This isn’t a deep dive, just a couple of recent observations from Ammon’s mission to the Lamanites starting with his defense of the king’s flocks.
In Alma 17:26 we are introduced to the water of Sebus which is mentioned 6 times in the Book of Mormon. Any time I find a unique name, something that Mormon felt like he needed to include, it catches my attention and I wonder why he included it.
And after he had been in the service of the king three days, as he was with the Lamanitish servants going forth with their flocks to the place of water, which was called the water of Sebus, and all the Lamanites drive their flocks hither, that they may have water—
Alma 17:26
There’s a resource called The Book of Mormon Onomasticon which seems to be maintained by Brigham Young University and it contains a lot of research into names that are found in the Book of Mormon. I looked up “Sebus” and found this definition:
SEBUS may reflect a West Semitic root śbs “to gather, assemble (persons),” and could possibly mean “Place of Gathering” for water, flocks or people (PYH).
https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php?title=SEBUS
It’s interesting that “Sebus” could mean “to gather” and that this could contrast with the word “scatter[ed]” that appears about 15 times in the narrative about the sheep that spans from Alma 17-19.
Alma 18:6 has what appears to be a little literary structure:
- For he had slain many of them because their brethren had
- scattered their flocks
- at the place of water (Sebus = gathering); and thus, because they had had
- their flocks scattered they
- scattered their flocks
- were slain.
There are a couple of verses where the word Sebus and scattered are placed very close together.
- “…to stand by the waters of Sebus to scatter the flocks of the people. (Alma 18:7)
- “…he slew his servants who had had their flocks scattered at the waters of Sebus. (Alma 19:20)
- “…who had stood at the waters of Sebus and scattered the flocks which belonged to the king…” (Alma 19:21)
It seems that these words are being contrasted as kind of a pun of some kind. Who did this? Possibly another example of Mormon, who is abridging the record, being creative with the text.
Severed Arms
Next, we get to the part of the account where Ammon is attacked by the gang of people looking to scatter the flocks and he defends himself and his compatriots by slicing off every arm that is lifted against him.
But behold, every man that lifted his club to smite Ammon, he smote off their arms with his sword; for he did withstand their blows by smiting their arms with the edge of his sword…
Alma 17:37
Cutting off their arms served a practical purpose in that it neutralized the attackers without necessarily killing them, and it may have had some symbolic significance as well.
Anciently, an arm represented themes such as strength, power, action, authority, and even covenant relationships. Even the letter Yod, which is associated with a hand or arm, can symbolize action, work, and power.
To remove the arm of an attacker by a servant of God might imply that there is some kind of covenant protection at hand and deliverance from oppression. Maybe it could also be a sign of divine judgement like when God “breaks the arm” of Pharaoh:
Son of man, I have broken the arm of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and behold, it has not been bound up…I will break his arms, the strong arm and the one that was broken, and I will make the sword fall out of his hand.
Ezekiel 30:21-22
Job 38:15 hits on this idea as well: “The arm of the wicked shall be broken.”
After the melee, the other servants, “…went in unto the king, bearing the arms which had been smitten off by the sword of Ammon, of those who sought to slay him; and they were carried in unto the king for a testimony of the things which they had done. (Alma 17:39)
The arms themselves were used as a kind of token, or a physical or tangible sign of an unseen spiritual reality. And this is exactly where King Lamoni goes with it, he thinks Ammon is the Great Spirit and that brings us to the next topic.
Wrong on the way to right
There’s a kind of phenomenon we observe with King Lamoni that I think is at play in our lives and the lives of pretty much everyone on earth at some point. I call it “wrong on the way to right” and I’ll break it down for you a little here in Lamoni’s story.
There’s an interesting development in Lamoni’s thinking as he first buys in too deeply to his assumptions to the point of being technically incorrect in thinking Ammon is literally the Great Spirit, but he’s right in that Ammon is more associated with the Great Spirit, but he gradually comes to this realization as he surrenders what he thinks he knows and becomes open to learning.
Upon hearing of Ammon’s deeds, he goes through this spectrum of assumptions:
- Surely, this is more than a man… (Alma 18:2)
- Behold, is not this the Great Spirit… (Alma 18:2)
- Now I know that it is the Great Spirit; (Alma 18:4)
- Now this is the Great Spirit… (Alma 18:4)
- Now I surely know that this is the Great Spirit… (Alma 18:10)
First, he thinks that Ammon is more than a man, and speculates that he could be the Great Spirit. He then proclaims that he knows that Ammon is the Great Spirit and then goes further by saying, “I surely know that this is the Great Spirit.”
While he’s technically wrong about Ammon’s identity, he’s right that there’s something special about Ammon and that he is associated with deity; but he’s a servant of deity, not the deity.
When the king gets a chance to speak to Ammon he asks, “Who art thou? Art thou that Great Spirit, who knows all things?” (Alma 18:18)
Now this is a very important part in the narrative because Ammon makes a deal with the king. He offers to answer all of his questions but only if the king hearkens to his words and Lamoni agrees.
Ammon then begins to ask the king some questions and instead of pretending to know everything the king is humble enough to admit that he doesn’t know the answer to some of Ammon’s questions. He’s no longer making assumptions.
Ammon’s first question is if Lamoni believes that there is a God and he replies:
- I do not know what that meaneth. (Alma 18:25)
Alma clarifies that God is the Great Spirit and then asks if Lamoni believes if God created all things in the heaven and earth and Lamoni replies:
- …I believe that he created all things which are in the earth; (Alma 18:29)
- …but I do not know the heavens. (Alma 18:29)
Lamoni then asks a couple of more humble questions and this prompts Alma to preach an indepth sermon recounting everything from the creation all the way down to Lehi’s departure from Jerusalem, and up unto the present day.
Lamoni soaks it all up and believes what he was taught and then exclaims:
O Lord, have mercy; according to thy abundant mercy which thou hast had upon the people of Nephi, have upon me, and my people.
Alma 18:41
Lamoni began by making a bunch of assumptions that seemed reasonable to him based upon what he though he knew and imagine how this might have gone differently if he chose to not believe Ammon and stick to his own assumptions and demand that Ammon admit he was the Great Spirit and then continue acting under that assumption.
How often is this like us where we have our own demands about who we think God is and what he does and refuse to set them aside because we like our version of the story better?
This reminds me of a quote I like from Kevin Christensen:
If I wanted to know, to be prepared, I had to take personal responsibility. In retrospect, my program involved three elements. Keep my eyes open. Give things time. And re-examine my own assumptions now and then. The alternative is to not pay attention. Insist on final answers now. And never re-examine my own assumptions. Either choice on these three points has consequences in life.
Kevin Christensen, Eye of the Beholder
I hold many beliefs that some might see as unorthodox, but don’t we all to some extent? However, I strive to remain genuinely open to correction because, at my core, I value truth far more than my own opinions.
Striking this balance is no small task—it requires the courage to embrace new light and knowledge, even when it feels unfamiliar, while weighing it against the understanding that brings us comfort and anchors our sense of meaning.
Anyway, just a couple observations from my latest read through these chapters and I get the sense that there is so much more (there always is) but I’ll have to revisit some of these ideas later.
