Lamoni As Type Of Christ

[USU78]

So . . . new wifie and I are reading through the BoM this year. Last week we read through abt Alma 27 or so, which puts us over the hump to finish, more or less on time, the BoM. During her lesson Sunday (she teaches the Gospel Doctrine class), a couple of thoughts came to me.

1. The mission of the Sons of Mosiah are smack dab in the middle of the BoM, making their several missions (if you reach back 5 chapters and forward 5 chapters from p. 266, the absolute middle of the BoM), perhaps, the whole point of Mormon's book.

2. Lamoni falls into his first repentence-induced swoon and lies there for 2 days before he awakes, converts his wife fully to Nephite-brand Christianity, then falls into a second swoon, albeit one of joy, along with his wife. Now, why is this significant? Perhaps because he's the king.

Much is made of David (2 Samuel 12), and later Hezekiah (2 Kings 20), going into near death states, the former for Bathsheba's sick child, the latter for fear of his impending death or the pending extinction event for Israel, depending upon your read. David is thus made a different kind of king, who cares, just like his remote descendent Jesus, for the little ones . . . and Hezekiah becomes a similar kind of king, who suffers on behalf of, not just a single child, but all the present and future children in the tribe.

Each is a type of Christ, in somewhat different, but significant ways: each suffers for others, as Christ will one day suffer for his people.

And then comes Lamoni, who suffers the pains of hell in order to save his own soul, but who, in doing so, opens up his whole people to salvation, beginning with his queen.

And this after lying there for 2 days . . . rising on the 3rd.

Haven't ever seen this particular subject treated with, but then I'm sure I'm just ignorant.

Anybody notice this?

Edited July 10, 2012 by USU78

[gtaggart]

Interesting. They really did teach you well up there in Logan.

[Kevin Christensen]

I like your observations about David and Hezekiah. Margaret Barker has suggested that Isaiah 53 was written on the occasion of Hezekiah coming down the plague.

I've got an essay in RBBM 10:2 looking at Lamoni's experience compared several other ancient accounts, Old World accounts noticed by Eugene Seaich, and Allen Christenson's reading of the Popul Vuh. It prefigures Jesus and Mary Magdalene in most moving manner, I think,

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[Calm]

Nibley compare Lamoni to Isaiah: http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=117&chapid=1371

[USU78]

I like your observations about David and Hezekiah. Margaret Barker has suggested that Isaiah 53 was written on the occasion of Hezekiah coming down the plague.

I've got an essay in RBBM 10:2 looking at Lamoni's experience compared several other ancient accounts, Old World accounts noticed by Eugene Seaich, and Allen Christenson's reading of the Popul Vuh. It prefigures Jesus and Mary Magdalene in most moving manner, I think,

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Is there a link, or is this just available in liberries?

[USU78]

Nibley compare Lamoni to Isaiah: http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=117&chapid=1371

I'd forgotten about this:

Later while he was sitting on the king's bed conversing, the prophet was overcome by the Spirit, "and his consciousness was carried away from this world, so that Somnas the record-keeper began to say that Isaiah was dead. But when Hezekiah the King came in and took him by the hand, he knew that he was not dead; but they thought he had died. . . . And thus he lay upon the bed of the King in his transported state [of ekstasis, which means your spirit having left your body; ek/ex is out, and stasia means standing up. So ecstasy is when your spirit leaves your body.] for three days and three nights. Then his spirit returned to his body, [and Isaiah] summoned Jasum his son and Somnas the scribe [the whole court, you see] and Hezekiah the King and all those who stood about such as were worthy to hear those things he had seen." To them he delivered an ecstatic discourse on the "surpassing, indescribable, and marvelous works of God who is merciful to men, and of the glory of the Father and of his Beloved Son and of the Spirit, and of the ranks of the holy angels standing in their places."

Now this is the same sort of thing that happens here. He saw the gospel plan. He was transported to heaven and saw God and his mercy, etc. In the same way when Isaiah comes to, he is going to say the same thing. Later on with the king and the queen this happens again. This is a very interesting passage here because it says, "And now, when he had said this, he fell unto the earth, as if he were dead. And it came to pass that his servants took him and carried him in unto his wife, and laid him upon a bed [well, Isaiah is laid upon the king's bed here] and he lay as if he were dead for the space of two days and two nights [with Isaiah it was three days and three nights]; and his wife, and his sons." All the family were there mourning for him when he rose up again, which he did. It carried on a long time, and then he finally came to in verse 13: "He stretched forth his hand unto the woman, and said: Blessed be the name of God, and blessed art thou. For as sure as thou livest, behold, I have seen my Redeemer; and he shall come forth, and be born of a woman, and he shall redeem all mankind who believe on his name. . . . He sunk again with joy; and the queen also sunk down, being overpowered by the Spirit."

[Kevin Christensen]

Is there a link, or is this just available in liberries?

Here is Margaret's take on Isaiah 53 and Hezekiah.

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/FourthServantSong.pdf

And the essay I did with my wife for RBBM 10:2 has this:

Significantly, the story of Abish and the Lamanite queen qualifies as a "type-scene,"⁸ a prophetic prefiguring not only of the resurrection of Christ, but also of the role of women in that event. As Robert Alter remarks, "The type-scene is not merely a way of formally recognizing a particular kind of narrative moment; it is also a means of attaching that moment to a larger pattern of historical and theological meaning."⁹ Compare the general features of this account in Alma with a conspicuous pattern in ancient Near Eastern religion:

One of the most striking features of the ancient Sacred Marriage cult was that the goddess had an important part to play in the resurrection of her husband. . . . We will recall how Anath made possible Baal-Hadad's resurrection by attacking and destroying his enemy, Mot, the god of death. In Mesopotamian myth it was Inanna-Ishtar who descended into the realm of death to destroy Erishkigal's power so that dead Dumuzi-Tammuz could be restored to life. Aristide's

Apology

describes how Aphrodite descended into Hades in order to ransom Adonis from Persephone. Cybele likewise made possible the resurrection of Attis on the third day, while in Egypt it was Isis who made possible the restoration of her husband, Osiris. . . . But no matter what the details of these ubiquitous Near Eastern death-and-resurrection legends, the underlying theme is the same: the god is helpless without the ministrations of his consort. . . . The reunion of Jesus and Mary Magdalene at the tomb on Resurrection Morning therefore clearly fits within this well-known tradition.

10

The same motif also appears in the Mesoamerican Popol Vuh in the story of One Hunahpu's death and the maiden daughter of the underworld lords, through whose courageous actions life was renewed.¹¹

The stories of Abish and the Lamanite kings and queens also resonate with these traditions. Given the growing recognition that Book of Mormon authors consciously selected stories that present archetypal patterns, it is likely that these stories attracted the attention of Mormon as significant type-scenes, and as such, they receive due attention and prominence in the text.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=10&num=2&id=288

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[USU78]

Another thought that came as we were reviewing these materials.

Ammon makes a considerable point of teaching the true history of the family split . . . demonstrating that it was not a usurpation/theft by Nephi (similar to the alleged Jacob usurpation/theft from Esau), but rather specific rebellion by Laman and Lemuel, presumably against Lehi, that led to Nephi having become Lehi's heir . . .

That's interesting enough, but it is that teaching, coupled with his own debasement of self by eschewing the kingship and becoming servant to Lamoni, in similar vein to Jacob's self-abasement at Esau's feet, that taught Lamoni (later Lamoni's father) the true nature of leadership ordained by G-d.

In order to become the kind of king he should be, in the tradition of David and Hezekiah, Lamoni would have to become the servant of his people, bearing their iniquity in his person perhaps, instead of lopping off heads of people who displeased him.

Thus Ammon truly brings about a restoration of the Laman/Lemuel lines to the family by making Lamoni into a king in the mold of David and Hezekiah . . . and the two Mosiahs and Benjamin . . . a transformation that so impressed Lamoni's father that Lamoni was freed from his feudal obligations to his father as over-king.

[USU78]

Thanks a bunch, KC. Terrific stuff, as usual.

[USU78]

Anybody else wish to weigh in on this topic?