Nephi'S Beheading Of Laban

[Cobalt-70]

"I need to ignore everything Laban did to Nephi and his brothers [should any of that have been tolerated?] so I can superimpose my presentist mindset on an occurrence that happened ca. 600 BC! What? Welch? Larsen? [stick fingers in ears] Nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah! I can't hear you! I can't hear you! Nyah-nyah-nyah! Nephi should have simply called 911, summoned the Jerusalem City Police, and had Laban arrested! Simple!"

The fact that Nephi already had a beef with Laban, because of prior offenses, would be even more damning evidence that this was a cold-blooded, calculated murder. If this were an actual event, and Nephi were a real person that was on trial for homicide, the prior animosity would be very relevant to show that this was revenge, rather than self-defense. That's true today, it was true in 1829 when the story was invented, and it would have been true in the tale's ostensible historical setting of 600 BCE Jerusalem.

[Samlam]

The concern in the Nephi passage is preserving God’s chosen people (or their progenitor) from destruction. In order to do so, acts that are normally forbidden and condemned are now required and commanded.

"R. Nahman b. Isaac said: A transgression performed for the sake of heaven is better than a precept performed not for the sake of heaven.”

Jael, wife of Heber the Kenite, is famous for having slain the Canaanite general Sisera when he sought refuge in her tent. Not only might this be construed as breaking the commandment against killing, the sages sensed that something more had occurred.

“Blessed above women shall Jael be, the wife of Heber the Kenite…

R. Johanan said: [sisera] that wicked one had intercourse seven times [with Jael] at that moment, as it says: “At her feet he sunk, he fell, he lay;” etc…”

These verbs were understood as euphemisms, and their appearance for a total of sevens times meant that Jael had gone to bed with Sisera not once, but seven times.

As Rashi explained, “Blessed [is Jael] for having committed a sin for the sake of heaven in order to sap that wicked one’s strength so that she could slay him.”

“Both Tamar and Zimri committed adultery. Tamar committed adultery and gave birth to kings and prophets. Zimri committed adultery and on his account many tens of thousands of Israel perished.”

These are interesting contributions. In part it possibly explains variant commentaries on the story of Achan, those that support not only his death but all those of his family as well. I will consider these further.

[Samlam]

There is an interesting account in the Babylonian Talmud, in the gemara at Berakot 58a (9:1), which YonaFraenkel describes in Tarbiz 40:33-40 (in Hebrew). In that story, Rabbi Shela` obtains permission from non-Jewish governmental authorities to execute an errant Jew. He receives that permission and beats that errant Jew to death with a rod (qulpa').

Is there any indication in the text of the nature of his crime. Was it one for which the death penalty applied or was this an exception to this standard?

[Samlam]

Nephi probably also knows where God commands to kill. Killing a person is serious business and shouldn't be undertaken without serious thought. I can well imagine the conflict within Nephi.

Precisely, a request upon which one can sacrifice his eternal salvation is certainly worthy of a moment's pause to validate "did I just hear what I think I heard?"

[Samlam]

How nice...I see you've met him.

[Cobalt-70]

Supposed that, today, a Mormon went on trial for murder, and his defense on the witness stand was that "I had a really strong impression to kill him. I felt the Spirit testify to me in unmistakeable terms that the world would be a better place if this man were dead, and that his death would allow the souls of many of my posterity to be saved. In addition, it was clear that God led him into my hands by providing me with an opportunity to kill him. I know, with every fiber of my being, that God wanted him dead, and I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen." Then, suppose he was nevertheless convicted. Do you think the LDS Church would revere him for his courage follow the promptings of the Spirit, or excommunicate him?

Edited August 8, 2013 by Cobalt-70

[Kenngo1969]

Most of the non-biblical evidence examined concerns "surrendering a specific named individual to be killed when heathens threaten to kill a whole group unless that one is delivered up." Nephi's case is different. He is not being asked to deliver up a member of the covenant community to be killed by outsiders. A minor point, perhaps, but the practice of law revolves around the finer points of it. There is a category closer to Nephi's act, and it employs the same rationale of preserving greater community.

Thank you!

[Kenngo1969]

Supposed that, today, a Mormon went on trial for murder, and his defense on the witness stand was that "I had a really strong impression to kill him. I felt the Spirit testify to me in unmistakeable terms that the world would be a better place if this man were dead, and that his death would allow the souls of many of my posterity to be saved. In addition, it was clear that God led him into my hands by providing me with an opportunity to kill him. I know, with every fiber of my being, that God wanted him dead, and I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen." Then, suppose he was nevertheless convicted. Do you think the LDS Church would revere him for his courage follow the promptings of the Spirit, or excommunicate him?

You're still attempting to superimpose 21st-century laws, norms, and mores onto an incident that reportedly occurred circa 600 BCE.

[Kenngo1969]

The fact that Nephi already had a beef with Laban, because of prior offenses, would be even more damning evidence that this was a cold-blooded, calculated murder. If this were an actual event, and Nephi were a real person that was on trial for homicide, the prior animosity would be very relevant to show that this was revenge, rather than self-defense. That's true today, it was true in 1829 when the story was invented, and it would have been true in the tale's ostensible historical setting of 600 BCE Jerusalem.

Nephi's reported hesitation when the spirit first commanded him to slay Laban belies your claim that his killing of Laban was motivated by nothing more than revenge-fueled bloodlust. But thanks fer playin'! Edited August 9, 2013 by Kenngo1969

[volgadon]

Nephi's reported hesitation when the spirit first commanded him to slay Laban belies your claim that his killing of Laban was motivated by nothing more than revenge-fueled bloodlust. But thanks fer playin'!

Someone so motivated by revenge-fuelled bloodlust is obviously lying...

[volgadon]

These are interesting contributions. In part it possibly explains variant commentaries on the story of Achan, those that support not only his death but all those of his family as well. I will consider these further.

With Achan (and others), their families were put to death because they weren't considered entirely independent entities, and were thus culpable.

[Calm]

Supposed that, today, a Mormon went on trial for murder, and his defense on the witness stand was that "I had a really strong impression to kill him. ......Do you think the LDS Church would revere him for his courage follow the promptings of the Spirit, or excommunicate him?

If enough members saw angels appear and stop him from being thrown in jail or beaten, if his life following this claim was filled with miracles of protection and guidance, if he turned out to be a great leader who protected his people, if the prophet of the time had confirmation of his spiritual nature and saw visions of the future of his posterity...I suspect that there would be those who entertained the idea that perhaps it wasn't wise to excommunicate the man.

The situation with Laban did not happen in a vacuum. If that was all we had to judge of Nephi, it would be significantly different, but if we choose to believe the BoM is revelation, then it would seem that God made it quite obvious to others that Nephi was who he claimed to be, even went so far as to send angels to protect him, give him powers to protect himself and caused nature to protect him.

[Calm]

Someone so motivated by revenge-fuelled bloodlust is obviously lying...

While the laws restrict people from killing in self defense due to the availability of the police to protect one...at least in most cases, the fact that Laban had attempted to kill Nephi in the past would surely work just as well for a fear for one's life claim as for bloodlust motivation.

I wonder what a state court might find for a small town young man defendant who was in a conflict with a local town boss who had ordered his men to kill the boy, who had stolen the boy's family wealth and the boy had no doubt that if he appealed to the local sheriff for protection, he was as good as dead and that no one would believe him anywhere else as well as it would be his word against the town boss and all his men and any of the town who backed the boss....and he and his family were dead no matter what except that it just so happened that the guy fell into his power giving him a chance to save himself and his family by removing the cause of all his misfortune.

[volgadon]

Is there any indication in the text of the nature of his crime. Was it one for which the death penalty applied or was this an exception to this standard?

The man had been whipped by R. Shila for sleeping with a gentile woman. The man decided to inform upon the rabbi to the Persian authorities that he had applied punishment without sanction, so R. Shila put him to death to prevent that. The Talmudic discussion cites the principle of preempting those who would seek your life (pursuers), by killing them first. The whole history of silencing informers is a dark, but fascinating and little-known subject in Judaism. It lasted well into the 19th century, with victims perhaps numbering in the hundreds throughout Eastern Europe. These secret Jewish courts form the historical kernel of what would later be used for that vile fabrication- the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

[Cobalt-70]

You're still attempting to superimpose 21st-century laws, norms, and mores onto an incident that reportedly occurred circa 600 BCE.

If the story of Nephi's killing of Laban is not relevant in our era, then why do we keep telling this story in our church manuals and church magazines as a model of obedience, courage, and following the Spirit? Also, wasn't it the character Nephi himself who said that he "did liken all scriptures unto us" (1 Ne. 19:23)?

[Cobalt-70]

Nephi's reported hesitation when the spirit first commanded him to slay Laban belies your claim that his killing of Laban was motivated by nothing more than revenge-fueled bloodlust. But thanks fer playin'!

Okay then, so lets assume that Nephi was a real person and that the thought processes he described in the Book of Mormon were exactly the thought processes he had in 600 BCE. His reasons for killing Laban were as follows:

1. God had delivered Laban into his hands (1 Ne. 4:11 and 12)
   
2. Laban had sought to take away his life (v. 11)
   
3. Laban would not listen to God's commandments (v. 11)
   
4. Laban had stolen Nephi's property (v. 11)
   
5. The end justifies the means (v. 13-17)
   

Self defense did not enter the equation, but Nephi did mention the list of wrongs that Laban had done to Nephi in the past.

[volgadon]

Okay then, so lets assume that Nephi was a real person and that the thought processes he described in the Book of Mormon were exactly the thought processes he had in 600 BCE. His reasons for killing Laban were as follows:

1. God had delivered Laban into his hands (1 Ne. 4:11 and 12)
   
2. Laban had sought to take away his life (v. 11)
   
3. Laban would not listen to God's commandments (v. 11)
   
4. Laban had stolen Nephi's property (v. 11)
   
5. The end justifies the means (v. 13-17)
   

Self defense did not enter the equation, but Nephi did mention the list of wrongs that Laban had done to Nephi in the past.

Self defense did not enter the equation? 2 and 4 is what? Should Nephi have been singing sticks and stones may break my bones, but attempts to seek my life will never hurt me?

Are you still contending that this is modern relativism?

[Sleeper Cell]

If the story of Nephi's killing of Laban is not relevant in our era, then why do we keep telling this story in our church manuals and church magazines as a model of obedience, courage, and following the Spirit? Also, wasn't it the character Nephi himself who said that he "did liken all scriptures unto us" (1 Ne. 19:23)?

Actually, this story is a model of obedience that is relevant today. It teaches us that obedience to a religious authority does not mean blind obedience. Nephi was not willing to obey a command from any religious authority, without question -- even one directly from God, Himself -- until he also reasoned it out in his own mind. and reconciled it with his own conscience.

[volgadon]

Self defense did not enter the equation, but Nephi did mention the list of wrongs that Laban had done to Nephi in the past.

In the past, do you mean in the past day or two?

[Cobalt-70]

Self defense did not enter the equation? 2 and 4 is what? Should Nephi have been singing sticks and stones may break my bones, but attempts to seek my life will never hurt me?

Are you still contending that this is modern relativism?

2 and 4 are things that happened in the past. When you kill an unconscious person for something that happened in the past, that is usually called revenge.

The relativism is in #5: the end justifies the means.

[Cobalt-70]

Actually, this story is a model of obedience that is relevant today. It teaches us that obedience to a religious authority does not mean blind obedience. Nephi was not willing to obey a command from any religious authority, without question -- even one directly from God, Himself -- until he also reasoned it out in his own mind. and reconciled it with his own conscience.

It's exactly this type of "obedience" that I find so scary and creepy. It's Dan and Ron Lafferty-style obedience. It's Isaac C. Haight-style obedience. And this is what we teach in our church and CES manuals?

[Rivers]

It's exactly this type of "obedience" that I find so scary and creepy. It's Dan and Ron Lafferty-style obedience. It's Isaac C. Haight-style obedience. And this is what we teach in our church and CES manuals?

Is there a type of obedience that you do not find scary?

[ZelphtheGreat]

No matter what is written about this, it was wrong. Murder during a burglary? Getting the records so a group of people wound not 'dwindle in unbelief'..., the very thing that ended up happening to them? I think the idea of what Nephi did is wrong on all levels and is used to justify most anything someone wants to do.

[Calm]

No matter what is written about this, it was wrong. Murder during a burglary? Getting the records so a group of people wound not 'dwindle in unbelief'..., the very thing that ended up happening to them? I think the idea of what Nephi did is wrong on all levels and is used to justify most anything someone wants to do.

Laban had taken the family's wealth that they offered him in payment...and then he reneged on his agreement. The burglary was Laban's, he had agreed to give them to Lehi' family and then refused and kept their money and attempted to take their lives. The murder during a burglary was Laban's as well.

[volgadon]

2 and 4 are things that happened in the past. When you kill an unconscious person for something that happened in the past, that is usually called revenge.

How distant was that past?

The relativism is in #5: the end justifies the means.

Are you still claiming that it is modern relativism, of a kind not found anciently?