a rather concrete point of relation between Himself and the Father: the Son bears record of the Father’s commandment concerning the Son. The point opens right onto baptism.
  • 3 Ne 11:32-33. From the comments above, it appears that one can excerpt verses 33-34 from the rest of the passage as the "doctrine" of Christ. However, the obvious connection between the end of verse 32 and the beginning of verse 33 destroys that possibility: even though verses 33-34 seem in some sense to be more explicitly the "doctrine," it only opens up through the commandment that issues from the trinity ("the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me [the Son]"). That the "doctrine" of verse 33 is specifically connected to the theme of the trinity is also important because it works towards interpreting the content of the "doctrine": inheritance, as mentioned in verse 33, is inevitably to be understood in terms of father and son, or of Father and Son. In other words, the trinitarian context in which verse 33 appears decides in advance that inheritance is not figurative, but trinitarian. But before exploring what this implies, it might be best to draw quite explicitly the connection between verses 32 and 33.
The commandment that closes verse 32 is of the utmost importance: after drawing out the intertwining record-bearing relations of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Jesus explains what those relations amount to, namely, a record borne by the Son of the Father's record-bearing commandment concerning the Son. The Father's universal commandment (to "all men") is only made manifest in the Son (this is the theme of much of Paul as well, and--if read carefully--"Second" Isaiah). This is as much as to say that the trinity is a necessary step on the way to the possibility of a universal invitation to the Abrahamic covenant. Outside of the trinitarian interrelationship of the Godhead, there is a sort of closure of the commandment (to Israel, it would appear). The Son, bearing record of the Father's otherwise hidden commandment, opens the possibility for "all men, everywhere, to repent and believe...." That the belief to be had is specifically "in me [the Son]" is vastly important: the belief commanded by the Father, as revealed in the Son, is a commandment to become involved in the trinity itself, to believe in the Son. When in verse 33 Jesus goes on to say that those who so believe (believing in the Son) become heirs, He seems essentially to be saying that these who believe in the Son gain a particular relationship to the Father (as sons in the Son). The trinity is, across the space between verses 32 and 33, made the locus of a universal plan of salvation. But what all of this means can only be explored through careful attention to the details of verses 33-34.
  • 3 Ne 11:33-34. These two verses can only, in the end, be read together. That they form a parallel structure is plain enough; the parallelism they form, in fact, sets off the question of inheritance as a sort of aside. The parallelism sets up the powerful opposition of being, on the one hand, saved and, on the other hand, damned. The terms are common enough in religious discourse, but perhaps their meaning is not often brought into clarity. In the New Testament ("damned" does not show up in the Old Testament in the KJV), the word "damned" translated the Greek katakrithesetai, a word that means roughly "sentenced" or, more literally, "judged against." The English "damn" had a similar courtroom connotation in 1828, coming from the Latin damno, -are, to find guilty. If one traces the word back to its Indo-European root dap-, one finds the implication of liability, of a debt or a duty that must be fulfilled. In short, to be damned does not mean so much--as it is often said--to be stopped in progression as it means to be judged officially and found guilty, to be sentenced to some task that fulfills the unpaid debt or duty. It is over against this damnation that salvation must be understood: to be saved means, when set parallel to being damned, to come through the trial without an incriminating sentence. It is not, however, to come through it innocently: salvo, -are in Latin, just as sozo in Greek (the word translated "be saved" in the New Testament), means to heal, implying that something was amiss. In other words, to be saved means, just as a most literal reading of the English "save" would suggest, to be taken from justice, to be not innocent but delivered from the sentence that would otherwise take effect. Salvation does not imply that no debt was involved in the situation, but that the debt was somehow canceled.
Here in verses 33-34, what makes all the difference between being saved and being damned is "believ[ing] in me [the Son]" and being "baptized." That baptism here is also a question of the Son is clear from verse 27: "after this manner shall ye baptize in my name." In other words, what makes all the difference between salvation and damnation is a double relation to the Son. The aside of verse 33, "and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God," then becomes absolutely vital: if inheritance is a question of Father and Son, then the double relation to the Son is what will or will not bring one into relation with the Father. The real thrust of all of this is that it is in being reconciled to the Son that one first takes up a relation with the Father, that one becomes a son to the Father in the Son. This highlights the phrase of verse 27, to be baptized "in my [Christ's] name," since it is in the name of the Son--even as the Son--that one approaches the Father (just as we pray to the Father in the name of the Son). The process of becoming heir here is quite simple: one is to repent and believe in the Son, thereafter being baptized in His name, taking upon oneself His name as Son, and just so able at last to approach the Father as the Son. As the Son, one becomes heir to the Father, and is prepared to inherit the kingdom of God (as, hence, a king: Father/Son, King/Prince).
Perhaps what is most peculiar of all about this sequence is that the incredible possibility of becoming heir to the kingdom itself, as the Prince/Son to/of the King/Father, is bordered (textually) on each side by the harsh reality of the scene of judgment. In other words, the transfer marked in these verses is a transfer from being the guilty party--and found to be thus--in court to being the next heir to the throne of God! It is precisely as if the Son walks into court and asks the guilty party to take His place as Son so that He might take the guilty party's place as guilty. The transfer is accomplished in baptism (death and rebirth under a new name, the name of the Son). (The connections with ordination to the Melchizedek priesthood should probably be sensed here: one becomes of the order of the Son in baptism.)
  • 3 Ne 11:35. Jesus wraps up the specifics of the doctrine (verses 33-34) by returning to the theme of bearing record (chiastically setting off verses 33-34 by connecting verse 35 with verse 32), though the discussion in verse 35 differs in at least one important respect from the earlier discussion. What might appear to be a first departure is that here Jesus says that He bears record, not exactly of the Father, but of the doctrine ("it") from the Father. With some work, however, this turns out to be no departure at all. The phrase is admittedly awkward: "it from the Father." The difficulty is perhaps that "from the Father" might be read in two ways: on the one hand, it might qualify "it," the doctrine; on the other hand, it might be read to be qualifying the act of bearing record. Either reading is, to some degree, awkward. In the end, it appears that the former reading is better, since it is not clear what it would mean to "bear record from the Father," though there is some sense to bearing record of "it [the doctrine] from the Father." The phrase seems, then, to mean that Jesus, as Son, bears record of the doctrine as the doctrine from the Father. This seems to be a doubling of the last phrase of verse 32: "I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me." In other words, just as verse 32 closing by presenting a second record that Jesus bears (in addition to a record of the Father, Jesus bears record of the commandment of the Father), so verse 35 opens with a similar "second" record borne by Jesus. The Son bears record, not only of the Father, but of the Father's record of the Son (the "doctrine").
Beyond that first return to verse 32, verse 35 offers a few others: the Father is said again to bear record of the Son, and the next verse will go on to confirm again that the Holy Ghost bears record of the Father and the Son. However, since verse 35 fixes itself on the question of the Father bearing record of the Son, it would be well to consider how it fleshes out that particular experience; and it does add quite a bit to verse 32 in this respect. Perhaps the subtlest difference, but one that opens up the remainder of the differences, is the shift in tense between verse 32 and verse 35. In verse 32, Jesus says quite plainly that "the Father beareth record of me," whereas the same (?) point is grammatically shifted to the future in verse 35: "unto him will the Father bear record of me." The movement from the present tense to the future tense is rather interesting, since it reflects (in English, at least--there is no distinction between the future and present tenses in Hebrew) a sort of conditionalizing or even un-securing. Whereas verse 32 seems to suggest that the Father universally--in all times and in all relevant places--bears record of the Son (as if that were the essence of the Father), here it appears that such a witness is a rare and particular happening. It would be, it turns out, conditional in a few different ways. Those conditions, spelled out, are the remainder of the differences between verses 32 and 35, and only now can they be considered carefully.
The particularization is also at work in another word of the phrase already considered: "and unto him will the Father bear record of me." That "him" ties this phrase intimately to the preceding phrase, "whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also." The first condition is clear: the record the Father bears of the Son will be manifest only to those who believe in the Son and therefore also in the Father. That double belief is necessary for the witness of the Father. The implication seems to be that the belief in the Father is necessary for the Father's witness of the Son to come, which then strengthens the belief one has in the Son. In other words: one believes in the Son, which implies a belief in the Father, which second belief opens the possibility of a witness offered by the Father of the Son, which returns the believer to the first belief, but now in a solidly confirmed manner. The pattern is vaguely chiastic: one believes in the Son, who bears record of the Father, and so one believes in the Father, who therefore bears record of the Son, and so one believes in the Son, now, perhaps, doubly.
Of some difficulty is deciding how to link this process of believing and bearing record up with the Father's commandment for all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in the Son. The commandment is not, it seems clear from the last phrase of this verse, the witness that comes from the Father of the Son. The commandment is something more universal than the witness the Father offers. In other words, there is more to the process still: the Father commands all to repent and believe, and those who believe in the One who bears record of the Father will believe in the Father also (and apparently so be baptized to become an heir), which will result in the witness of the Father concerning the Son, which will return one to the belief with which one began. There is, interestingly, a sort of return--in the end--to faith in the Son: regardless of one's meanwhile belief in the Father, one is to return in faith to the Son, to center one's work there. It is the last phrase of this verse, and the content of the next verse, that seems to confirm this--though in a somewhat surprising and clarifying manner. Perhaps it is best to delay any real discussion of this last phrase until commentary proceeds in the following verse. For now, all that must be said is that the Father bears His record of the Son by visiting the believer "with fire and with the Holy Ghost."
  • 3 Ne 11:36. The word "thus," so early in this verse, points back to the last phrase of verse 35: "with fire and with the Holy Ghost." This is, apparently, the manner in which the Father bears record of the Son, following one's double faith in the Father and the Son. Though the rest of this verse goes on to describe how it is that the Holy Ghost is a record of the Son, the question of fire is passed over in just a word. Perhaps more than a word might here be devoted to it. The reference seems to be 2 Ne 31:13, where Nephi promises those who receive the Holy Ghost consequent to baptism that they will receive the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. There, the baptism of fire seems to be tied in some manner to the gift of speaking with the tongue of angels. Some connection with the Pentecostal experience of Acts 2 seems implied as well. Whatever "fire" is supposed to mean here, it appears that it would best be explored in other scriptural contexts.
Similar to verse 32, this verse describes the Holy Ghost as bearing record of both the Father and the Son. The implication seems again to be that the Holy Ghost bears in itself--in its very witness--some reference to the relation of Father to Son. But, based on what has been said between verse 32 and the present verse, the phrase has a somewhat more nuanced meaning. The end of verse 32, combined with the first phrase of verse 35, suggests that part of the Father's witness of the Son involves a commandment to all men to believe in the Son, and that part of the Son's witness of the Father is a record borne about that very commandment (or "doctrine"). In short, the record-bearing relation that holds between the Father and the Son is a sort of universal direction of all attentions to the Son by the Father, and a subsequent attribution of the Son to the Father concerning that very direction. The Father's witness of the Son is in the form of a commandment, and the Son's witness of the Father is in the way of attribution. If the Holy Ghost is now said to bear record of the Father and the Son, and these, apparently, in their interrelation, then the Holy Ghost puts on display for those to whom it is sent by the Father this double relation of commandment and attribution. In other words, the primary message of the Holy Ghost seems to be a confirmation or even a presentation of the Father's profferment of the Son (this profferment embracing both the commandment and the subsequent attribution).
All of this suggests, then, that when Jesus concludes this first trinitarian discussion with the rather enigmatic "for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one," He is first and foremost describing their unified witness of the Father's profferment of the Son, of His offering the Son as the point of all belief and as the meaning of baptism. There are two implications or consequences of all of this that are perhaps the most important to be drawn. First, it is clear that the doctrine of the trinity ultimately focuses all attention on the Christ Himself (the Holy Ghost points to the relation between the Father and the Son, and that relation amounts to the Father's setting forth the Son). But second, it is clear that the Son is the focus of the trinitarian doctrine as--and only as--set forth by the Father and doubly witnessed by the Holy Ghost. The Son is not experienced as the Son without the Father (where was there a son without a father?), and the two together cannot appear without the double record of the Holy Ghost. In other words, the trinitarian doctrine here does not offer itself only to cancel itself in a profferment of the Son, but it is a sort of interpretive necessity that proffers the Son as Son, as related to (with constant reference to) the Father, and always witnessed as such by the Holy Ghost.
In the end, then, it seems that Jesus offers the trinitarian unity ("are one") as a clarification of the broader role of the whole doctrine: the point is hardly metaphysical; it is rather a question of the mode of appearance of the Son, of the possibility of the Son appearing as the Son. The suggestion is that the Son, proffered in the Holy Ghost's witness as the Son, opens the possibility of sonship for all those who might be united to Him in atonement, that the Son, as Son, presents for the first time the meaning of sonship, and that the relation one has to God--the "invisible God" of Col 1:15--is offered for the first time. The trinitarian doctrine is meant, it seems in the end, as a contextualization of the believer's relationship to God, more than it is a question of the interrelationship of the several Gods (or, for that matter, of the several aspects of God).--Kurt Elieson (talk) 23:33, 17 October 2015 (EDT)

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:35ff: In verse 35 and following verses, what does it mean to "bear record" and what is its significance?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: Verses 11:18-30                      Next page: Chapters 12-15a

3 Ne 11:36-41

Home > The Book of Mormon > Third Nephi > Chapter 11 > Verses 31-41
Previous page: Verses 11:18-30                      Next page: Chapters 12-15a


This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.


Summary[edit]

This heading should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Chapter 11. The relationship of Verses 31-41 to the rest of Chapter 11 is discussed at Chapter 11.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 31-41 include:

Discussion[edit]

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:31. Christ states quite bluntly that He is about to delare His "doctrine." The phrase, "my doctrine," might well be connected with 2 Ne 31:2, where Nephi states that he is about to declare "the doctrine of Christ." In both cases (2 Nephi 31 and 3 Nephi 11), the doctrine in question seems to be the interrelation of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (see especially 2 Ne 31:21). The term "doctrine" is interesting. Though the term is used in a number of different circumstances in the Book of Mormon as translated, it might be significant that one of these is a quotation of Isaiah (specifically of Isa 29:24, also found in 2 Ne 27:35). The context here seems similar to that in Isaiah in that the true doctrine of Christ is given after an errant version has been mentioned. In particular, the spirit of contention described in verses 28-30 will now be contrasted with the unified relationship between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Also, if Isaiah's text might be understood as a point of departure for understanding the Nephite use of the term, the Hebrew word lqh comes into play (this is the word in the Hebrew text of Isaiah 29). The word is translated "learning" elsewhere in the KJV, but it means quite literally a "take" on things, a way of "taking" things up. If there had been disputations to this point on Christ's doctrine, He here offers His take on things, His way of taking them. While it might be said that this makes "doctrine" a rather subjective thing, it might well be responded that Christ invites one to come to Him, not to some objective reality He discusses. That Christ explicitly states here that this is "my doctrine" makes the point clear: one is to trust Him here, one is to follow Him, whether or not what He says conforms to some scientific or otherwise objective view of the world.
  • 3 Ne 11:32. With this verse, the "doctrine of Christ" begins to unfold. It begins with a move that at once more radically subjectivizes the doctrine than the last verse and yet objectivizes it just as much. The "doctrine" is Christ's and the Father's. In fact, it is a doctrine given to the Son by the Father. More radically subjective: subjective enough that the Son could only receive it from another person (as it were), not from objective criteria. Yet objective: the doctrine is held by at least two now, a real take offered through the Son to all. This double way of understanding the role of the "doctrine" here offers a sort of criticism of the categories of subjectivity and objectivity: the "doctrine of Christ" outstrips these categories entirely. The doctrine is beyond questions of subjectivity and objectivity.
All of this opens onto the question of the interrelation of the Father and the Son, as well as the role of the Holy Ghost. And here, the doctrine of the trinity begins to unfold. Proceeding on, then, to the "doctrine" itself, a major difficulty arises out of the series of "and’s" that make up the passage comprising this "doctrine." Since every single phrase begins with an "and," it seems impossible at first to see where the actual discussion of the "doctrine" begins and where it ends. It in fact appears at first as if there is no discussion of the "doctrine" whatsoever, because, every phrase starting with an "and," there is the grammatical suggestion that every phrase is a continuation or extension of the sentence introducing the "doctrine." In other words, since every phrase is grammatically subordinate to the introductory phrase, the introductory phrase ultimately introduces nothing, and it appears as if there is no explanation of the "doctrine" in the passage. However, verse 35 makes it clear that, somewhere between that verse and verse 31, there must be read an explanation of the doctrine, since verse 35 essentially repeats the introduction of verse 31 and the beginning of verse 32, but in a confirmatory way. The difficulty is as to where to read it, and how to read it.
There is a hint, however, in verses 37-39, and perhaps a hint that clinches the matter. There, Jesus repeats in paraphrase the content of verses 33-34 twice and then says, quite explicitly, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, this is my doctrine...." The lack of the "and" before that conclusive phrase (in verse 39) is telling: the baptismal commandment is the key to the doctrine, is the doctrine. With that clear, the contents of the discourse on the subject might be approached. Before approaching it, perhaps a word concerning the trinity is in order: the comments above have hinted repeatedly that the "doctrine of Christ" is a question of the trinity, whereas here it has been apparent that the "doctrine of Christ" is a question of baptism. A reply to this point is rather simple: how is it that one feels to draw so careful a distinction between the two, between the trinity and baptism (see the comments at verse 25)? The question of baptism is the question of baptism, that much is clear.
In light of this last clarification, the remainder of this verse becomes rather interesting: the "and’s" that hold this verse together, paralleling the "and’s" at the opening of this verse and the "and’s" at the openings of the following two verses, mean at once to tie the remaining phrases to the introductory "this is my doctrine" and to the actual "doctrine" as it is laid out in verses 33-34. The remainder of this verse, in short, is provided as a clarification at once of the "doctrine" and of the introduction of the "doctrine." What this accomplishes interpretively for the verse must be seen next.
First, there is a threefold record-bearing: the Son of the Father, the Father of the Son, and the Holy Ghost of the Father and the Son. Perhaps at the core of these phrases is the very phrase "to bear record." The phrase in English is fascinating enough; that is represents universally in the KJV the Greek martyreo only doubles the fascination: anyone can see in the Greek term here the English derivative, "martyr." While it is often pointed out that the English "martyr" (or, indeed, the eventual Greek just as well) extends the original meaning of the word (only coming to include the concept of death or persecution in the tradition after the New Testament), it should certainly be noted that the richer concept of the "martyr" is implicit in the original Greek word, as used before the Christian era. The best way to think this question is to look at the English translation, where the KJV translators recognized that some form of the word "martyr" would be perhaps to add too much meaning to the original Greek: they translated the verb as "to bear record."
To bear: to hold up, to carry, even to support a burden (the etymological tie between "bear" and "burden" is rather obvious). The word also, of course, is used for labor: to bear is to give birth (again, the etymological tie is rather obvious). To hold up, to carry, to support, even to give birth to: a record. A record: a seconding (re-) of the heart (-cord) of the matter, a doubling of what is witnessed, a setting out in a physical object (perhaps even plates of gold) what would otherwise disappear with the passing of the event. The word "record" usually translates, in the Old Testament, the word zykrwn, a remembrance, a re-enactment, even a memorial: the record re-calls into the present what otherwise would pass away, re-presents what otherwise would slip into the past. To bear record: to hold up, carry, even give birth to what otherwise would disappear into the past. To bear record: to hold in the present what is liable to slip away into the past, to present it or even re-present it. Martyreo: to present physically (even in one’s physical body—and here the question of martyrdom is already implicit) the event that otherwise would slip into oblivion, the irretrievable past. In short, to bear record is to offer oneself as a physical re-presentation of an event (or, at times, of another person).
All this said, what does it mean to say, for example, that the Son bears record of the Father? The implication is that if it were not for the physical reality of the Son, the knowledge of the Father would pass away, that the Son’s person presents (makes present) the otherwise unknowable reality of the Father. But, then, what of the Father bearing record of the Son? It seems that this would mean that without the confirming witness of the Father—the voice from the heavens, for example—the divine reality of the Son would fade, and He would go unrecognized, would be thought other than what He is, would cease to be Himself as He is. This reciprocal record, the re-presentation of the Father by the Son and the presentation of the Son by the Father, is finally said to be presented or re-presented by the further record of the Holy Ghost. This last record is perhaps the most difficult one to handle, precisely because the record—unquestionably "borne"-—is always to be physical, not merely spiritual. But no sooner is this point made than the difficulty passes away: the dichotomy between the physical and the spiritual is Greek, not scriptural, and the witness of the Spirit is, in the end, more physical perhaps than the vision of the Father or of the Son. In its physical witness, the Spirit presents and re-presents the double relation of the Father and the Son.
But perhaps all of this sounds too "Trinitarian." Even so, it all seems to be what Jesus is talking about quite clearly. None of this yet breaches the implied relationship that underlies the double record-bearing work of the Father and the Son, and none of this yet explores how it is that the Holy Ghost is to be understood as playing into that relationship: the doctrine might well become far more "Trinitarian" than it already is. At any rate, there is certainly a good deal at work here.
Drawing from the abstract (if it can indeed be called abstract) question of record-bearing, Jesus mentions a rather concrete point of relation between Himself and the Father: the Son bears record of the Father’s commandment concerning the Son. The point opens right onto baptism.
  • 3 Ne 11:32-33. From the comments above, it appears that one can excerpt verses 33-34 from the rest of the passage as the "doctrine" of Christ. However, the obvious connection between the end of verse 32 and the beginning of verse 33 destroys that possibility: even though verses 33-34 seem in some sense to be more explicitly the "doctrine," it only opens up through the commandment that issues from the trinity ("the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me [the Son]"). That the "doctrine" of verse 33 is specifically connected to the theme of the trinity is also important because it works towards interpreting the content of the "doctrine": inheritance, as mentioned in verse 33, is inevitably to be understood in terms of father and son, or of Father and Son. In other words, the trinitarian context in which verse 33 appears decides in advance that inheritance is not figurative, but trinitarian. But before exploring what this implies, it might be best to draw quite explicitly the connection between verses 32 and 33.
The commandment that closes verse 32 is of the utmost importance: after drawing out the intertwining record-bearing relations of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Jesus explains what those relations amount to, namely, a record borne by the Son of the Father's record-bearing commandment concerning the Son. The Father's universal commandment (to "all men") is only made manifest in the Son (this is the theme of much of Paul as well, and--if read carefully--"Second" Isaiah). This is as much as to say that the trinity is a necessary step on the way to the possibility of a universal invitation to the Abrahamic covenant. Outside of the trinitarian interrelationship of the Godhead, there is a sort of closure of the commandment (to Israel, it would appear). The Son, bearing record of the Father's otherwise hidden commandment, opens the possibility for "all men, everywhere, to repent and believe...." That the belief to be had is specifically "in me [the Son]" is vastly important: the belief commanded by the Father, as revealed in the Son, is a commandment to become involved in the trinity itself, to believe in the Son. When in verse 33 Jesus goes on to say that those who so believe (believing in the Son) become heirs, He seems essentially to be saying that these who believe in the Son gain a particular relationship to the Father (as sons in the Son). The trinity is, across the space between verses 32 and 33, made the locus of a universal plan of salvation. But what all of this means can only be explored through careful attention to the details of verses 33-34.
  • 3 Ne 11:33-34. These two verses can only, in the end, be read together. That they form a parallel structure is plain enough; the parallelism they form, in fact, sets off the question of inheritance as a sort of aside. The parallelism sets up the powerful opposition of being, on the one hand, saved and, on the other hand, damned. The terms are common enough in religious discourse, but perhaps their meaning is not often brought into clarity. In the New Testament ("damned" does not show up in the Old Testament in the KJV), the word "damned" translated the Greek katakrithesetai, a word that means roughly "sentenced" or, more literally, "judged against." The English "damn" had a similar courtroom connotation in 1828, coming from the Latin damno, -are, to find guilty. If one traces the word back to its Indo-European root dap-, one finds the implication of liability, of a debt or a duty that must be fulfilled. In short, to be damned does not mean so much--as it is often said--to be stopped in progression as it means to be judged officially and found guilty, to be sentenced to some task that fulfills the unpaid debt or duty. It is over against this damnation that salvation must be understood: to be saved means, when set parallel to being damned, to come through the trial without an incriminating sentence. It is not, however, to come through it innocently: salvo, -are in Latin, just as sozo in Greek (the word translated "be saved" in the New Testament), means to heal, implying that something was amiss. In other words, to be saved means, just as a most literal reading of the English "save" would suggest, to be taken from justice, to be not innocent but delivered from the sentence that would otherwise take effect. Salvation does not imply that no debt was involved in the situation, but that the debt was somehow canceled.
Here in verses 33-34, what makes all the difference between being saved and being damned is "believ[ing] in me [the Son]" and being "baptized." That baptism here is also a question of the Son is clear from verse 27: "after this manner shall ye baptize in my name." In other words, what makes all the difference between salvation and damnation is a double relation to the Son. The aside of verse 33, "and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God," then becomes absolutely vital: if inheritance is a question of Father and Son, then the double relation to the Son is what will or will not bring one into relation with the Father. The real thrust of all of this is that it is in being reconciled to the Son that one first takes up a relation with the Father, that one becomes a son to the Father in the Son. This highlights the phrase of verse 27, to be baptized "in my [Christ's] name," since it is in the name of the Son--even as the Son--that one approaches the Father (just as we pray to the Father in the name of the Son). The process of becoming heir here is quite simple: one is to repent and believe in the Son, thereafter being baptized in His name, taking upon oneself His name as Son, and just so able at last to approach the Father as the Son. As the Son, one becomes heir to the Father, and is prepared to inherit the kingdom of God (as, hence, a king: Father/Son, King/Prince).
Perhaps what is most peculiar of all about this sequence is that the incredible possibility of becoming heir to the kingdom itself, as the Prince/Son to/of the King/Father, is bordered (textually) on each side by the harsh reality of the scene of judgment. In other words, the transfer marked in these verses is a transfer from being the guilty party--and found to be thus--in court to being the next heir to the throne of God! It is precisely as if the Son walks into court and asks the guilty party to take His place as Son so that He might take the guilty party's place as guilty. The transfer is accomplished in baptism (death and rebirth under a new name, the name of the Son). (The connections with ordination to the Melchizedek priesthood should probably be sensed here: one becomes of the order of the Son in baptism.)
  • 3 Ne 11:35. Jesus wraps up the specifics of the doctrine (verses 33-34) by returning to the theme of bearing record (chiastically setting off verses 33-34 by connecting verse 35 with verse 32), though the discussion in verse 35 differs in at least one important respect from the earlier discussion. What might appear to be a first departure is that here Jesus says that He bears record, not exactly of the Father, but of the doctrine ("it") from the Father. With some work, however, this turns out to be no departure at all. The phrase is admittedly awkward: "it from the Father." The difficulty is perhaps that "from the Father" might be read in two ways: on the one hand, it might qualify "it," the doctrine; on the other hand, it might be read to be qualifying the act of bearing record. Either reading is, to some degree, awkward. In the end, it appears that the former reading is better, since it is not clear what it would mean to "bear record from the Father," though there is some sense to bearing record of "it [the doctrine] from the Father." The phrase seems, then, to mean that Jesus, as Son, bears record of the doctrine as the doctrine from the Father. This seems to be a doubling of the last phrase of verse 32: "I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me." In other words, just as verse 32 closing by presenting a second record that Jesus bears (in addition to a record of the Father, Jesus bears record of the commandment of the Father), so verse 35 opens with a similar "second" record borne by Jesus. The Son bears record, not only of the Father, but of the Father's record of the Son (the "doctrine").
Beyond that first return to verse 32, verse 35 offers a few others: the Father is said again to bear record of the Son, and the next verse will go on to confirm again that the Holy Ghost bears record of the Father and the Son. However, since verse 35 fixes itself on the question of the Father bearing record of the Son, it would be well to consider how it fleshes out that particular experience; and it does add quite a bit to verse 32 in this respect. Perhaps the subtlest difference, but one that opens up the remainder of the differences, is the shift in tense between verse 32 and verse 35. In verse 32, Jesus says quite plainly that "the Father beareth record of me," whereas the same (?) point is grammatically shifted to the future in verse 35: "unto him will the Father bear record of me." The movement from the present tense to the future tense is rather interesting, since it reflects (in English, at least--there is no distinction between the future and present tenses in Hebrew) a sort of conditionalizing or even un-securing. Whereas verse 32 seems to suggest that the Father universally--in all times and in all relevant places--bears record of the Son (as if that were the essence of the Father), here it appears that such a witness is a rare and particular happening. It would be, it turns out, conditional in a few different ways. Those conditions, spelled out, are the remainder of the differences between verses 32 and 35, and only now can they be considered carefully.
The particularization is also at work in another word of the phrase already considered: "and unto him will the Father bear record of me." That "him" ties this phrase intimately to the preceding phrase, "whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also." The first condition is clear: the record the Father bears of the Son will be manifest only to those who believe in the Son and therefore also in the Father. That double belief is necessary for the witness of the Father. The implication seems to be that the belief in the Father is necessary for the Father's witness of the Son to come, which then strengthens the belief one has in the Son. In other words: one believes in the Son, which implies a belief in the Father, which second belief opens the possibility of a witness offered by the Father of the Son, which returns the believer to the first belief, but now in a solidly confirmed manner. The pattern is vaguely chiastic: one believes in the Son, who bears record of the Father, and so one believes in the Father, who therefore bears record of the Son, and so one believes in the Son, now, perhaps, doubly.
Of some difficulty is deciding how to link this process of believing and bearing record up with the Father's commandment for all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in the Son. The commandment is not, it seems clear from the last phrase of this verse, the witness that comes from the Father of the Son. The commandment is something more universal than the witness the Father offers. In other words, there is more to the process still: the Father commands all to repent and believe, and those who believe in the One who bears record of the Father will believe in the Father also (and apparently so be baptized to become an heir), which will result in the witness of the Father concerning the Son, which will return one to the belief with which one began. There is, interestingly, a sort of return--in the end--to faith in the Son: regardless of one's meanwhile belief in the Father, one is to return in faith to the Son, to center one's work there. It is the last phrase of this verse, and the content of the next verse, that seems to confirm this--though in a somewhat surprising and clarifying manner. Perhaps it is best to delay any real discussion of this last phrase until commentary proceeds in the following verse. For now, all that must be said is that the Father bears His record of the Son by visiting the believer "with fire and with the Holy Ghost."
  • 3 Ne 11:36. The word "thus," so early in this verse, points back to the last phrase of verse 35: "with fire and with the Holy Ghost." This is, apparently, the manner in which the Father bears record of the Son, following one's double faith in the Father and the Son. Though the rest of this verse goes on to describe how it is that the Holy Ghost is a record of the Son, the question of fire is passed over in just a word. Perhaps more than a word might here be devoted to it. The reference seems to be 2 Ne 31:13, where Nephi promises those who receive the Holy Ghost consequent to baptism that they will receive the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. There, the baptism of fire seems to be tied in some manner to the gift of speaking with the tongue of angels. Some connection with the Pentecostal experience of Acts 2 seems implied as well. Whatever "fire" is supposed to mean here, it appears that it would best be explored in other scriptural contexts.
Similar to verse 32, this verse describes the Holy Ghost as bearing record of both the Father and the Son. The implication seems again to be that the Holy Ghost bears in itself--in its very witness--some reference to the relation of Father to Son. But, based on what has been said between verse 32 and the present verse, the phrase has a somewhat more nuanced meaning. The end of verse 32, combined with the first phrase of verse 35, suggests that part of the Father's witness of the Son involves a commandment to all men to believe in the Son, and that part of the Son's witness of the Father is a record borne about that very commandment (or "doctrine"). In short, the record-bearing relation that holds between the Father and the Son is a sort of universal direction of all attentions to the Son by the Father, and a subsequent attribution of the Son to the Father concerning that very direction. The Father's witness of the Son is in the form of a commandment, and the Son's witness of the Father is in the way of attribution. If the Holy Ghost is now said to bear record of the Father and the Son, and these, apparently, in their interrelation, then the Holy Ghost puts on display for those to whom it is sent by the Father this double relation of commandment and attribution. In other words, the primary message of the Holy Ghost seems to be a confirmation or even a presentation of the Father's profferment of the Son (this profferment embracing both the commandment and the subsequent attribution).
All of this suggests, then, that when Jesus concludes this first trinitarian discussion with the rather enigmatic "for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one," He is first and foremost describing their unified witness of the Father's profferment of the Son, of His offering the Son as the point of all belief and as the meaning of baptism. There are two implications or consequences of all of this that are perhaps the most important to be drawn. First, it is clear that the doctrine of the trinity ultimately focuses all attention on the Christ Himself (the Holy Ghost points to the relation between the Father and the Son, and that relation amounts to the Father's setting forth the Son). But second, it is clear that the Son is the focus of the trinitarian doctrine as--and only as--set forth by the Father and doubly witnessed by the Holy Ghost. The Son is not experienced as the Son without the Father (where was there a son without a father?), and the two together cannot appear without the double record of the Holy Ghost. In other words, the trinitarian doctrine here does not offer itself only to cancel itself in a profferment of the Son, but it is a sort of interpretive necessity that proffers the Son as Son, as related to (with constant reference to) the Father, and always witnessed as such by the Holy Ghost.
In the end, then, it seems that Jesus offers the trinitarian unity ("are one") as a clarification of the broader role of the whole doctrine: the point is hardly metaphysical; it is rather a question of the mode of appearance of the Son, of the possibility of the Son appearing as the Son. The suggestion is that the Son, proffered in the Holy Ghost's witness as the Son, opens the possibility of sonship for all those who might be united to Him in atonement, that the Son, as Son, presents for the first time the meaning of sonship, and that the relation one has to God--the "invisible God" of Col 1:15--is offered for the first time. The trinitarian doctrine is meant, it seems in the end, as a contextualization of the believer's relationship to God, more than it is a question of the interrelationship of the several Gods (or, for that matter, of the several aspects of God).--Kurt Elieson (talk) 23:33, 17 October 2015 (EDT)

Unanswered questions[edit]

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application[edit]

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study[edit]

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

  • 3 Ne 11:35ff: In verse 35 and following verses, what does it mean to "bear record" and what is its significance?

Resources[edit]

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes[edit]

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.



Previous page: Verses 11:18-30                      Next page: Chapters 12-15a

For efficiency this page often uses a cached copy of an older version. If you need to refresh the cache, to see the most up to date version, click here.