I’ve been stuck in the Lehi/Nephi vision lately, not intentionally, I just keep finding things in the vision or other accounts that circle back around to it. I’m not complaining though because I’m having a great deal of fun with all these discoveries.
This latest one has been really fun and there is probably a lot more to discover here. What I noticed was a parallel between the conversion of Alma’s people in Mosiah 18 and the tree of life vision. What makes this more compelling to me is that I think Mormon intentionally used language to not only make this parallel but to inject another message, one concerning the meaning of his name: Mormon.
This chapter details the conversion and growth of Alma’s little group of saints but embedded in the telling of this story are suspiciously similar parallels to the tree of life vision. First, I think it is important to notice that this chapter is framed by the name Mormon which is mentioned 12 times in the chapter. Half of those occurrences happen in a single verse which I think was done to get our attention.
We already know that Mormon is the name of the one abridging this record, but we also learn that “Mormon” is also the name of a:
- Place (vs.4,30)
- King (vs.4)
- Fountain/Waters (vs.5,30)
- Thicket/Forest (vs.5,30)
Now let’s explore the many parallels between the story of Alma’s people and the vision of the tree of life. This is going to be a wild ride…Read Full PostGo to Comments
I transcribed the following from the third part of an interview with Terryl Givens on the Mormon Stories podcast. I can’t remember how I came across this interview, but I remember seeing Terryl Givens’ name which immediately drew my interest. I’m a big fan of Terryl and his wife Fiona, they are delightful people.
Based on my own research, I am inclined to agree with Terryl’s perspective on many (but not all) things. Here are a few highlights concerning Joseph Smith and the restoration that I find extremely insightful and consistent with my own beliefs.Read Full PostGo to Comments
In the what is today the first book of the New Testament we have an interesting account at the very end of Matthew. Here, it appears that Matthew is attempting to debunk an anti-Christian rumor that was going around concerning the resurrection of Christ.
Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done. And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers, Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept. And if this come to the governor’s ears, we will persuade him, and secure you. So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day. (Matthew 28:11-15)
According to Matthew a common explanation for the missing body of Christ was attributed to fraud committed by his followers.
Is it really that far of a stretch to believe that among Jesus’ closest confidants and hundreds of followers that someone might have stolen his body in an attempt to somehow “prove” the resurrection? Or that the remaining apostles could have fabricated the story of the resurrection in order to keep the movement going and save face? Isn’t this the simplest explanation if you don’t accept the reality of miracles or the existence of God?
In the case of the Latter-day Saint claim that God restored his Church to the earth, a skeptic might ask Read Full PostGo to Comments