Why did Nephi decapitate Laban?

[Doug the Hutt]

Howdy folks. I have a lot of questions.

1 Nephi chapter 4

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/1_ne/4

Nephi obtains the brass plates:

1. Nephi gives pep talk in which he juxtaposes the Exodus of Israel from Egypt and the destruction of the Egyptian armies in the Red Sea with how Laban will be destroyed.

vs 3 -- ...Let us go up; the Lord is able to deliver us, even as our fathers, and to destroy Laban, even as the Egyptians. This shows a premeditated decision to terminate Laban.

2. The brothers follow Nephi to the walls of Jerusalem, grumbling, "murmuring" and complaining along the way.

3. Nephi approaches Laban's domicile alone, with predetermined end-goals in mind -- to obtain brass plates and destroy Laban, but not yet set on the details.

vs. 6 And I was led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things which I should do.

4. Nephi finds a fallen-down-frat-boy-party-drunk-guy completely alone, incapacitated and unconscious lying in a gutter. Upon closer inspection it happens to be Laban. That's quite the convenient place to find him -- alone without body guards, family, friends or consciousness. How much more pathetic and undignified can a domineering, one-dimensional, power-crazed, bad-guy-person be presented?

5. Nephi hears a Spirit telling him to kill Laban: "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. " Initially he didn't want to but when he was reminded by this Spirit that Laban tried to kill him previously and confiscated all his property he was sold.

6. Nephi lops (not lobs -- thank you jwhitlock) off Laban's head (also: chops/cuts/ -- he's now headless and dead is the point...).

7. Nephi steals his apparently bloodless garments, armor and sword. I know -- the Book of Mormon is silent on the state of Laban's clothes but I find it hard to imagine body armor and clothing being anything but soiled by blood and other situational goo unless Laban were stripped first, then killed. But the Book of Mormon presents it the other way.

Stop. Stop. Stop.

There are a few problems with this story:

1. Thou shalt not murder is a pretty clear commandment. Nephi was certainly aware of it even before ever seeing the brass plates. Maybe it's different when whole countries duke it out, but in this case we've got our strong, moral, faithful, pure and delightsome hero taking the other guy, who is in no condition to present a proper defense, and takin off his head like Perseus did in Clash of the Titans to Medussa (no poison blood or turning to stone here).

2. Having our Hero recognizing that it's wrong to kill and then having the Spirit convince him otherwise in sort of an exception-basis sets a dangerous precedent. For one, it shows that there's really only one commandment -- obedience. The slippery-slope comes when any other commandment set in stone could change 180 degrees at any time for any reason, and the only thing consistent would be in believing it's what God wants. There are other examples in both scripture and Mormon history that supports an obedience-only-doctrine (thou shalt not bear false witness juxtaposed with Abraham in the Book of Abraham being instructed by God himself to lie about the relationship between he and his wife comes to mind as does polygamy being outrightly decried in Jacob 2 but explicitly demanded in D&C132). Another problem is that we expect our God and his dealings with us to maintain a certain consistency. After all He's supposed to be the same yesterday, today and forever. Having an about-face makes me wonder if it's God that changes doctrines or whether man changes doctrines and assigns the sudden course correct to God's unknowable, mysterious will.

3. Laban was so drunk that he wouldn't have presented much of a tactical challenge in his drooling, unconscious state. Why didn't Nephi just take his clothes, tie him up and leave him somewhere? Nephi was a resident of the city and would have known the best places to conceal him. He could have even taken Laban back to Lehi's house and tied him to a bed like (a la Steven King's "Misery"). No really, all he needed to do was gag, bind and hide him somewhere. And he didn't even need to be put away for very long -- just long enough to steal his clothes and gold-hilted-steel-sword, meander up to Laban's personal treasury, impersonate himself to Zoram, steal the brass plates, kidnap Zoram, force him into an oath under threat of death and leave the city forever. By the time Laban came around and was rescued from his strange night of debauchery Nephi would be long gone with his property, still retain his life at least until Jerusalem was sacked, and Nephi wouldn't have had to kill Laban. Laban might not have even had a memory of the ordeal and would have been primarily interested in where his expensive armor and gold-hilted-steel-sword went. That whole story could have ended better. It's certainly not outside the possibilities, powers and influence of God. I just don't see why it didn't happen a less destructive and conflicted way.

4. Laban's bloody clothes should have set Zoram and any other guards or even passersby around the domicile grounds and treasury into DEFCON-1. If God himself intervened in making Laban's clothes un-bloody, then why wouldn't He also intervene to make it so Nephi didn't have to slaughter Laban?

5. Later in 1st Nephi Lehi finds his faith-energy-powered-gold-compass, the Liahona, lying in the desert outside his tent door one fine midsummer's morning. Since God was willing to craft and deliver a compass to Lehi, why couldn't he just do the same with the brass plates? Why was He willing to do one but not the other?

6. Why was any of Lehi's, Nephi's & co. retrieval of the brass plates even necessary? Wasn't Lehi a prophet? Didn't he already know the scriptures (you know, don't kill people, don't steal, don't lie, etc.)? Couldn't he just use his VPN connection to God and get all of that information via revelation? I understand that Lehi discovers from the brass plates that he's of the tribe of Manasseh -- why wouldn't he have known that? Seems Israelites were all about keeping themselves separated from gentiles and would have made a central point in anyone's marriages to know who's who so as not to corrupt the pure Isrealite bloodline.

7. Going back to vs. 13 -- GOD is supposed to be the one slaying the wicked, such as how God slew all the firstborn sons of the Egyptians. Why didn't God just cause Laban to have a bloodless stroke or something while laying there face down in the street?

Do I appeal to faith and just accept the story at face value? Do I appeal to ignorance and assert that God works in mysterious ways and file it under "X"? Do I accept that there's only obedience, period as that which constitutes Mormon doctrine? Other?

[BCSpace]

Do I appeal to faith and just accept the story at face value? Do I appeal to ignorance and assert that God works in mysterious ways and file it under "X"? Do I accept that there's only obedience, period as that which constitutes Mormon doctrine? Other?

All of the above. If you accept the Bible as the word of God, God has prescribed the killing of many people by His chosen people because of various sins other than murder.

Num. 25: 17.

Deut. 12: 29.

D&C 98: 32 (31-32)

And of course there is Isaiah 55:8

[jwhitlock]

Perhaps you need to reread the story of Elijah and the priests of Baal - since you seem to be sure about what God means by commandments such as "Do not kill".

Of course, since you don't believe that God had anything to do with the Book of Mormon - which he did, by the way - then you can feel free to be cutsie with the story in setting up your strawman assumptions.

The point is, of course, that God was directing Nephi. No amount of rationalization about what you can't understand about the story changes that fact.

By the way, Nephi didn't "lob" off Laban's head. He "lopped" it off, to use your kind of phrasing. Keep it straight.

[Wiki Wonka]

3. Nephi approaches Laban's domicile alone, with predetermined end-goals in mind -- to obtain brass plates and destroy Laban, but not yet set on the details.

vs. 6 And I was led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things which I should do.

Just a minor point - Nephi's "predetermined end-goal" was to obtain the brass plates, not to "destroy Laban."

Then again, there's THIS explanation:

"Nephi's beheading of Laban might also symbolize an attack on Joseph Sr.'s tendency to intellectualize and allegorize the scriptures, a trait undoubtedly inherited from his own father, Asael, and reinforced by his Unitarian-Universalist leanings. In this sense, Joseph Jr. wanted to free the Bible from the intellectualizing grip of his father and those like him, to interpret the scriptrues for himself more literally and through the spirit of God." (Vogel, Joseph Smith, The Making of a Prophet, p. 135)

Yeah...what HE said.

[USU78]

I rather like the recent speculations that Nephi's killing of Laban was the sine qua non of the founding of the new Lehite Polity. By killing him and taking his sword, Nephi establishes independence from and conquerer status over the polity represented by Laban.

[jadams_4242]

Howdy folks. I have a lot of questions.

1 Nephi chapter 4

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/1_ne/4

Nephi obtains the brass plates:

1. Nephi gives pep talk in which he juxtaposes the Exodus of Israel from Egypt and the destruction of the Egyptian armies in the Red Sea with how Laban will be destroyed.

vs 3 -- ...Let us go up; the Lord is able to deliver us, even as our fathers, and to destroy Laban, even as the Egyptians. This shows a premeditated decision to terminate Laban.

2. The brothers follow Nephi to the walls of Jerusalem, grumbling, "murmuring" and complaining along the way.

3. Nephi approaches Laban's domicile alone, with predetermined end-goals in mind -- to obtain brass plates and destroy Laban, but not yet set on the details.

vs. 6 And I was led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things which I should do.

4. Nephi finds a fallen-down-frat-boy-party-drunk-guy completely alone, incapacitated and unconscious lying in a gutter. Upon closer inspection it happens to be Laban. That's quite the convenient place to find him -- alone without body guards, family, friends or consciousness. How much more pathetic and undignified can a domineering, one-dimensional, power-crazed, bad-guy-person be presented?

5. Nephi hears a Spirit telling him to kill Laban: "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. " Initially he didn't want to but when he was reminded by this Spirit that Laban tried to kill him previously and confiscated all his property he was sold.

6. Nephi lobs off Laban's head.

7. Nephi steals his apparently bloodless garments, armor and sword. I know -- the Book of Mormon is silent on the state of Laban's clothes but I find it hard to imagine body armor and clothing being anything but soiled by blood and other situational goo unless Laban were stripped first, then killed. But the Book of Mormon presents it the other way.

Stop. Stop. Stop.

There are a few problems with this story:

1. Thou shalt not murder is a pretty clear commandment. Nephi was certainly aware of it even before ever seeing the brass plates. Maybe it's different when whole countries duke it out, but in this case we've got our strong, moral, faithful, pure and delightsome hero taking the other guy, who is in no condition to present a proper defense, and takin off his head like Perseus did in Clash of the Titans to Medussa (no poison blood or turning to stone here).

2. Having our Hero recognizing that it's wrong to kill and then having the Spirit convince him otherwise in sort of an exception-basis sets a dangerous precedent. For one, it shows that there's really only one commandment -- obedience. The slippery-slope comes when any other commandment set in stone could change 180 degrees at any time for any reason, and the only thing consistent would be in believing it's what God wants. There are other examples in both scripture and Mormon history that supports an obedience-only-doctrine (thou shalt not bear false witness juxtaposed with Abraham in the Book of Abraham being instructed by God himself to lie about the relationship between he and his wife comes to mind as does polygamy being outrightly decried in Jacob 2 but explicitly demanded in D&C132). Another problem is that we expect our God and his dealings with us to maintain a certain consistency. After all He's supposed to be the same yesterday, today and forever. Having an about-face makes me wonder if it's God that changes doctrines or whether man changes doctrines and assigns the sudden course correct to God's unknowable, mysterious will.

3. Laban was so drunk that he wouldn't have presented much of a tactical challenge in his drooling, unconscious state. Why didn't Nephi just take his clothes, tie him up and leave him somewhere? Nephi was a resident of the city and would have known the best places to conceal him. He could have even taken Laban back to Lehi's house and tied him to a bed like (a la Steven King's "Misery"). No really, all he needed to do was gag, bind and hide him somewhere. And he didn't even need to be put away for very long -- just long enough to steal his clothes and gold-hilted-steel-sword, meander up to Laban's personal treasury, impersonate himself to Zoram, steal the brass plates, kidnap Zoram, force him into an oath under threat of death and leave the city forever. By the time Laban came around and was rescued from his strange night of debauchery Nephi would be long gone with his property, still retain his life at least until Jerusalem was sacked, and Nephi wouldn't have had to kill Laban. Laban might not have even had a memory of the ordeal and would have been primarily interested in where his expensive armor and gold-hilted-steel-sword went. That whole story could have ended better. It's certainly not outside the possibilities, powers and influence of God. I just don't see why it didn't happen a less destructive and conflicted way.

4. Laban's bloody clothes should have set Zoram and any other guards or even passersby around the domicile grounds and treasury into DEFCON-1. If God himself intervened in making Laban's clothes un-bloody, then why wouldn't He also intervene to make it so Nephi didn't have to slaughter Laban?

5. Later in 1st Nephi Lehi finds his faith-energy-powered-gold-compass, the Liahona, lying in the desert outside his tent door one fine midsummer's morning. Since God was willing to craft and deliver a compass to Lehi, why couldn't he just do the same with the brass plates? Why was He willing to do one but not the other?

6. Why was any of Lehi's, Nephi's & co. retrieval of the brass plates even necessary? Wasn't Lehi a prophet? Didn't he already know the scriptures (you know, don't kill people, don't steal, don't lie, etc.)? Couldn't he just use his VPN connection to God and get all of that information via revelation? I understand that Lehi discovers from the brass plates that he's of the tribe of Manasseh -- why wouldn't he have known that? Seems Israelites were all about keeping themselves separated from gentiles and would have made a central point in anyone's marriages to know who's who so as not to corrupt the pure Isrealite bloodline.

7. Going back to vs. 13 -- GOD is supposed to be the one slaying the wicked, such as how God slew all the firstborn sons of the Egyptians. Why didn't God just cause Laban to have a bloodless stroke or something while laying there face down in the street?

Do I appeal to faith and just accept the story at face value? Do I appeal to ignorance and assert that God works in mysterious ways and file it under "X"? Do I accept that there's only obedience, period as that which constitutes Mormon doctrine? Other?

Jesus Christ killed the legion of unclean spirits by running them over the cliff into the ocean after they chose to enter in swines bodies, but none the less he killed them.

[rockslider]

Just a minor point - Nephi's "predetermined end-goal" was to obtain the brass plates, not to "destroy Laban."

Then again, there's THIS explanation:

"Nephi's beheading of Laban might also symbolize an attack on Joseph Sr.'s tendency to intellectualize and allegorize the scriptures, a trait undoubtedly inherited from his own father, Asael, and reinforced by his Unitarian-Universalist leanings. In this sense, Joseph Jr. wanted to free the Bible from the intellectualizing grip of his father and those like him, to interpret the scriptrues for himself more literally and through the spirit of God." (Vogel, Joseph Smith, The Making of a Prophet, p. 135)

Yeah...what HE said.

Wonka;

two things:

1. please explain that in country boy english

2. Please find a picture of the real Mr. Wonka (Wilder)

[Sevenbak]

Since there are so many Elder Holland threads going on, we might as well have the Apostle's take on this little issue too.

Jeffrey Holland

[rockslider]

Jesus Christ killed the legion of unclean spirits by running them over the cliff into the ocean after they chose to enter in swines bodies, but none the less he killed them.

Does it actually say kill? I've forgotten all and gonna have to start doing some reading.

I would not have thought you could kill unembodied spirits that were cast out with Satan.

[Sevenbak]

Does it actually say kill? I've forgotten all and gonna have to start doing some reading.

I would not have thought you could kill unembodied spirits that were cast out with Satan.

He killed the swine. The spirits went back to their unbodied state.

[rockslider]

He killed the swine. The spirits went back to their unbodied state.

yes, that was my take on the story

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

There are a few problems with this story:

1. Thou shalt not murder is a pretty clear commandment.

Do I appeal to faith and just accept the story at face value? Do I appeal to ignorance and assert that God works in mysterious ways and file it under "X"? Do I accept that there's only obedience, period as that which constitutes Mormon doctrine? Other?

Do you accept that Moses was and is a prophet of God?

Did not Moses slay an egyptian?

Are there not numerous stories on the OT of God commanding his people to go up to war against other people? How could they violate the command "thou shalt not kill". Why would God against His own commandments?

I guess ol' Joe really did make up the BoM huh.

[ashylikeamug]

To me this is a very explainable story. The concept of self-defense under the law was much different than we often think it would be. First let's remember that if the 10 commandments are violated then the violator was subject to stoning by the accuser. Laban broke many commandments that would allow Nephi to kill him with no problem.

1. in chapter 3 starting at verse 13: And behold, it came to pass that Laban was angry, and thrust him out from his presence; and he would not that he should have the records. Wherefore, he said unto him: Behold thou art a robber, and I will slay thee.

14 But Laman fled out of his presence, and told the things which Laban had done, unto us. And we began to be exceedingly sorrowful, and my brethren were about to return unto my father in the wilderness.

He tried to kill Laman and if Laman wouldn't have left then he would have killed him.

2. Starting at verse 22 And it came to pass that we went down to the land of our inheritance, and we did gather together our agold, and our silver, and our precious things.

23 And after we had gathered these things together, we went up again unto the house of Laban.

24 And it came to pass that we went in unto Laban, and desired him that he would give unto us the records which were engraven upon the aplates of brass, for which we would give unto him our gold, and our silver, and all our precious things.

25 And it came to pass that when Laban saw our property, and that it was exceedingly great, he did alust after it, insomuch that he thrust us out, and sent his servants to slay us, that he might obtain our property.

26 And ait came to pass that we did flee before the servants of Laban, and we were obliged to leave behind our property, and it fell into the hands of Laban.

27 And it came to pass that we fled into the wilderness, and the servants of Laban did not overtake us, and we ahid ourselves in the cavity of a rock.

He stole all of their stuff and then tried to kill them again.

Now Numbers 35 starting at verse 15.

15 These six cities shall be a refuge, both for the children of Israel, and for the astranger, and for the sojourner among them: that every one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither.

16 And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the amurderer shall surely be put to bdeath.

17 And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.

18 Or if he smite him with an hand weapon of wood, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.

19 The arevenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him.

20 But if he athrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, that he die;

21 Or in enmity smite him with his hand, that he die: he that smote him shall surely be put to death; for he is a murderer: the revenger of blood shall slay the murderer, when he meeteth him.

22 But if he thrust him suddenly without enmity, or ahave cast upon him any thing without laying of wait,

23 Or with any stone, wherewith a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it upon him, that he die, and was not his enemy, neither sought his harm:

24 Then the congregation shall judge between the slayer and the revenger of blood according to these judgments:

25 And the congregation shall deliver the slayer out of the hand of the revenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to the city of his refuge, whither he was fled: and he shall abide in it unto the death of the ahigh priest, which was anointed with the holy oil.

26 But if the slayer shall at any time come awithout the border of the city of his refuge, whither he was fled;

27 And the revenger of blood find him without the borders of the city of his refuge, and the revenger of blood akill the slayer; he shall not be bguilty of blood:

28 Because he should have remained in the city of his refuge until the death of the high priest: but after the death of the high priest the slayer shall return into the land of his possession.

29 So these things shall be for a statute of judgment unto you throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

This is why Nephi is not guilty of a crime. He was defending himself and as chapter 4 indicates he had no enmity toward Laban so he is not guilty of lying in wait to kill him. this is self-defense not an example of a capricious God. God is not capricious. He is God because he is the ultimate law follower. And just to clarify Sarah was Abraham's sister so it wasn't a lie (Genesis 20:12). Also with polygamy look at Jacob 2:30. We must obey God but God will never expect us to violate divine laws.

[Wiki Wonka]

Wonka;

two things:

1. please explain that in country boy english

I have ordered a seer stone from E-bay, and will endeavor to translate the passage once I receive it.

2. Please find a picture of the real Mr. Wonka (Wilder)

Yes, the true Wonka. I am not yet worthy.

[rockslider]

I have ordered a seer stone from E-bay, and will endeavor to translate the passage once I receive it.

Oh I see, said the blind man ...anxiously awaiting your results here

Yes, the true Wonka. I am not yet worthy.

Thank you so much

[Judd]

One important thing to consider:

1 Ne. 3:29: Behold ye shall go up to Jerusalem again, and the Lord will deliver Laban into your hands.

I believe it's necessary to have the context that Nephi didn't just receive an 'urging of the spirit'.

And, yes, if God could spontaneously deliver the liahona he could also have spontaneously given the gold plates. He also could have spontaneously created and exalted us, but alas.

[William Schryver]

Wonka;

please explain that in country boy english

Once again confirming my long-standing contention that the irony chip is the first thing to malfunction in disaffected Mormons.

[William Schryver]

I have ordered a seer stone from E-bay, and will endeavor to translate the passage once I receive it.

Yes, the true Wonka. I am not yet worthy.

I have a strong suspicion that the new avatar (notwithstanding your admitted unworthiness to sport it) bears a much stronger resemblance to you than did the former.

.

.

.

For some reason, the words "Dr. Frahnkensteen" just came into my mind ...

[Brant Gardner]

Allow me to plug Ben McGuire's "Nephi and Goliath" article in the recent Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture. He doesn't necessarily explain the why of the killing, but more the why of the way the story of it was written. I highly recommend it.

[mysteryman]

Stop. Stop. Stop.

There are a few problems with this story:

1. Thou shalt not murder is a pretty clear commandment. Nephi was certainly aware of it even before ever seeing the brass plates. Maybe it's different when whole countries duke it out, but in this case we've got our strong, moral, faithful, pure and delightsome hero taking the other guy, who is in no condition to present a proper defense, and takin off his head like Perseus did in Clash of the Titans to Medussa (no poison blood or turning to stone here).

The main thing you must remember that the Book of Mormon was composed by a Christian believer that took the Bible seriously, that is Joseph Smith. Therefore, the composer is aware that "God" did the following the in Old Testament in which this portion of the Book of Mormons is in: God commanded the genocide of men, women, and even children when the Israelites conquered the promised land; God murdered the entire world with a flood; God established the Law of Moses as a law of brutal and deadly force, obey or die was the main message; God sent a destroying angel to murder all the first born in Egypt which would include innocent children; etc, etc. When compared to these examples of mass murder, the taking off of Nephi's head is child's play.Therefore from the standpoint of a Bible believer like Joseph Smith, the story presents no problem.

2. Having our Hero recognizing that it's wrong to kill and then having the Spirit convince him otherwise in sort of an exception-basis sets a dangerous precedent. For one, it shows that there's really only one commandment -- obedience. The slippery-slope comes when any other commandment set in stone could change 180 degrees at any time for any reason, and the only thing consistent would be in believing it's what God wants.

It certainly does present a dangerous precedent, but that precedent was already and overwhelmingly set in the Bible. Therefore the Bible believer that composed it saw no issue with it. After all, the Law of Moses was a obedience only law. And when you look at the despicable things "God" ordered in the OT, this little story in the Book of Mormon is perfectly rational from that point of view.

There are other examples in both scripture and Mormon history that supports an obedience-only-doctrine (thou shalt not bear false witness juxtaposed with Abraham in the Book of Abraham being instructed by God himself to lie about the relationship between he and his wife comes to mind as does polygamy being outrightly decried in Jacob 2 but explicitly demanded in D&C132).

There are obedience only concepts in LDS history, although Jacob 2 and D&C 132 is a bad example since Jacob 2:30 leaves the door open to polygamy (it gets very frustrating that so many do not see that in there and bring it up over and over and over and over), but again, were talking about believers in the Bible. Mormon obedience concepts are actually not even close to the same level as the fascist and deadly obedience doctrine of the Law of Moses.

Another problem is that we expect our God and his dealings with us to maintain a certain consistency. After all He's supposed to be the same yesterday, today and forever. Having an about-face makes me wonder if it's God that changes doctrines or whether man changes doctrines and assigns the sudden course correct to God's unknowable, mysterious will.

Again, we are talking about Bible believers where that "God" is certainly not the same today, yesterday, and forever. By the Christian era, the concept of God had changed so dramatically things like the trinity had to be invented to make sense of the new God concept, which is entirely foreign to the Old Testament's concepts of God.

3. Laban was so drunk that he wouldn't have presented much of a tactical challenge in his drooling, unconscious state. Why didn't Nephi just take his clothes, tie him up and leave him somewhere? Nephi was a resident of the city and would have known the best places to conceal him. He could have even taken Laban back to Lehi's house and tied him to a bed like (a la Steven King's "Misery"). No really, all he needed to do was gag, bind and hide him somewhere. And he didn't even need to be put away for very long -- just long enough to steal his clothes and gold-hilted-steel-sword, meander up to Laban's personal treasury, impersonate himself to Zoram, steal the brass plates, kidnap Zoram, force him into an oath under threat of death and leave the city forever. By the time Laban came around and was rescued from his strange night of debauchery Nephi would be long gone with his property, still retain his life at least until Jerusalem was sacked, and Nephi wouldn't have had to kill Laban. Laban might not have even had a memory of the ordeal and would have been primarily interested in where his expensive armor and gold-hilted-steel-sword went. That whole story could have ended better. It's certainly not outside the possibilities, powers and influence of God. I just don't see why it didn't happen a less destructive and conflicted way.

Again, this story is derived from a Bible believer. God certainly didn't have to command genocide when the Isrealites conquered the land, but he did anyway. Most armies that invade and conquer don't commit genocide by killing everybody including women and children, I suppose they didn't need to either.

4. Laban's bloody clothes should have set Zoram and any other guards or even passersby around the domicile grounds and treasury into DEFCON-1. If God himself intervened in making Laban's clothes un-bloody, then why wouldn't He also intervene to make it so Nephi didn't have to slaughter Laban?

Well, maybe it was just armor and easily wiped off and the bloody parts of the cloths were covered. Maybe he cut his head off on and incline with the head facing downward so all the blood ran down the hill and didn't get much on the cloths. As for why did God have to order the slaughter of Laban is a good question, but again this is coming from a Bible believer where God did all sorts of unnecessary murderous acts.

5. Later in 1st Nephi Lehi finds his faith-energy-powered-gold-compass, the Liahona, lying in the desert outside his tent door one fine midsummer's morning. Since God was willing to craft and deliver a compass to Lehi, why couldn't he just do the same with the brass plates? Why was He willing to do one but not the other?

Good question, but this was written by a Bible believer where we could come up with this same question many times over.

6. Why was any of Lehi's, Nephi's & co. retrieval of the brass plates even necessary? Wasn't Lehi a prophet? Didn't he already know the scriptures (you know, don't kill people, don't steal, don't lie, etc.)? Couldn't he just use his VPN connection to God and get all of that information via revelation? I understand that Lehi discovers from the brass plates that he's of the tribe of Manasseh -- why wouldn't he have known that? Seems Israelites were all about keeping themselves separated from gentiles and would have made a central point in anyone's marriages to know who's who so as not to corrupt the pure Isrealite bloodline.

Good question, but again this is coming from a Bible believer. I mean, good grief, God offered a pagan human sacrifice of his own son! Isn't he God, couldn't he have changed the rules so he did not have to do this evil offering of his own son? These sorts of questions are everywhere in the Bible, therefore it is easy to see how a Bible believer could have composed this story.

7. Going back to vs. 13 -- GOD is supposed to be the one slaying the wicked, such as how God slew all the firstborn sons of the Egyptians. Why didn't God just cause Laban to have a bloodless stroke or something while laying there face down in the street?

Why did God have to murder all the firstborn anyway? Why did God have drown the entire world? Why did God have to command Genocide? Why did God have to kill everyone that didn't obey the Law of Moses? Remember, this was composed by a Bible believer, therefore, the story is perfectly consistent with the Bibles blood thirsty God.

Do I appeal to faith and just accept the story at face value? Do I appeal to ignorance and assert that God works in mysterious ways and file it under "X"? Do I accept that there's only obedience, period as that which constitutes Mormon doctrine? Other?

No, you should recognize the danger of accepting such stories and excuses of Gods mysterious ways as found in the Bible and in this story of the Book of Mormon and abandon such beliefs.

[William Schryver]

Allow me to plug Ben McGuire's "Nephi and Goliath" article in the recent Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture. He doesn't necessarily explain the why of the killing, but more the why of the way the story of it was written. I highly recommend it.

I am about 99% certain that Ben is not the first person to see a connection between Nephi/Laban and David/Goliath. I say that because I'm sure the idea I've had along those lines did not originate with me but is the result of something I've read in the distant past. Do you recollect anyone else writing something to that effect in the past? Along with many other things (many of which you yourself have noted over the years) this is another example of the Nephites crafting their sacred history to conform to their own sense of a scriptural leitmotif.

[Euthyphro]

Rather an irreverent retelling of the story, but entertaining. I especially liked Lehi

[William Schryver]

The main thing you must remember that the Book of Mormon was composed by a Christian believer that took the Bible seriously, that is Joseph Smith. Therefore, the composer is aware that "God" did the following the in Old Testament in which this portion of the Book of Mormons is in: God commanded the genocide of men, women, and even children when the Israelites conquered the promised land; God murdered the entire world with a flood; God established the Law of Moses as a law of brutal and deadly force, obey or die was the main message; God sent a destroying angel to murder all the first born in Egypt which would include innocent children; etc, etc. When compared to these examples of mass murder, the taking off of Nephi's head is child's play.Therefore from the standpoint of a Bible believer like Joseph Smith, the story presents no problem.

It certainly does present a dangerous precedent, but that precedent was already and overwhelmingly set in the Bible. Therefore the Bible believer that composed it saw no issue with it. After all, the Law of Moses was a obedience only law. And when you look at the despicable things "God" ordered in the OT, this little story in the Book of Mormon is perfectly rational from that point of view.

There are obedience only concepts in LDS history, although Jacob 2 and D&C 132 is a bad example since Jacob 2:30 leaves the door open to polygamy (it gets very frustrating that so many do not see that in there and bring it up over and over and over and over), but again, were talking about believers in the Bible. Mormon obedience concepts are actually not even close to the same level as the fascist and deadly obedience doctrine of the Law of Moses.

Again, we are talking about Bible believers where that "God" is certainly not the same today, yesterday, and forever. By the Christian era, the concept of God had changed so dramatically things like the trinity had to be invented to make sense of the new God concept, which is entirely foreign to the Old Testament's concepts of God.

Again, this story is derived from a Bible believer. God certainly didn't have to command genocide when the Isrealites conquered the land, but he did anyway. Most armies that invade and conquer don't commit genocide by killing everybody including women and children, I suppose they didn't need to either.

Well, maybe it was just armor and easily wiped off and the bloody parts of the cloths were covered. Maybe he cut his head off on and incline with the head facing downward so all the blood ran down the hill and didn't get much on the cloths. As for why did God have to order the slaughter of Laban is a good question, but again this is coming from a Bible believer where God did all sorts of unnecessary murderous acts.

Good question, but this was written by a Bible believer where we could come up with this same question many times over.

Good question, but again this is coming from a Bible believer. I mean, good grief, God offered a pagan human sacrifice of his own son! Isn't he God, couldn't he have changed the rules so he did not have to do this evil offering of his own son? These sorts of questions are everywhere in the Bible, therefore it is easy to see how a Bible believer could have composed this story.

Why did God have to murder all the firstborn anyway? Why did God have drown the entire world? Why did God have to command Genocide? Why did God have to kill everyone that didn't obey the Law of Moses? Remember, this was composed by a Bible believer, therefore, the story is perfectly consistent with the Bibles blood thirsty God.

No, you should recognize the danger of accepting such stories and excuses of Gods mysterious ways as found in the Bible and in this story of the Book of Mormon and abandon such beliefs.

Obviously mysteryman doesn't hold with the Smith/Spaulding theorists, but falls squarely into the camp of "Joseph Smith as Literary Sampler cum Religious Genius Extraordinaire."

Myself, I find the "miraculous translation of ancient metallic plates via seer stone" thesis much more plausible.

[William Schryver]

Rather an irreverent retelling of the story, but entertaining. I especially liked Lehi

[ed2276]

Why did Nephi decapitate Laban?

Because he was going to leave Jerusalem with Laban's records and wanted to get a head start.