A Secular Theory of Where the BoM Came From

[The Nehor]

On 3/6/2026 at 9:45 AM, Senator said:

Note to self:
Add to list of justifications for Nephi's killing of Laban>
Laban was crime boss and serial killler who had it coming....

 

Got it.

Based on “trust me bro”.

So…..all I have to do to kill someone is make up some fan fiction about the person first.

[smac97]

On 3/6/2026 at 8:45 AM, Senator said:

Note to self:
Add to list of justifications for Nephi's killing of Laban>
Laban was crime boss and serial killler who had it coming....

 

Got it.

I am curious as to your perspective on this:

Quote

I think the case can be made for Nephi to be justified, both religiously/morally/spiritually and under the laws in place at the time.  See here:

Legal Perspectives on the Slaying of Laban (John W. Welch)

An excerpt:

Quote

Abstract: This article marshals ancient legal evidence to show that Nephi’s slaying of Laban should be understood as a protected manslaughter rather than a criminal homicide. The biblical law of murder demanded a higher level of premeditation and hostility than Nephi exhibited or modern law requires. It is argued that Exodus 21:13 protected more than accidental slayings or unconscious acts, particularly where God was seen as having delivered the victim into the slayer’s hand. Various rationales for Nephi’s killing of Laban are explored, including ancient views on surrendering one person for the benefit of a whole community. Other factors within the Book of Mormon as well as in Moses’ killing of the Egyptian in Exodus 2 corroborate the conclusion that Nephi did not commit the equivalent of a first-degree murder under the laws of his day.
...

Concluding observations. Over the years Hugh Nibley has enjoyed telling a story about his Arab students in the early 1950s who were required to take the basic Book of Mormon class at Brigham Young University. Knowing that the Laban episode had been troublesome to the moral sensitivities of many twentieth-century readers, Nibley was puzzled when these students found the story somewhat implausible but precisely for the opposite reason he had expected. Instead of being troubled that Nephi had killed the unconscious Laban, the students found it odd that he had hesitated so long.⁴⁸While the reaction of these Arab students cannot be taken as evidence of the attitudes of the inhabitants of the city of Jerusalem around 600 B.C., it does reinforce the point that different cultures have unique values and idiosyncratic legal expectations. Accordingly, modern readers should be willing to consider not only the implications and moral bearings of ancient scriptural events upon contemporary society, but also to approach these developments in terms of the ancient dispositions and legal norms that would have operated as guiding principles in the lives of people years ago.

While nineteenth-century vocabulary and concepts are in some ways useful in Book of Mormon exegesis, the Laban episode is a case where the nineteenth-century environment offers little help.⁴⁹Joseph Smith’s nineteenth-century audience was just as scandalized by Nephi’s killing of Laban as is a modern audience. Early Book of Mormon critics readily viewed this episode as a clear indication that the Book of Mormon was not inspired by God, a divine being who would never have commanded a true prophet to kill, having already commanded, “Thou shalt not murder.” That view, however, assumes only a nineteenth-century viewpoint.

But when analyzed in terms of ancient biblical law, the case is framed within the appropriate set of legal terms and issues. This is not to say that the slaying of Laban presents us as modern readers with an easy case: neither was it an easy case for Nephi. In its ancient legal context, however, the slaying of Laban makes sense, both legally and religiously, as an unpremeditated, undesired, divinely excusable, and justifiable killing—something very different from what people today normally think of as criminal homicide.

 

If you are in a TLDR mood, here's a Grok-generated summary:

Quote

John W. Welch's article "Legal Perspectives on the Slaying of Laban" (Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, 1992) argues that Nephi's killing of Laban in 1 Nephi 4 should be viewed as protected manslaughter (excusable homicide) rather than criminal murder under the law of Moses as understood around 600 B.C., drawing primarily from biblical texts like Exodus 21:12–14, Deuteronomy 19:4–13, and Numbers 35:9–34.

Core Thesis

Welch contends that ancient Israelite law required a higher threshold for culpable murder (premeditation, hatred, lying in wait, or guile) than modern law. Nephi's act lacked these elements: it was unpremeditated, reluctant, and driven by divine command rather than personal malice. Thus, it qualified as excusable, potentially allowing refuge in a city of asylum (or, in Nephi's case, exile from Jerusalem).

Key Legal Elements Analyzed

1. State of Mind (No Premeditation or Enmity):
   • Nephi entered Jerusalem unarmed, without a plan ("not knowing beforehand the things which I should do," 1 Nephi 4:6), and stumbled upon drunk Laban unexpectedly.
   • He acted reluctantly ("I shrunk and would that I might not slay him," 1 Nephi 4:10), without hatred, revenge, or prior enmity—despite Laban's prior threats.
   • Biblical law (e.g., Exodus 21:14) condemned only presumptuous, guileful killings; unpremeditated or "involuntary" acts (even intentional but undesired) were mitigated. Greek parallels (e.g., Aristotle) support viewing constrained actions as less culpable.
2. Divine Deliverance:
   • The Spirit repeatedly stated "the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands" (1 Nephi 4:11–12), echoing Exodus 21:13 verbatim.
   • This phrase implied God orchestrated the encounter for righteous purposes ("the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes," 1 Nephi 4:13), excusing the act as divinely sanctioned rather than human-initiated murder.
   • Welch notes the Hebrew term for "deliver" (rare in the Bible) suggested divine causation beyond mere chance.
3. Greater Good Rationale:
   • The Spirit's justification—"It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief" (1 Nephi 4:13)—aligns with biblical precedents (e.g., Judges 15; 2 Samuel 20) and later Jewish debates (Pharisees vs. Sadducees) allowing sacrifice of one for the community's survival.
   • Laban's prior false accusation (calling Laman a robber, a capital offense) may have further mitigated guilt, as God could execute justice where humans could not.

Corroborating Evidence

• Nephi's brothers never accused him of murder, despite ample motive.
• Jacob's later woe against "the murderer who deliberately killeth" (2 Nephi 9:35) implies non-deliberate killings were not condemned.
• Parallels with Moses killing the Egyptian (Exodus 2) show similar spontaneous, protective acts were excusable.
• Practical reasons (preventing pursuit if Laban lived) supported the necessity.

Conclusion

Welch emphasizes the episode was not easy for Nephi but makes legal/religious sense in its ancient context: an unpremeditated, divinely commanded, reluctant act to preserve sacred records and prevent spiritual destruction. Modern views (e.g., 19th-century critics) scandalize it as murder, but ancient norms framed it as excusable. The narrative uses precise legalistic language to portray it favorably under Mosaic law. This is a scholarly defense from a Latter-day Saint perspective, not claiming absolute acquittal in a hypothetical trial but reducing culpability significantly.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

21 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Based on “trust me bro”.

So…..all I have to do to kill someone is make up some fan fiction about the person first.

You are saying Nephi fabricated the narrative?  Which parts?

Also, you seem to be advancing a position based on presentism.  Am I wrong in surmising that?

Also, does the context matter?

Also, what are your thoughts about Welch's article?

Thank,

-Smac

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

You are saying Nephi fabricated the narrative?  Which parts?

 

Nah, he’s talking about the whole crime boss storyline that has no evidence in the text for it. 
 

At least I put a speculation alert on my storytelling when I do it (or at least try to remember to do it).  Using personal speculation for justification is dangerous, it can become a habit for justifying anything including personal behaviour imo.  I probably look like I am doing the same thing, but I am just creating scenarios, filling out details in narratives for fun (intended fan fiction).  I do it for everything.

 I don’t feel the need to justify scriptures as I believe it’s the individual interacting with them that matters the most (hopefully in partnership with the Spirit), not what others tell us we should see in them. 

Edited March 7 by Calm

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

You are saying Nephi fabricated the narrative?  Which parts?

No, I’m saying that people that concoct the narrative that Laban was a criminal mastermind and serial killer are writing fanfic. That is not in the text.

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Also, you seem to be advancing a position based on presentism.  Am I wrong in surmising that?

As crazy as some of the statutes in the Torah are murder is generally frowned on. Now the Hebrew Bible as a whole gets weird about it when the victim isn’t an Israelite of course.

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Also, does the context matter?

Yes. For example if we found out that Laban was a fascist then Nephi would have been morally justified in punching him a few times and killing him…..meh, I’ll allow it.

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Also, what are your thoughts about Welch's article?

I am not trusting Grok’s summary so I skimmed it. I think the article relies way too much on thinking that 1st Nephi uses technical language to exonerate Nephi. If it was the original text it might be persuasive but in translation that is a stretch. I have doubts about some of the readings of the Torah. I have read quite a bit from biblical scholars and don’t think many of them would agree with this take on the Law. Also most biblical scholars agree that the Torah wasn’t law in the sense of being the rules as they were enforce on the ground. It is religious writing, not a law text. I suspect the two were similar but not identical.

Seems like an ad hoc justification piece. It is apologetic. It is not looking at everything in order to discover connections and get at some underlying reality. It is an exercise in justifying Nephi on moral grounds because Nephi’s character must be protected.

I also found it ironic that Welch argues that this episode was included to show Nephi was following the Law and was thus the legitimate inheritor of the plates and family leadership despite the Torah having strict laws against passing over elder sons for leadership because you prefer the younger ones. Then again the three patriarchs ALL did this so it is a confusing mess.

[california boy]

On 3/4/2026 at 12:16 PM, smac97 said:

 

It does seem that in 1828, no scholar (including Anthon or Mitchill) could reliably translate or authenticate "reformed Egyptian" or read Egyptian scripts fluently enough to verify a translation, as decipherment was nascent and incomplete.  That said, it sure seems odd that Harris returned to Joseph with a strengthened view that the Plates were authentically agent. 

Indeed, if Anthon's account of the meeting (February 1828, IIRC) is correct (that he told Harris that the characters were "a scheme to cheat the farmer [Martin Harris] of his money..."), how was it that Harris would have utterly disregarded that guidance from a noted scholar, return to Joseph and, in the summer of 1829, mortgage his farm to raise $3,000.00 to publish The Book of Mormon?

Martin's wife Lucy was famously and vociferously opposed to Joseph's work.  If Anthon's characterization of the meeting is accurate, why did Martin return and resume a posture that his wife so adamantly disliked?

Martin dissociated from Joseph and the Church in, I think, 1844, and was re-baptized in 1870.  If Anthon's characterization of the meeting is accurate, why did Martin spent 26 years out of the Church and yet never varied from his testimony of the Plates?

Thanks,

-Smac

This makes the most sense to me.  How could any scholar read a language that had never appeared anywhere during this time.  And to my knowledge has never appeared in any stella or other stone carvings in the Americas while other languages during that time and even earlier are still preserved.  I have seen such examples in the anthropology museum in Mexico City.

 

People believe what they want to believe.  

 

 

[longview]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Also, does the context matter?

Reasons:

1. Nephi was made an agent for the Lord
2. It is better for Lehi's clan to obtain the Brass Plates
3. than the "future nation" should perish
4. Nephi and his brothers had already more than paid for the plates (probably several times over) with the family jewels
5. Laban had already refused to "hearken" unto the commandments of the Lord

1 Ne 4:13 Behold the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes. It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, longview said:

Reasons:

1. Nephi was made an agent for the Lord
2. It is better for Lehi's clan to obtain the Brass Plates
3. than the "future nation" should perish
4. Nephi and his brothers had already more than paid for the plates (probably several times over) with the family jewels
5. Laban had already refused to "hearken" unto the commandments of the Lord

1 Ne 4:13 Behold the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes. It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief.

Laban was a violent jerk. Probably a power tripping little tinpot dictator too. I don’t think step 5 is a fair take though. A bunch of kids wander in and tell you that God wants you to give them the prized plates. They are probably a prestige thing. Based on the estimated dates of the composition of the Torah they would probably be a pretty new thing. Possibly a prestige piece he custom ordered. Yeah, I wouldn’t consider it God telling me to give something if a kid (son of a local criminal) showed up bearing testimony that they needed my prize item.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

They are probably a prestige thing.

Speculation and thinking out loud:

And likely a sacred responsibility as well.  Not that fond of the custom order to create the brass plates instead of being given the responsibility (added:  I have changed my mind, see below).  I wonder what his position was that Nephi speaks of his fifty and even tens of thousands.

Zoram thought Nephi as Laban wanted the plates to take to the “brethren of the church”.  This seems more than just showing off to the neighbors.

We are told Joseph Smith went through much suffering and difficulty when he was the custodian of the plates to keep them and Moroni devoted his life and afterlife as far as we know primarily to the care and safety of records that included them.

Why would Laban not be as invested in their protection and care even if he was a greedy, ruthless *******?  Why would he think losing the plates for the community (which could even be the kingdom and not just the extended family/clan/tribe) would be an acceptable idea since apparently Lehi and company were traveling far off, more than just a trade caravan since they abandoned their land…which was a major thing biblically speaking.

Especially since the brothers couldn’t even manage to protect themselves?  Why would he expect the plates to even stay in the possession of Lehi/Nephi and not get ripped off by bandits, slavers, soldiers patrolling the lands the wanderers were going to pass through?

Thinking of their home/land of inheritance…..

I wonder if the Lehites told extended family to move in, never thought of that before because of the ease the brothers got the treasure…the context makes it seem like their home was abandoned and empty of people when they went to retrieve the loot because it doesn’t speak of any complications.  Still it speaks of the land of their inheritance and not the house, so before they had left they could have chosen to bury the treasures somewhere away from the house on the land while giving/selling/trading their home for needed supplies.  They could have had the house in the city and the land outside the city.  I assume once it became clear they were gone, the land would revert to the clan or maybe a sibling or cousin of Lehi’s.

Another aside….Lehi just says “Laban” without details, not Laban the general or Laban who lives in that ostentatious mansion a few blocks away from our house…you get the idea I hope. Now Nephi may have left those out, but it is also possible that Laban was well known to them, perhaps a close family member since Lehi’s family genealogy was on it.  Seems like he might have even been a half brother or cousin of Lehi, someone who wasn’t fond of Lehi or his kids as half siblings can often be, of a different branch that was perhaps in competition with Leah’s branch…making it more likely that Laban’s go to solution was murder.  Being family would also explain why they thought Laman could just waltz in there and ask for the records. Maybe they figured a family member would respect Lehi’s calling as called of God and turn over the plates.

If so, it would make it more logical if the plates were something Laban had made for himself rather than had the custody of where he wasn’t the actual owner in the sense they belonged to the tribe or the church community.  Now that I think of it, they wouldn’t likely try to buy the plates if Laban was only a custodian more or less rather than outright owner.  So it does make more sense to think of the brass plates as something Laban either had made for himself that could be replaced with effort or it was a gift that someone else had made for him and not something tied into the family wealth an eldest son was caretaker of to pass down to his eldest son, etc for the overall benefit of the family.

Edited March 8 by Calm

[smac97]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

How was killing Laban necessary for obtaining the plates?

Well, the narrative indicates that Plates were in the custody of Laban's steward/servant, Zoram. 

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Also God suggests that Laban’s death is the only thing that will allow the plates to be taken.

Yes.  It's effectively impossible for us, living 2,600 years after the events described, to meaningfully speculate about alternative ways for Nephi to obtain the Brass Plates.  We can either except Nephi's narrative as accurate, or not. 

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

God seriously has no other options?  God who can turn the oceans to sand can’t come up with an alternate plan? Really? God could have just pinched off his throat or a vital artery after Laban fell down drunk in the street. Same impact. No moral dilemma for Nephi.

Can't the same be said for virtually everything God asks or commands us to do?  Why have us come to earth and be tested?  God has no other options?  He can create worlds without number, but not come up with an alternate plan that involves His children exercising faith, confronting sin and temptation and moral quandaries, etc.?  Why not just create us with built-in perfection as part of us? 

Seems like God's ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our thoughts.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Zosimus]

8 hours ago, california boy said:

How could any scholar read a language that had never appeared anywhere during this time.  And to my knowledge has never appeared in any stella or other stone carvings in the Americas while other languages during that time and even earlier are still preserved.  I have seen such examples in the anthropology museum in Mexico City.

Reformed Egyptian wasn't yet a thing when Harris visited Anthon in 1828.

Mitchill did tell Harris the script was from a nation in the east, which would have thoroughly impressed Harris, so that's probably where we get reformed Egyptian from. It was accepted in the 1820s that Asia (and the Americas) were colonized by Egyptians, and that Chinese (and Mesoamerican) hieroglyphs were just a variation of Egyptian hieroglyphs.

Anthon himself believed this and was actively seeking evidence for a sort of diffused language from Egypt across the Polynesian Islands and into the Americas

[teddyaware]

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Well, the narrative indicates that Plates were in the custody of Laban's steward/servant, Zoram. 

Yes.  It's effectively impossible for us, living 2,600 years after the events described, to meaningfully speculate about alternative ways for Nephi to obtain the Brass Plates.  We can either except Nephi's narrative as accurate, or not. 

Can't the same be said for virtually everything God asks or commands us to do?  Why have us come to earth and be tested?  God has no other options?  He can create worlds without number, but not come up with an alternate plan that involves His children exercising faith, confronting sin and temptation and moral quandaries, etc.?  Why not just create us with built-in perfection as part of us? 

Seems like God's ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our thoughts.

Thanks,

-Smac

Brilliant insights! Why indeed didn’t the Lord simply teleport the Lehites and the Jaredites, along with all their life sustaining supplies, from their native lands to the American promised instead of commanding his them to engage in all that dangerous and labor intensive shipbuilding and seafaring stuff? Or why didn’t the Lord just use his miraculous power to instantaneously wipe the wicked Canaanites off the face of the earth so that the children of Israel could take a leisurely afternoon stroll into the promised land without having to engage in all that bloody and traumatic warfare? One could go on forever with endless examples that ask the same question: why didn’t the Lord simplify and streamline things to make it so much easier and less complicated instead of insisting that his people almost always have to do things the hard way?

And now a final and most powerful question: why didn’t God the Father simply issue a decree declaring that all sins will be forgiven and mankind redeemed without the need for his Only Begotten Son to have to offer up a heartbreaking infinite and eternal sacrifice of unimaginable suffering? Surely there must be a more efficient way to save mankind without the need for God’s beloved Son of God to have to drink to the dregs the bitter cup of the wrath of Almighty God?

The answer to these questions is as simple as it is reasonable. For their own ultimate good and eternal joy, the children of God need to have their faith painstakingly tested and refined as gold in the crucible of adversity. All the outcries and pearl clutching engaged in by the spiritually illiterate and immature will never sway God to do things in any other way than the extremely difficult and sacrificial way that they need to be done in order to bring to accomplish his purposes in bringing pass the immortality and eternal life of man. There is no other way!

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

17 And if children, then heirs, heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans 8:16-16) 

 

Edited March 8 by teddyaware

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Well, the narrative indicates that Plates were in the custody of Laban's steward/servant, Zoram. 

The word you are looking for is slave. Zoram was a slave.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  It's effectively impossible for us, living 2,600 years after the events described, to meaningfully speculate about alternative ways for Nephi to obtain the Brass Plates.  We can either except Nephi's narrative as accurate, or not. 

I completely disagree. If we can’t analyze the Book of Mormon and the choices the people in it made then Mormon and Moroni really screwed up with their admonitions about the plates.

”Learn to be wiser than us but don’t even think that we could have made other choices. There is a too big a time gap. Don’t even try!”

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Can't the same be said for virtually everything God asks or commands us to do?  Why have us come to earth and be tested?  God has no other options?  He can create worlds without number, but not come up with an alternate plan that involves His children exercising faith, confronting sin and temptation and moral quandaries, etc.? 

It wasn’t a moral quandary according to the text. God gave Nephi a cheat sheet and told him which option to take. He told Nephi to violate the letter of the law and probably the spirit of the law too.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Why not just create us with built-in perfection as part of us? 

That is a very good question.

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Seems like God's ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our thoughts.

So we will never understand and we just have to trust God no matter how irrational and insane his plans and thoughts are. The secret to becoming like God is descending into insanity. God is kind of like Cthulhu I suppose. The more you understand reality the more you know humanity has no moral judgement at all and what we view as good is evil and what we see as evil and predatory is actually good.

Yeah, I don’t buy the whole God is so far above us that we cannot hope to understand his plans. The scriptures are chock full of prophets explaining God’s plans and they don’t share Machiavellian schemes designed to bring about hidden purposes. They are usually pretty banal and straightforward.

[The Nehor]

13 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

Brilliant insights! Why indeed didn’t the Lord simply teleport the Lehites and the Jaredites, along with all their life sustaining supplies, from their native lands to the American promised instead of commanding his them to engage in all that dangerous and labor intensive shipbuilding and seafaring stuff? Or why didn’t the Lord just use his miraculous power to instantaneously wipe the wicked Canaanites off the face of the earth so that the children of Israel could take a leisurely afternoon stroll into the promised land without having to engage in all that bloody and traumatic warfare? One could go on forever with endless examples that ask the same question: why didn’t the Lord simplify and streamline things to make it so much easier and less complicated instead of insisting that his people almost always have to do things the hard way?

Because He is bad at the whole God thing?

13 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

And now a final and most powerful question: why didn’t God the Father simply issue a decree declaring that all sins will be forgiven and mankind redeemed without the need for his Only Begotten Son to have to offer up a heartbreaking infinite and eternal sacrifice of unimaginable suffering? Surely there must be a more efficient way to save mankind without the need for God’s beloved Son of God to have to drink to the dregs the bitter cup of the wrath of Almighty God?

Because he likes the suffering?

13 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

The answer to these questions is as simple as it is reasonable. For their own ultimate good and eternal joy, the children of God need to have their faith painstakingly tested and refined as gold in the crucible of adversity of this fallen world. All the outcries and pearl clutching exhibited by the spiritually illiterate and immature will never sway God to do things in any other way than the extremely difficult and sacrificial way that they need to be done in order to bring to accomplish his purposes in bringing pass the immortality and eternal life of man. There is no other way!

The only way to find happiness is through torment, suffering, and child sacrifice? With no guarantee that will end at death or at any point. This is a horrible universe. Also God disciplines like a violent and abusive parent.

”I only hurt you because I love you.”

According to the prophets God loves to humiliate and degrade his bride in order to perfect her for him. That is really really messed up.

13 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

 

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

17 And if children, then heirs, heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans

If we just learn to behave right and do everything perfectly God will one day stop hurting us. Will He though?

[champatsch]

Here's something I (S Carmack) wrote up a few months ago about another interesting aspect of Book of Mormon English usage (bear in mind that Joseph Smith's 1829 dictation of the Book of Mormon went from Mosiah to Moroni and then 1 Nephi to Words of Mormon):

Quote

In 1993, Brent Metcalfe wrote about therefore gradually shifting to wherefore in the book of Ether.[1] Yet it is not accurate to describe this shift in lexical usage as gradual: the full shift takes up only one-fortieth of the text. In 1983, Arthur Glen Foster, Jr. wrote about a lexical shift from the indefinite pronoun whosoever to whoso (discussed in a privately circulated paper I have not seen).[2] This shift begins in 3 Nephi 9,[3] and it is certainly an abrupt shift in usage. In 2015, while working through a text-critical analysis by Skousen, I noticed that in the manuscripts and the first edition there was an abrupt shift from no “after that S” usage to a very high rate, historically speaking, beginning at 3 Nephi 12:1.[4] Later I saw that there was a shift to significantly more of the rhetorical and nonbiblical phrase “if it so be,” beginning at 3 Nephi 16:4. At that point, I began to look for other shifting linguistic features, starting with two other types of subordinate that, as well as the conjunction save versus except.

In addition to many other linguistic elements, the conjunction save usage of the Book of Mormon points away from 19c authorship. The text shifts after the book of Helaman to mostly conjunction save usage relative to synonymous except usage (shifting from 35% save [conj.] to 83%; n=300). (To verify this, exclude verbal save, prepositional uses, and biblical quotations.) This is not a shift to more archaic usage, as most of the shifts are. Furthermore, archaic "except it be|were" usage ends at Helaman 8:21 (24× to that point; "except it were" 15×, a few 17c texts noted with 13 or 14) and from then on it is "save it be|were" 86 times in a row. No text has more than five of "save it <be>"; the Book of Mormon has 130.

I currently see 30+ different shifts in English usage, some subtle. One of the most interesting shifts, besides the ones Metcalfe pointed out and the shift from zero "after that S" (in 60% of the text) to 115 (in 40% of the text), is from 25% “they | them which” (vs. less archaic “those which”) to 92%, using 3 Nephi 7|8 as a boundary [orig. ch. 3 Nephi III | IV;  n=235, Yates χ²≐103.82, p<.0001]. In general, the text shifts to somewhat more archaic usage (which is why there's a shift to wherefore and whoso), with a few exceptions. Frequent readers of the text have probably sensed the greater English archaism of the small plates and 3 Nephi to Moroni, especially if the first edition or critical text is read.

---

[1] Brent Lee Metcalfe, “The Priority of Mosiah: A Prelude to Book of Mormon Exegesis,” in New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Explorations in Critical Methodology, ed. Brent Lee Metcalfe (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1993), 409–15. https://archive.org/details/NewApproachesToTheBookOfMormon.

[2] Arthur Glen Foster, Jr., “The Plates of Jacob: An Analysis of the Replacement to the Lost Manuscript of the Book of Mormon” (1983). See Metcalfe, “The Priority of Mosiah,” 408–09.

[3] 3 Nephi 9:14 (whosoever) → 3 Nephi 9:20 (whoso).

[4] Royal Skousen, Grammatical Variation (Provo, UT: FARMS and BYU Studies, 2016), 1019–21.

[Kenngo1969]

I'm late to the party, but I thought I might as well throw this in, as well:

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol16/iss1/5/

[Ryan Dahle]

4 hours ago, champatsch said:

I currently see 30+ different shifts in English usage, some subtle. One of the most interesting shifts, besides the ones Metcalfe pointed out and the shift from zero "after that S" (in 60% of the text) to 115 (in 40% of the text), is from 25% “they | them which” (vs. less archaic “those which”) to 92%, using 3 Nephi 7|8 as a boundary [orig. ch. 3 Nephi III | IV;  n=235, Yates χ²≐103.82, p<.0001]. In general, the text shifts to somewhat more archaic usage (which is why there's a shift to wherefore and whoso), with a few exceptions. Frequent readers of the text have probably sensed the greater English archaism of the small plates and 3 Nephi to Moroni, especially if the first edition or critical text is read.

What do think the significance may be for these types of shifts? 

[longview]

18 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Laban was a violent jerk. Probably a power tripping little tinpot dictator too. I don’t think step 5 is a fair take though. A bunch of kids wander in and tell you that God wants you to give them the prized plates. They are probably a prestige thing. Based on the estimated dates of the composition of the Torah they would probably be a pretty new thing. Possibly a prestige piece he custom ordered. Yeah, I wouldn’t consider it God telling me to give something if a kid (son of a local criminal) showed up bearing testimony that they needed my prize item.

No, it was NOT a bunch of kids. Nephi was at least 14 years old. The other 3 were older. Laman and Lemuel could have in their mid 20s or mid 30s. They most likely had a good conversation going with Laban before they broached the subject of the Brass Plates.

NOT a new thing. I have read in BYU scholarly pieces that the records represent/contained in the Brass Plates originated in the northern kingdom of Israel. That record may have started with Joseph of Egypt and passed down thru the generations. The Brass Plates had rings that allowed for continual additions for history and for the genealogies. It even had the teachings and warnings of Jeremiah added, a contemporary of Lehi.

Laban might have been a near cousin of Lehi.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, longview said:

They most likely had a good conversation going with Laban before they broached the subject of the Brass Plates.

What makes you think that?  Laban was an important man, why would he sit and chat with any of these young and youngish men whether Laman or Nephi (assuming your ages are right)? Not a challenge, want to know what leads you to that besides pure speculation (which is what I do above).

BTW, 14 is still a kid in my view.  While the culture may have treated the youth differently back then in giving them adult responsibilities, that doesn’t mean the brain was fully developed by the age of 14.

It is not just how one is treated that allows someone to think and plan in more adult ways, brain development matters too. 

Edited March 8 by Calm

[longview]

40 minutes ago, Calm said:

What makes you think that?  Laban was an important man, why would he sit and chat with any of these young and youngish men whether Laman or Nephi (assuming your ages are right)? Not a challenge, want to know what leads you to that besides pure speculation (which is what I do above).

Laban with his high status would be very skilled in personal relations and savvy with a wide swath of society in gaining alliances. At the same time being able to outflank certain competitors in his social strata. He would be wise enough to size up new visitors if he was not acquainted with them. Or if he was related, then he certainly would want to catch up on news of his extended family including Lehi.

Laban might have been adding to the Brass Plates himself! Jeremiah was important enough to him.

40 minutes ago, Calm said:

BTW, 14 is still a kid in my view.  While the culture may have treated the youth differently back then in giving them adult responsibilities, that doesn’t mean the brain was fully developed by the age of 14.

Quote

1 Ne 2:16 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, being exceedingly young, nevertheless being large in stature, and also having great desires to know of the mysteries of God, wherefore, I did cry unto the Lord; and behold he did visit me, and did soften my heart that I did believe all the words which had been spoken by my father; wherefore, I did not rebel against him like unto my brothers.
17 And I spake unto Sam, making known unto him the things which the Lord had manifested unto me by his Holy Spirit. And it came to pass that he believed in my words.
18 But, behold, Laman and Lemuel would not hearken unto my words; and being grieved because of the hardness of their hearts I cried unto the Lord for them.
19 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto me, saying: Blessed art thou, Nephi, because of thy faith, for thou hast sought me diligently, with lowliness of heart.
20 And inasmuch as ye shall keep my commandments, ye shall prosper, and shall be led to a land of promise; yea, even a land which I have prepared for you; yea, a land which is choice above all other lands.

40 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is not just how one is treated that allows someone to think and plan in more adult ways, brain development matters too. 

Nephi certainly did develop greater faith and exercised better judgment than did Laman and Lemuel. Sam must have been impressed with Nephi's reasoning abilities. So Sam chose not to gang up on Nephi but to accept his spiritual witness.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, longview said:

Laban with his high status would be very skilled in personal relations and savvy with a wide swath of society in gaining alliances. At the same time being able to outflank certain competitors in his social strata. He would be wise enough to size up new visitors if he was not acquainted with them. Or if he was related, then he certainly would want to catch up on news of his extended family including Lehi.

Speculation:

People with high status generally have others who deal with those looking for favors unless they are of equal or superior status…at least to screen them to see who would be worth their master’s time.  I don’t see why that would have been different back then. 

Laman also went to speak with Laban with no retainers himself, not impressive.  His clothing might have still been in decent repair and was likely high class given the family’s wealth, so that would have been in his favor assuming he took the time to tidy up.

The family connection makes more sense, but still seems like with Lehi being out of favour with the community (as in they were going to try and kill him if he stuck around), seems like Laban would not have been friendly to begin with, though perhaps he might have indulged in some diplomatic fishing for information.

Can’t decide if Laman was more likely to put off asking for the plates as long as possible or would just get to the point to get it over with so he could get out of there.  Laman had nothing to trade to begin with, it is strange to even expect Laban to consider giving them up even if they were close family members, which given Laban’s reaction seems highly unlikely.  I don’t understand why they didn’t first go get the riches….except for wanting to hold on to them so they could return to wealth when they returned as Laman and Lemuel wanted to do, but it would make sense to take substantial gifts at least.  Makes me wonder what Nephi left out.  Maybe Lehi originally had higher standing in the family, so they thought that prestige would add weight to the request. 

Edited March 8 by Calm

[Calm]

12 hours ago, longview said:

Nephi certainly did develop greater faith and exercised better judgment than did Laman and Lemuel. Sam must have been impressed with Nephi's reasoning abilities. So Sam chose not to gang up on Nephi but to accept his spiritual witness.

Which has nothing to do with the fact Nephi was still a kid.  Kids can be smart…smarter than many adults, but they are still kids.

We don’t know their ages, I am just speaking to your “they weren’t young kids”.  If you are thinking Nephi was 14, he qualifies as a kid in my view based on brain development even if in that society he was viewed as an adult (but certainly not equal to someone of Laban’s age even if they happened to be same social class).

Laman and Lemuel likely weren’t kids even if Nephi was 14, they seem quite preoccupied with more adult type thoughts early on to me, no sense of adventure, more concerned with living well.  Seems unlikely there was a huge age gap though. I don’t care how well spoken Nephi is or physically powerful, if they were teens and out doing ‘adult’ stuff when Nephi was in nappies, they wouldn’t forget that.  And Laman obviously looked on himself as the rightful heir/leader after Lehi with Lemuel backing him up.  Age matters when it comes to accepting authority and one doesn’t yet have the angel as a backup.  Giving up all their treasure because their baby brother thought that was a great idea when they were in their 30s?  Nah.  Laman and Lemuel as 20ish and still new to the I am an adult thing, brains still not fully mature but closer and most important still being treated by lots of people older than them as youngsters probably and therefore less confidence and therefore easier to be swayed, that seems more reasonable.

I also find it hard to believe they were in their 30s and unmarried, so I would place them early to mid 20s at the latest.  With the family wealth, they wouldn’t need to wait as long to be able to afford a family.

I don’t know about Sam as not much said about him  in the text.  I see him as not much older than Nephi as Nephi treats him as his shadow more or less, no distinct personality, but they had a good, seems like close relationship.

Edited March 9 by Calm

[longview]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

I also find it hard to believe they were in their 30s and unmarried, so I would place them early to mid 20s at the latest.  With the family wealth, they wouldn’t need to wait as long to be able to afford a family.

What if they were widowers? Babylonian incursions happened a number of times in stages. The story can get complicated sometimes.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, longview said:

What if they were widowers? Babylonian incursions happened a number of times in stages. The story can get complicated sometimes.

At that age with no children?  Seems unlikely, they would likely have married quickly again, especially Laman as the firstborn and expected heir.  Having his own heir would make his expected position more secure.

Makes more sense not to see them as that old. Makes it more believable if closer in age that they gave into Nephi as much as they did even if they constantly whined about him.

I don’t see any advantage to making the two that much older and a lot of advantages not to (makes Sariah having two more kids under a great deal of stress more likely if she is younger than 50 or more when she had them).

Edited March 9 by Calm

[Calm]

13 hours ago, longview said:

That record may have started with Joseph of Egypt and passed down thru the generations. The Brass Plates had rings that allowed for continual additions for history and for the genealogies. It even had the teachings and warnings of Jeremiah added, a contemporary of Lehi.

If the record was much older, the plates Laban had could have been a personal copy made for Laban off the original that was the record his fathers kept.  Nehor was thinking it had to be pretty new as there is no evidence of something like it existing for all that time, but maybe it wasn’t identical, but just some of the collected stories, etc. It’s logical to me that a record of the kings were kept by the court and if the prophets were supported by the court that their prophecies became a part of that…and if not supported, but condemning the court, still makes sense to include them.  Still why would Laban’s family have that. There is no claim of royalty or even family leadership though descending from Joseph.  Maybe they were a family of scribes and were the court historians and kept their own copy modified with their own genealogy added.  If the family was typically devout, would explain all the prophecies being included. 

The genealogy of Laban’s family who had custody of the plates makes sense as well.  If you are going to keep records in the family, of course you would track the genealogy. 

The five Books of Moses is the biggest problem that I am aware of. The Book of the Law, which was most likely one of them was said to be found in the temple not that many years before.  It would hardly have been a lost text if Laban’s family had a copy of it. 

Does seem to be something special given the elders of the Church were interested in it.  If they were a family heirloom treasure or even a treasure if the kingdom (that’s seems unlikely as it would have been in the King’s treasury), so a clan/tribe thing) there’s an excellent reason for pursuit even if Laban was dead. They might be irreplaceable.

Killing Laban and taking Zoram with them might delay the discovery of the missing plates since it seems like no one saw Zoram and Nephi leaving…though surely there were guards at the city gates.  But if so, then they would know it wasn’t only Zoram but someone dressed up in Laban’s armor (since they would find his body in the city, not outside it).  The servants might not bring attention to the theft out of fear of punishment, but a murder of an elite commander?  Seems like there would still be some pursuit. What happened to the body?  Did he hide it to delay discovery?  

Got to wonder if Joseph was making up the story, why would he have his hero do such a morally disturbing killing?
 

 

Edited March 9 by Calm