Should Nephi Have Obtained Lehi's Permission?

[ELF1024]

I think the idea that Nephi needed to call Lehi to get permission to follow the council of the Lord is a bit on the silly side. However, that is just me.

I read either on FARMS or on FAIR, and account of someone teaching a group of students from the modern day Middle East the Book of Mormon. The biggest complaint they had about the story of Nephi killing Laban was that Nephi waited so long to do it. The group felt that Nephi should have done it much quicker than he did.

Lecture 7: 1 Nephi 1; Jeremiah

Well, I told the story of cutting off the head of Laban there, which has always shocked everybody as being immoral. Well, it is. It shocked Nephi, too. He had to argue with himself for an hour. He wouldn't do it (I'll tell you about that when we get to it). But anyway, these boys were worried. I could hear murmurs all over the class. They didn't like this story of cutting off Laban's head like that. Fayek Salim raised his hand and said, "Mr. Nibley, there is something very wrong about this story; this is not a good story. When he found Laban lying in the street like that, why did he wait so long to cut off his head? That doesn't ring true

[charity's child]

I would like to know how you can correlate this story with the MMM. Laban had stolen goods from Nephi and his brothers. he had tried to have them killed. I believe (correct me please experts) that by the law of the time thse acts would have been punishable by death. Laban's wealth and power kept him safe from the human court of law, so God chose Nephie to carry out the sentence.

In the MMM, what had these people done? The two cases are really not at all parallel.

If God told me to kill someone, and I knew that he was threatening my family with death, that my brothers or sisters would die if this man had his way, I might be able to follow the command (big might, I'm not exactly in favor of killing people). But if God told me to kill someone and that person had done me no harm, I think I'd go spend a couple of days in the temple asking God why in the world he would ask me to do such a thing.

CC

[Uncle Dale]

...

In the MMM, what had these people done? The two cases are really not at all parallel.

If you were one of the young men in the Iron County militia,

you might have been inclined to rebel against elders Lee,

Dame, Haight, Higby, etc., and not murder anybody. Certainly

you might have later been inclined to seek forgiveness from

the Church's leaders -- to at least confide in Apostle

George A. Smith as to the fact that you (and not Indians)

had carried out an act you believed ordered by God.

Laman and Lemuel were in the same position. They had no

inclination to kill Laban, but their mission leader was

telling them that it was OK. Then came the cover-up with

Zoram -- either he had to be killed, or co-opted.

Whether or not Nephi was following God's will in killing

Laban is not my point. Whether or not John D. Lee was

following God's will in killing travelers is not my point.

Had you been Nephi's co-conspirators, should you (and he)

not first of all consulted with your religious superiors?

And, if you were a member of the Iron County Militia in

1857, should you not have first of all consulted with the

topmost religious superiors --- before believing that murder

was actually God's holy will?

Say that Laman and Lemuel had gone back to Lehi, and asked

whether or not Nephi had proper authority to murder Laban

and threaten Zoram with murder ---- would that have been wrong?

Say that a member of the Iron County Militia had gone up to

Great Salt Lake City, and asked whether or not John D. Lee

had proper authority to murder the travelers and to cover up

that murder, with threats against those who knew what happened

----- would that have been wrong?

Is there no situation in which we should first of all consult

with a faithful representative of the living prophet, before

taking upon ourselves the responsibility of killing a man?

If God told me to kill someone, and I knew that he was threatening my family with death, that my brothers or sisters would die if this man had his way, I might be able to follow the command (big might, I'm not exactly in favor of killing people).

Why not allow God Himself to do that. Vengeance is His and

He will repay -- His commandment is thou shalt not kill.

Is God incapable of stopping a man's heart or halting his breath?

But if God told me to kill someone and that person had done me no harm, I think I'd go spend a couple of days in the temple asking God why in the world he would ask me to do such a thing.

CC

How can you receive personal revelation beyond the limits

of your own domain? Can you go to meetings next Sunday and

issue a "Thus saith the Lord...?"

"Thus saith the Lord, thou shalt kill thy neighbor..." ???

Would not the Bishop take you aside and explain that your

claim to personal revelation exceeded your limits as a member?

UD

.

[Lightbearer]

Yes, and even today all of The LDS Twelve are ordained

to the office of prophet, seer, revelator and translator.

But I do not think they have the authority to act over

and above the man who holds the keys to the dispensation.

I was taught in Sunday School that Lehi held those keys --

but, as I said elsewhere, we were also taught that the

keys were merely symbolic. So, my logic would not hold up.

Did Nephi have to receive permission for ANY of his activities?

Or, was he co-equal to Lehi in his priesthood authority?

UD

Did you even bother to read the scripture I quoted? You cannot compare Lehi and Nephi to the modern equivalents because there is none. The Church is fully organized with a means whereby the authority is held in both the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve. Lehi was the Patriarch and Prophet of this dispensation, but Nephi was the immeadiate and direct successor to his authority as the above scripture clearly shows, and Lehi had given him and his brothers the charge to get the plates through any means necessary and as the Lord directed him. You cannot get more direct than when the Lord tells Nephi to slay Laban, and if his communication was such that he could receive such a command then going back to ask Lehi would be stupid as well as risky. If they just took the plates without killing Laban, he would surely have known who it was that took them and he would have sent his armies into the desert in search of Lehi's party and would have killed them all. So Nephi really had little choice, it was either go back without the plates and fail to keep the commandments of the Lord, or do as the spirit told him, kill Laban and get the plates as commanded. Do you think Lehi would have gave him any other directions? Also as you may have noticed later in the book there was a gradual change in authority as Lehi and Nephi proceeded on their journey, at one point the Liahona would only work for Nephi. In fact Nephi had to call his own father to repentance for murmering at one point. So really going back for permission to kill Laban not only would have been impractical and risky but probably offensive to the Lord.

[Uncle Dale]

Did you even bother to read the scripture I quoted? You cannot compare Lehi and Nephi to the modern equivalents because there is none. The Church is fully organized with a means whereby the authority is held in both the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve. Lehi was the Patriarch and Prophet of this dispensation, but Nephi was the immeadiate and direct successor to his authority as the above scripture clearly shows, and Lehi had given him and his brothers the charge to get the plates through any means necessary and as the Lord directed him. You cannot get more direct than when the Lord tells Nephi to slay Laban, and if his communication was such that he could receive such a command then going back to ask Lehi would be stupid as well as risky. If they just took the plates without killing Laban, he would surely have known who it was that took them and he would have sent his armies into the desert in search of Lehi's party and would have killed them all. So Nephi really had little choice, it was either go back without the plates and fail to keep the commandments of the Lord, or do as the spirit told him, kill Laban and get the plates as commanded. Do you think Lehi would have gave him any other directions? Also as you may have noticed later in the book there was a gradual change in authority as Lehi and Nephi proceeded on their journey, at one point the Liahona would only work for Nephi. In fact Nephi had to call his own father to repentance for murmering at one point. So really going back for permission to kill Laban not only would have been impractical and risky but probably offensive to the Lord.

At least your response fits the parameters of the text better

than anything else I've seen posted here.

I'm still hazy as to who it was that held the keys to the 5th dispensation

during the time period being discussed. Perhaps that is unknown?

All of which leads me back to Nephi's decision, not to consult with

any other priesthood-holder, when initiating an assassination. If he

indeed had that authority, then I suppose he also had the authority

to follow through with Zoram, had Zoram refused his direction.

Having all of this information now laid out before me, I can only

conclude that either Nephi's story is fiction, or else the voice

he heard in his head was a delusion -- or, in fine, both.

I'm sure others will disagree -- but at least they have helped me

work through the text to determine a conclusion. That was worthwhile.

UD