Commandments “given unto our father(s)”

In Jacob chapter 2, the condemnation of multiplying wives, concubines, and riches highlights the violation of multiple commandments simultaneously. Jacob conveys to his people that these commandments were given to their father (singular), Lehi.

And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before;

Jacob 2:34

Within chapter 2, the Lord’s commandments (plural) are mentioned three times. It is unclear whether these commandments (plural) were revealed anew to Lehi or if he received them as part of the record on the brass plates.

In Jacob 3, the context shifts from the commandments (plural) given to Lehi to a specific commandment (singular) for men to have only one wife and no concubines. It says that this commandment (singular) was given to the Nephite’s fathers (plural), while also mentioning the fathers (plural) of the Lamanites. Consider the following verse:

…for [the Lamanites] have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our fathers—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none

Jacob 3:5 (1830 – 1981 edition)

It appears that this change from “fathers” to “father” in Jacob 3:5 was meant to match the language in Jacob 2:34 and narrow the context of this commandment just to Lehi and his people.

For 151 years, that’s how it read, until the word “fathers” (plural) was changed to “fathers” (singular) in the 1981 edition, which is not that long ago. This is how the altered verse reads in today’s edition of the Book of Mormon:

…for [the Lamanites] have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none

Jacob 3:5 (1981+ editions)

It is important to note that the printer’s manuscript, (source) which is the earliest text that we have of this verse, does read “father,” but is the earliest manuscript known the most correct? Much of the original manuscript was destroyed by moisture and mold including this portion of the text.

I think it’s possible that the printer’s manuscript was in error and that the printed edition contained the correct plural version of “fathers.”

During Joseph Smith’s lifetime, four editions of the Book of Mormon were published between 1830 and 1841 (source). The text was rendered “fathers” from the first edition to every other edition throughout Joseph’s life and for 139 years after his death.

The Book of Mormon Critical Text Project has some insights on the second edition which was published in 1837:

For this edition, hundreds of grammatical changes and a few emendations were made in the text. The 1830 edition and the printer’s manuscript were used as the basis for this edition.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230913163032/https://criticaltext.byustudies.byu.edu/editions-1830-1981

Not only was the the printer’s manuscript revisited and the text left the same in this edition after hundreds of changes were made, but in the very next edition three years later, even more corrections were made:

Joseph Smith compared the printed text with the original manuscript and discovered a number of errors made in copying the printer’s manuscript from the original. Thus the 1840 edition restores some of the readings of the original manuscript.

https://web.archive.org/web/20230913163032/https://criticaltext.byustudies.byu.edu/editions-1830-1981

Joseph Smith discovered errors the printer’s manuscript made from the original and made those improvements and even then the word “fathers” remained unchanged.

Which version holds greater authenticity: the original printer’s manuscript or the four subsequent editions released during the translator’s own lifetime?

In my personal opinion, it seems prudent to embrace the only version of the word that was in every published edition of the Book of Mormon that Joseph Smith approved.

In 2009, Royal Skousen published what he determined to be the ‘earliest text’ of the Book of Mormon. The website Book of Mormon Central has this to say about it:

Author Royal Skousen has made it his life’s work to bring readers back to the original text of the Book of Mormon. From the Original Manuscript to the current LDS edition of the Book of Mormon, various changes have made their way into the text. The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text, attempts to sift through changes in the manuscript to bring the reader back to the best approximation of what the original text of the Book of Mormon would have said.

https://bookofmormoncentral.org/content/book-mormon-earliest-text

It is evident from Skousen’s research that he concluded the term “father” in the printer’s manuscript was a more accurate rendition than “fathers” found in the edition approved by Joseph Smith, which was based on the original manuscript.

To clarify further, it is essential to reiterate that the 1830 edition relied on the printer’s manuscript, while the 1840 edition was derived from a meticulous comparison between the original manuscript and the printer’s manuscript.

Consequently, I think that the 1840 edition, based on the original manuscript, aligns more faithfully with the content of the plates compared to the printer’s manuscript because it was edited personally by Joseph Smith who was the only person uniquely qualified to determine what words would best reflect what the plates themselves said.

Until 1983, not a single published edition of the Book of Mormon used the word “father” in Jacob 3:5, so why change it back to the printer’s manuscript version?

A theory about why the change was made

I think that it is possible that the change was made to align with a misinterpretation of Jacob 3:5 to suggest that the commandment of monogamy was given only to Lehi’s posterity. This would support the idea that a commandment of monogamy was exclusive to their people, and leave room for the Lord to allow men to have many wives and concubines in other times and places.

This aligns with the conventional interpretation of Jacob 2:30, which suggests that, while monogamy is the standard practice among Lehi’s people, the Lord retains the prerogative to temporarily suspend His commandment against the taking of multiple wives and concubines should He so choose.

However, a notable challenge arises when examining this within the context of the Book of Mormon. The Lord, as depicted in the Book of Mormon, consistently condemns this practice among every people, including the pre-Abrahamic Jaredites (Ether 10:5), the Nephites (Jacob 2-3, Mosiah 11:2, 4, 14), and includes those residing “in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people” (Jacob 2:31).

Throughout the Book of Mormon narrative, instances of the Lord’s people having “many wive and concubines” are invariably accompanied by strong condemnation using descriptors, such as “gross crimes,” “lasciviousness,” “sin,” “fornication,” “filthy,” “iniquity,” “whoredoms,” “wickedness,” and “abominations.”

Who would the “fathers” be then?

But if the “fathers” (plural), which Joseph Smith approved of in every published edition, is the correct rendering, who are the fathers? They could be Lehi and Nephi, but what if they are the Israelite fathers such as Moses who may have written:

Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.

Deut. 17:17

Multiplying wives and riches were precisely the two things that Jacob and the Lord are condemning among the Nephites. These commandments were indeed given to the Israelite fathers that predated Lehi by hundreds of years.

Establishing the authority of this commandment by tracing it back to a time before Lehi, as recorded in their sacred brass plates, may have significantly bolstered its credibility and legitimacy.

What is unknown to many people is that the Book of Deuteronomy, which included this commandment, was obscured for centuries. It was even unknown to David and Solomon and was discovered in the temple just 25 years before Lehi left Jerusalem.

The Damascus Document, one of the books found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, contains the views of a particular ancient sect that opposed polygamy and had an interesting view about marriage and King David.

They mention three traps that would be an issue for the Israelites, and the first one was fornication or polygamy specifically. It speaks of the “Shoddy-Wall-Builders” who:

“[took] two wives in their lifetimes, although the principle of creation is “male and female He created them” (Gen. 1:27) and those who went into the ark “went into the ark two by two” (Gen. 7:9). Concerning the Leader it is written “he shall not multiply wives to himself” (Deut. 17:17); but David had not read the sealed book of the Law in the Ark; for it was not opened in Israel from the day of the death of Eleazar and Joshua and the elders who served the goddess Ashtoret. It lay buried [and was not] revealed until the appearance of Zadok. Nevertheless the deeds of David were all excellent, except the murder of Uriah and God forgave him for that.

The Dead Sea Scrolls – Revised Edition: A New Translation By Michael O. Wise, Martin G. Abegg, Edward M. Cook, https://books.google.com/books?id=218JbeU2POgC&pg=PA55#v=onepage&q&f=false

We have evidence that the Lord condemned the practice of multiplying wives outside of Lehi’s family circle in Deuteronomy 17:17, along with Riplakish the Jaredite (Ether 10:5) who predated Israel, and the Lord himself declares his condemnation of this practice among all of his people:

For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.

Jacob 2:31

In order for God to justly condemn them for breaking it, God’s people in all lands needed to be aware that this was indeed a commandment.

While Deuteronomy 17:17 specifically instructs the leaders of the people not to multiply wives and riches, Jacob’s condemnation extends to the entire populace for engaging in the same practices.

This suggests that this commandment was not exclusive to leaders alone. It’s conceivable that Jacob had access to a more precise record on the brass plates or received revelations from his father, Lehi, which might have been lost over time.

There are some other references that can shed some light onto who the Nephites may have considered their “fathers”.

And behold, it is wisdom in God that we should obtain these records, that we may preserve unto our children the language of our fathers;

1 Nephi 3:19

That language may not have been Hebrew, but Egyptian because the brass plates were written in Egyptian. This may point to Joseph of Egypt would would have been the “father” to Lehi and his posterity since they were descendants of Joseph through Menasseh.

Therefore let us go up; let us be strong like unto Moses; for he truly spake unto the waters of the Red Sea and they divided hither and thither, and our fathers came through, out of captivity, on dry ground…Let us go up; the Lord is able to deliver us, even as our fathers, and to destroy Laban, even as the Egyptians.

1 Nephi 4:2-3

Again here, the descendants of Joseph would have been among Moses’ people who were delivered.

And it came to pass that I, Nephi, spake unto them, saying: Do ye believe that our fathers, who were the children of Israel…

1 Nephi 17:23

Here, Nephi identifies his fathers as the children of Israel in general which encompasses far more than just the descendants of Joseph.

Behold, he loved our fathers, and he covenanted with them, yea, even Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…

1 Nephi 17:40

In this verse, Nephi specifically identifies Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the Nephite’s “fathers.” In other places, Nephi seems to refer to descendants more proximate to his people’s time as fathers. There are well over 100 and perhaps closer to 170 references to “fathers” in the Book of Mormon and it seems that they reference different groups depending on the context.

It would seem though that to Nephi and Jacob that their fathers would have encompassed the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, along with the house of Israel, Joseph and his posterity, and their specific line that descended from him.

Did the fathers violate this commandment?

The house of Israel was no stranger to violating God’s commandments. They, along with all of God’s people seem to do constantly throughout time.

It’s possible that such a commandment was given to Abraham after he received his covenant with God after the situation with Hagar. Isaac did not seem to have a reason to take another wife, concubine, or surrogate. Jacob did not seek to have multiple wives and concubines, he was deceived into it and the situation was further complicated by his wives proposing their servants as surrogates much like Sarai did.

Even in the midst of such a messy situation, God used it to tell a story and brought forth something extraordinary, like turning water into wine. Personally, I find hope in the idea that even the most turbulent family dynamics can become a means for God’s will to shine through.

However, this doesn’t mean we should elevate past mistakes into virtues. While we may not know exactly which “fathers” Jacob was referencing, it’s clear that a commandment had been given at some point. One example is found in Deuteronomy 17:17, which shares notable parallels with Jacob’s sermon. Furthermore, we know that Nephi regarded the people of the great lawgiver, Moses, as their “fathers,” tying their current situation to the broader scriptural and covenantal tradition.

Takeaways

For these compelling reasons, I believe the verse should have been retained with “fathers” to clarify that this commandment was a more universally recognized principle among the house of Israel, rather than appearing to be an exclusive exemption limited to Lehi and his descendants.

This perspective clarifies why God could justly express His anger not only toward the Nephites but also toward those “in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people” (Jacob 2:31). For their actions to be deemed wicked, they must have been violating a commandment they already knew, and Jacob explicitly asserts that they had been given such a commandment.

It is possible that the lost pages of the Book of Mormon, including Lehi’s record, contained additional details on this subject. If indeed that’s the case, it’s intriguing that potentially clarifying texts like those were lost over time.

Similarly, the fact that Deuteronomy, which also condemned the multiplication of wives, was lost for centuries adds an interesting layer to this discussion.

I don’t doubt that the adversary actively seeks to corrupt and obscure such vital information from God’s people, making it easier for them to deviate from His intended pattern for marriage and families and enviably come to hearken unto these kinds of things rather than hearken unto God’s commands.

Irrespective of the reasons behind the change, I believe that this subtle alteration in Jacob 3:5 may serve a similar purpose in potentially obscuring the original context and intent.

The Book of Mormon unequivocally upholds God’s divine pattern, His commandment, of one man and one woman joined in marriage, categorically denouncing the practice of multiplying wives and concubines as wickedness and abominations.