Some observations on Jared the usurper and his daughter

I was reading about Jared, the man who usurps the Jaredite kingdom from his father Omer, and I thought it was interesting to read these versus again about his reaction once his brothers take back the kingdom for their father and mercifully let him live.

7 And now Jared became exceedingly sorrowful because of the loss of the kingdom, for he had set his heart upon the kingdom and upon the glory of the world.

8 Now the daughter of Jared being exceedingly expert, and seeing the sorrows of her father, thought to devise a plan whereby she could redeem the kingdom unto her father. (Ether 8:7-8)

It sounds to me like Jared became deeply depressed. And it seems to be a situational depression, probably a feeling of having lost everything he ever wanted and being frustrated in his desires.   The verse tells us he had set his heart on the kingdom and the world’s glory.

Jared, born as a prince, was in a pretty high status anyway, and it makes me think about what there might be for a prince to aspire to, if not gaining the kingdom.  IT may have seemed to Jared that there was nothing else.  Eternal salvation and serving to build and improve the kingdom wasn’t on his radar.  Or maybe he thought being king was the best way to improve things.. 

It’s not really clear whether he usurped the kingdom in the first place to forestall competing with other brothers for the crown, or whether he would have inherited anyway and he just wanted to hurry it along.

Anyway, Jared’s depression over his drop in status in the kingdom teaches us it is important to pay attention to what our aspirations are.  Aspirations can drive us, but they can also cause us grief when we are frustrated in them or when they are gained and then lost.  Are they good aspirations?   What are we willing to do to obtain them?  Will we do anything, or will we pursue them in a lawful way?

We are all princes and princesses in God’s kingdom, but it is worth asking what our aspirations are.  Do we simply aspire to rule over everyone, or do we want to build up the kingdom?   Do we sometimes get the feeling we are “demoted” from callings of authority, and does that depress us?

Let’s move on to the verses about the daughter of Jared.  Ignoring all the awfulness that follows from the particular plan the daughter of Jared comes up with, there are some neat things about her in the verse that I want to point out.

First it is noted that she is “exceedingly expert.”  Our natural question might be “Expert in what?”  Since it doesn’t say, I am brought to the conclusion that she seems to have been expert in just about everything.  (Except.. being faithful to God.)  She seems to have dealt with her high status and the need for a driving aspiration in a different way from Jared her father.  She was granddaughter to a king, and in the time her father was king, she was a princess. Her aspiration seems to have been gaining every bit of learning and skill that she could. And she attained it, which may or may not say something about opportunities for women to learn in those days. I don’t know.   Is being “exceedingly expert” bad? Really, it depends on what use the expertise is put to.

Second, she saw the sorrows of her father, and she wanted to alleviate them.  This was a good desire, even if the manner of doing it was wrong-headed.  What parent wouldn’t want a child who would go to great lengths to help them pull out of a blue funk?

Third, she thought to devise a plan to help him, so she seems to have been pretty goal-oriented. You get the sense that she has made plans and executed them successfully in the past, based on her confidence in herself that she can pull off this admittedly ambitious project of redeeming the kingdom to her father.

Fourth, it is interesting that her project is called “redeeming the kingdom.”  You and I know that Moroni who is abridging this account would see through this terminology and know what she is doing. She’s trying to usurp the kingdom back for her father.  So it is likely this “redeeming” was language in the Jaredite account that Moroni allowed to pass through. It shows us the daughter of Jared was skilled at spinning the truth. “Redeeming the kingdom” sounds virtuous, whereas “usurping the kingdom” does not.  The lesson here is that projects need good names, but they have to be good projects, such that naming them doesn’t require lying to ourselves and others about their true nature.

Seeing these qualities in the daughter of Jared, I get the sense that she was a neat woman who began to make some very bad choices to help her father in a bad way.  She goes blithely into it with such naivety that I wonder if she had been making bad choices for a while and this was just another easy step for her.  How could she just do what she did with no regard for the consequences and the evil it would unleash upon the world? 

In the end, she turns into an object lesson illustrating the principle that when people are learned too often they think they are wise and then they don’t hearken to the counsels of God. All their learning becomes foolishness. To be learned is good if we hearken to God’s counsels.

Survivor’s guilt versus the Lord’s assessment on sin in 3 Nephi 8-9

When the destruction among the Nephites happens at Christ’s death, there is a curious contradiction between the people’s cries of mourning and regret and the Lord’s words about where the fault lay.

The people say one thing and Christ says another.

24 And in one place they were heard to cry, saying: O that we had repented before this great and terrible day, and then would our brethren have been spared, and they would not have been burned in that great city Zarahemla.

25 And in another place they were heard to cry and mourn, saying: O that we had repented before this great and terrible day, and had not killed and stoned the prophets, and cast them out; then would our mothers and our fair daughters, and our children have been spared, and not have been buried up in that great city Moronihah. And thus were the howlings of the people great and terrible. (3 Nephi 8:24-25)

The people exclaim that if they had repented and not stoned the prophets, their brethren and families would have been spared.  It is as if they claim it is their fault and that innocent others were destroyed in punishment for that guilt.

Christ has something different to say.

2 Wo, wo, wo unto this people; wo unto the inhabitants of the whole earth except they shall repent; for the devil laugheth, and his angels rejoice, because of the slain of the fair sons and daughters of my people; and it is because of their iniquity and abominations that they are fallen!

3 Behold, that great city Zarahemla have I burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof. . . .

5 And behold, that great city Moronihah have I covered with earth, and the inhabitants thereof, to hide their iniquities and their abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come any more unto me against them. . . .

12 And many great destructions have I caused to come upon this land, and upon this people, because of their wickedness and their abominations.

13 O all ye that are spared because ye were more righteous than they, will ye not now return unto me, and repent of your sins, and be converted, that I may heal you? (3 Nephi 9:2-3, 5, 12-13)

Christ, on the other hand, tells them the people slain had been wicked and those who were spared were more righteous, although they still needed to repent.

I think this shows us several things.  First, people tend to attribute responsibility to themselves for the destruction of their family members, even if those who were destroyed were wicked.  (“If we would have repented, these family members would have been spared.”)  We know from the D&C that parents are responsible for the guilt of the children if the children are not taught right, but when those who sin do it in full knowledge of their rebellion, it is another story.  To the survivors it can feel like a punishment when it is actually more of a deliverance.  So when Jesus says those who had been spared had been more righteous, He absolves them of the guilt they don’t deserve to feel, though He still tells them they need to turn to Him and repent.

I think Satan would love people to feel responsible for sins they didn’t commit because then he can destroy their peace. Jesus, on the other hand, wants us to be free from guilt. He put the responsibility where it really belonged so they could be free of undeserved guilt, and He also extended the invitation to repent of their sins so they could become free from deserved guilt.  

It is also interesting to see who is mourned in the city of Moronihah and who is left out.  They mourn for their mothers, fair daughters, and their children, but there is no mention of fathers, wives, or fair sons, so it is possible those were saved. 

It is peculiar that mothers, fair daughters, and children were killed because usually we’d think of these groups as being some of the tender and innocent.  But because of Christ’s statement about the destruction falling on the iniquitous and abominable, we must conclude that He was just and they were corrupted.  I could speculate a good long time on why the families were divided along those particular lines, and I can think of at least three plausible scenarios about how this happened, but ultimately it’s not terribly important.  The important thing was that it shows us that the Lord has the power to save or destroy very specifically, even with large disasters.

Other observations can be made about what Christ told the people about the destruction.  A lot of cities are listed that were destroyed, but there were also a lot of cities we’ve heard of in the Book of Mormon in other places that were not mentioned in the list, so we can probably assume that the damage to them wasn’t so horrific that all the people died in them too.

There is also a range of severity in the destruction and condemnation. Zerahemla and Moronihah had great destruction, but they also had people associated with them that remained alive to mourn the loss of those who died there.  There is no such thing recorded of the other cities – Moroni, Gilgal, Onihah, Mocum, Jerusalem, Gadiandi, Gadiomnah, Jacob, Gimgimno, Jacobugath, Laman, Josh, Gad, and Kishkumen.

Also, all of the cities mentioned have it noted of them that the inhabitants were slain “that the blood of the prophets and saints shall not come any more unto me against them,” but the cities of Laman, Josh, Gad, and Kishkumen come in for especial condemnation for 1) casting out and stoning the prophets and those sent by God to declare unto them concerning their wickedness and abominations (3 Nephi 9:10) and 2) casting ALL of them out so there were no righteous among them (v11) and they were destroyed so that the blood of the prophets and saints “might not cry unto me from the ground against them.” (v11)

So, some cities just had the righteous blood come up to God, but the extra wicked cities had righteous blood crying to God against them. To me this implies degrees of violence, one perhaps being abuse and injury, but the other implying murder, much like Abel’s blood cried to God against Cain.  It also seems like most of the cities still allowed the righteous to stay among them, but the extra wicked cities kicked them all out.

The Lord mentions that prophets and others had been sent to those cities Laman, Josh, Gad, and Kishkumen to declare their wickedness to them, which makes me think those cities had no local people to tell them. They needed imported prophets and warnings. I wonder if those were cities formed by Gadianton robbers for the purpose of having their own special enclave, or whether the robbers had just taken over a place and gradually got rid of everyone who dared to warn them of their perfidy.  Kishkumen  could easily be a city of just Gadianton robbers, since it is stated elsewhere that cities were named after their first founder.

Jacobugath also comes in for special condemnation because in addition to the blood of prophets and saints, they also 1) committed murders, 2) had secret combinations, and 3) destroyed the peace of the people and the government of the land. It is very significant that He calls their wickedness “above all the wickedness of the whole earth” (v9).   This is probably because the secret combination created such a synergy of coordinated, corporatized evil greater than just individuals and it affected the whole land by destroying the credibility of government and causing the government to be destroyed. (Yet another reason to avoid secret combinations or group-organized evil…) 

The way the Lord says multiple times that He destroyed these places “to hide their iniquities and abominations from before my face” is a great reminder that even if we think our sins are secret, the Lord can still see them.  We can’t hide them from the Lord; apparently only death does that.  And even if they are hidden from the Lord for His relief, they still exist and have to be repented of and had to be atoned for.  And it reminds me that as Christ is the one who atoned for all of our sins and even the worst of what these people did, He would not let them continue to go on in it indefinitely. He removed them from life to stop them.  And we see that He had warned them all, even the worst of them.

After all the tale of destruction has been told, I love that Christ says to those who remain, “Behold, mine arm of mercy is extended towards you, and whosoever will come, him will I receive; and blessed are those who come unto me.” (3 Nephi 9:14)  Maybe they didn’t feel like they had more chance to repent and all this destruction was a punishment, but Christ still extended mercy in the middle of it.  Their lives were extended and that was a mercy. The invitation to repent and return was given, and that was extended mercy. They were not beyond help.

I’ve noticed and Elder Bednar pointed out in the recent Christmas devotional that Christ saved a bunch of Christians among the Nephites simply by being born, but I think it could also be said that He saved a bunch of Christians through the signs of His death as well.  We don’t have the accounts of all the circumstances whereby those who were saved were guiding to remove them from danger in those natural cataclysms while the wicked from the same families were destroyed. But it is evident that His death saved many, not just spiritually, but temporally.  With every major event of His life, Christ was the means of saving those who believed in Him, and His second coming will be another event of salvation for the righteous.

Lessons fromPahoran Jr. Versus Brothers in Helaman 1

Next to the story of Laman, Lemuel, and Nephi, the story of Pahoran, Paanchi, and Pecumeni in Helaman 1 ranks as one of the most effective warnings against sibling rivalry in the Book of Mormon.  

1 And now behold, it came to pass in the commencement of the fortieth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi, there began to be a serious difficulty among the people of the Nephites.

2 For behold, Pahoran had died, and gone the way of all the earth; therefore there began to be a serious contention concerning who should have the judgment-seat among the brethren, who were the sons of Pahoran.

3 Now these are their names who did contend for the judgment-seat, who did also cause the people to contend: Pahoran, Paanchi, and Pacumeni.

4 Now these are not all the sons of Pahoran (for he had many), but these are they who did contend for the judgment-seat; therefore, they did cause three divisions among the people.

We don’t even know what their birth order was, but we can imagine one of them as an oldest child seeking to keep the authority he has wielded all his childhood.  We can imagine the others seeking to gain some ascendency so that they can have some additional respect among all the sons of the great chief judge.  This sibling rivalry became magnified to national proportions, since it caused three divisions among the people.  

5 Nevertheless, it came to pass that Pahoran was appointed by the voice of the people to be chief judge and a governor over the people of Nephi.

6 And it came to pass that Pacumeni, when he saw that he could not obtain the judgment-seat, he did unite with the voice of the people.

The single bright spot in this story is that Pecumeni, when he saw that he couldn’t win, united with the voice of the people and upheld his brother as chief judge.  There is a good example here of unselfishly celebrating the accomplishments of our siblings and supporting them, even if it feels like it is at our expense. (If only Paanchi had decided to do the same.)

7 But behold, Paanchi, and that part of the people that were desirous that he should be their governor, was exceedingly wroth; therefore, he was about to flatter away those people to rise up in rebellion against their brethren.

We are not given any of the reasons behind Paanchi’s anger.  He might have had good reason; maybe he was ticked at underhanded campaigning tactics. Or it may have just been pride and desire for self-aggrandizement that drove him.  At any rate, he could not accept defeat, and the text says he was “about to” flatter followers toward a rebellion. 

8 And it came to pass as he was about to do this, behold, he was taken, and was tried according to the voice of the people, and condemned unto death; for he had raised up in rebellion and sought to destroy the liberty of the people.

Pahoran’s (2) capture of his brother was according to precedent, as during the previous extended war with the Lamanites his father Pahoran (1) and Captain Moroni had to strictly enforce a law by which any found denying their freedom, or refusing to take up arms to defend their country, fighting against their country, were put to death.

Yet Paanchi and his followers probably took the view that it is one thing to be “about to” flatter people and start a rebellion, but it is quite another to actually do it.  It seems Pahoran took Paanchi’s premeditation and preplanning of rebellion as grounds to try him as a criminal as if the rebellion had actually occurred.  Mormon maybe has revealed to us here why Paanchi’s faction felt pushed toward criminal methods of trying to get what they want with assassination.  Before, they only wanted to rebel, but when Paanchi was taken and tried and condemned, they decided that he should be killed.

At this point we should also consider there may be strong family programming influencing both Pahoran and Paanchi’s actions.  Their father Pahoran (1) was once ousted from the judgment seat.  Pahoran (1) had to flee and then try to drum up support from the populace (and the army) to get enough backing to retake his judgment seat.  This experience would have made a deep impression not only on his mind, but the minds of his sons.  Furthermore, Pahoran (1) would certainly add to that impact by reinforcing to his sons the personal lessons that he learned about dealing strictly with rebels and how to rally popular support when ousted.

It is possible that both Pahoran (2) and Paanchi felt they were playing a part in a scenario similar to what their father went through, both making the assumption that it was time to use the lessons their father taught them.  Even though Paanchi did not have the voice of the people, he probably located himself in the story as the ousted-but-rightful judge who had to drum up support in order to claim his place.  Pahoran (2) probably located himself in the story as the judge who was strictly quelling rebellion.   Somehow they became prisoners to their father’s experience and couldn’t see how their situation might require different responses.  It may also be that their peculiar status in a highly visible family and relationship to each other was uniquely qualified to illustrate that law’s weakness or susceptibility to abuse.  The tragedy is almost Shakespearean.

9 Now when those people who were desirous that he [Paanchi] should be their governor saw that he was condemned unto death, therefore they were angry, and behold, they sent forth one Kishkumen, even to the judgment-seat of Pahoran, and murdered Pahoran as he sat upon the judgment-seat.

If Paanchi thought he was the rightful judge, then his followers probably considered the conflict an actual war and sent Kishkumen as a Teancum-like measure to assassinate the “enemy leader.”  Perhaps they saw it as eye-for-an-eye retribution, if Paanchi had been executed (although the text is not exactly clear on whether Paanchi actually was executed or not.  It only says he was “condemned unto death.”)  Or, the fact that their open opposition had been violently suppressed made them decide to take their opposition underground. But whatever they thought about the justice of their measures, it was wrong, and unfortunately, this brought assassination into the political arena during peacetime, and once brought in, it stayed.

10 And he was pursued by the servants of Pahoran; but behold, so speedy was the flight of Kishkumen that no man could overtake him.

11 And he went unto those that sent him, and they all entered into a covenant, yea, swearing by their everlasting Maker, that they would tell no man that Kishkumen had murdered Pahoran.

12 Therefore, Kishkumen was not known among the people of Nephi, for he was in disguise at the time that he murdered Pahoran. And Kishkumen and his band, who had covenanted with him, did mingle themselves among the people, in a manner that they all could not be found; but as many as were found were condemned unto death. (Helaman 1:1-12)

It’s the beginning of the awful Gadianton Robbers.  I ran across a website that synthesized Hugh Nibley’s thoughts on the Gadiantons’ essential nature as distilled from the Book of Mormon:

“Let us summarize the essential nature of what some have called ‘Gadiantonism’:

“Objectives.

(1) ‘Power and gain,’ the two being interactive: power wins gain and gain wins power for whoever has either.

(2) Control or overthrow of the government; using political office ‘to rule and do according to their wills, that they might get gain and glory’ (Helaman 7:5).

“Methods.

(1) Secret agreements between individuals and groups. The Gadiantons are essentially an underground movement.

(2) Assassination. These two things, ‘secret combinations’ and ‘that men should shed blood,’ have been forbidden by God ‘in all things . . . from the beginning of man’ (Ether 8:19).

(3) "Payola": ‘Akish did offer them money’  (Ether 9:11); ‘letting the guilty . . . go unpunished because of their money’ (Helaman 7:5).

(4) Skillful propaganda and public relations: ‘flattering words.’

(5) The hate campaign: a steady output of charges, accusations, and rumors, in the manner of Amalickiah: Accuse--always accuse. Eagerness to accuse is from the devil, as Brigham Young often taught.

(6) Intimidation: ‘breathing out many threatenings,’ operating ‘by the hand of secrecy,’ wearing fearsome disguises (3 Nephi 4:7).

(7) Showmanship, e.g., the picturesque uniforms and romantic appeal to the young (3 Nephi 1:29).

(8) Tight control of members--death penalty for betrayal (Ether 8:14; Helaman 1:11).

“Attitude.

(1) The Gadiantons were totally partisan, the laws and interests of the combination taking priority over all other laws and interests.

(2) All were ambitious, hence the labor for power and gain: Cain is the type and model.

(3) The combinations were highly competitive, feuding fiercely among themselves.

(4) They sought to project a noble image, with much talk of rights and wrongs, high courage and upright character (the letter to Lachoneus).

(5) They professed piety and religion, swearing their forbidden oaths not by the demons but ‘by the God of heaven’ (Ether 8:14), ‘by their everlasting Maker’ (Helaman 1:11).

(6) They were paranoid, always attributing their troubles to the wickedness of others; never the aggressors, they are constantly seeking to avenge their wrongs. Vengeance is their watchword.

“Ecology.

(1) They flourish best in an affluent business society, and wither in times of poverty.

(2) They crystallize around ambitious individuals.

(3) They readily coalesce with king-men, would-be nobility, great families, ambitious local officials, and rapacious Lamanite overlords, i.e., with all who are opposed to popular government among the Nephites.

(4) They have destroyed every civilization in the New World in which they have been able to thrive.

(5) They cannot thrive or even survive without the acceptance and encouragement of the society in general. Being predatory and non-productive, i.e., parasites, they must have a complacent society to host and support them. Such a society is one which accepts as desirable the Gadianton goals of power and gain.

(6) They can become dormant for long periods of time and then, when circumstances are favorable, suddenly appear in full strength and vigor, their plans having been buried and preserved intact against the day of opportunity.

“The Gadiantons, terrible as they were, are treated more as a symptom than as a disease: the society that has them is sick, but they are like maggots that prey only on dead tissue; they simply exploit the evil situation that gives them their opportunity.” (http://josephsmith.com/wp-content/content/Joseph_Smith_Book_of_Mormon/Helaman6.htm. Adapted from Hugh Nibley’s Since Cumorah, pp. 370-2)

Some concluding observations and lessons from this story:

·      Sibling rivalry is a very bad thing among adults.  Even if national elections aren’t involved, it is still bad.  It forces relatives to take sides and can turn the family into a battleground.  Hostilities become even more deep-seated and can last for generations.  (The whole Nephite-Lamanite opposition is another example of this.)

·      It almost seems as if there is an element of offense and revenge that underlies what happens.  Paanchi was offended by Pahoran’s win, so he decides to rebel.  Pahoran is offended by Paanchi’s anger and planning to rebel, so he decides to take him and try him for treason and condemn him to death.  Paanchi’s supporters are offended by Pahoran’s brand of justice, so they decide to have Pahoran assassinated.  At any point individuals involved could have decided to just stop the cycle of offense and revenge, but no one did. 

·      Pahoran Jr. and Paanchi may have been prisoners of their father’s difficult experience.  Sometimes we learn the lessons of the previous generation too well to the point that we become unable to imagine alternative responses that might be more appropriate.  This is why it is so heroic and amazing when someone can break out of a cycle of family abuse, addiction, or divorce.

·      People are susceptible to be tempted into forming secret combinations when open opposition to the powers that be is violently suppressed. 

The Sign in the Questioning of Seantum for His Brother’s Murder, Helaman 9:25-38

In Helaman 9 when the prophet Nephi gives the second sign to the unbelieving judges, there are some very odd features about it that have puzzled me more and more.

25 And now behold, I will show unto you another sign, and see if ye will in this thing seek to destroy me.

26 Behold I say unto you: Go to the house of Seantum, who is the brother of Seezoram, and say unto him—

27 Has Nephi, the pretended prophet, who doth prophesy so much evil concerning this people, agreed with thee, in the which ye have murdered Seezoram, who is your brother?

28 And behold, he shall say unto you, Nay.

29 And ye shall say unto him: Have ye murdered your brother?

30 And he shall stand with fear, and wist not what to say. And behold, he shall deny unto you; and he shall make as if he were astonished; nevertheless, he shall declare unto you that he is innocent.

31 But behold, ye shall examine him, and ye shall find blood upon the skirts of his cloak.

32 And when ye have seen this, ye shall say: From whence cometh this blood? Do we not know that it is the blood of your brother?

33 And then shall he tremble, and shall look pale, even as if death had come upon him.

34 And then shall ye say: Because of this fear and this paleness which has come upon your face, behold, we know that thou art guilty.

35 And then shall greater fear come upon him; and then shall he confess unto you, and deny no more that he has done this murder.

36 And then shall he say unto you, that I, Nephi, know nothing concerning the matter save it were given unto me by the power of God. And then shall ye know that I am an honest man, and that I am sent unto you from God.

37 And it came to pass that they went and did, even according as Nephi had said unto them. And behold, the words which he had said were true; for according to the words he did deny; and also according to the words he did confess.

38 And he was brought to prove that he himself was the very murderer, insomuch that the five were set at liberty, and also was Nephi. (Helaman 9:25-38)

Take that first question, “Has Nephi, the pretended prophet, who doth prophesy so much evil concerning this people, agreed with thee, in the which ye have murdered Seezoram, who is your brother?”  The question is technically a loaded one about on par with “Have you stopped beating your wife, yes or no?”  The question Nephi tells them to ask presupposes that Seantum has murdered Seezoram, and an innocent man would object to that presupposition, as would a guilty man who wished to conceal his guilt.  Yet it is very strange that with all the other emotional and physical reactions that Nephi prophesies that Seantum will have later, this first question doesn’t seem to raise anything besides a simple “No.”  What is he saying no to?  We can observe that the simple “no” can be taken as a denial of both agreement and murder or an ambiguous denial of one of those.  This doesn’t seem to get anyone anywhere.

I really didn’t understand why Seantum was not worried until the second question, “Have ye murdered your brother?” and not when the first is asked.

What I finally realized was that the judges questioning Seantum were also part of the Gadianton robbers.  This may seem obvious, but as I thought about the true implications of this, I began to realize that this brought into the dialogue a subtext that Seantum would read differently than he would have if the questioning had been done by someone outside the Gadianton robbers.

We have to keep in mind that the Gadianton robbers protected their own from suffering for their crimes or from being exposed to Nephite justice, so the Gadianton judges probably thought that if they did the questioning, they could protect Seantum and that Seantum would easily deny any charge against him.  What they didn’t realize was that the line of questioning that Nephi laid out for them was inspired by God with the purpose of using the Gadianton’s own association and culture of wickedness against them, using questions that would seem almost absurd.  It is likely that if the Gadianton judges suspected any particularly pointed question, they would have altered it or softened it.  That they didn’t alter it meant that they thought there was no way that it would succeed and therefore wasn’t much of a danger to them or Seantum.

What the Lord designed that first question to do was give Seantum the impression that his questioners were speaking to him confidentially about Gadianton business, merely to find out who was involved in a particular caper.  “Has Nephi, the pretended prophet, who doth prophesy so much evil concerning this people, agreed with thee, in the which ye have murdered Seezoram, who is your brother?”  It makes it seem like they were uninformed the murder was supposed to happen and they just want to get the real facts of the matter.  Again, an innocent man would immediately have been worried by this question, but a Gadianton would not, if talking to other Gadiantons.

The second question was, “Have ye murdered your brother?”  The Gadianton judges thought it would be easy for Seantum to make a confident show of denying his involvement and bold-face his way through it.  They fully expected that Seantum would deny it, but they didn’t realize that the question carried subtext to Seantum that they perhaps didn’t mean.  In Seantum’s eyes, that question would reveal that they were not asking in the role of fellow-associates, but as investigators.  Investigation implied they didn’t approve of the murder.  (They may have approved, but the question made him think they didn’t.)  Thinking they didn’t approve might lead Seantum to think that somehow he had run afoul of a particular Gadianton faction that favored Seezoram over him and was angry at what he had done.  He might worry, not about Nephite justice, but Gadianton “justice.”  Or he might begin to wonder if his questioners were going to throw him under the bus and betray him for their own advantage.  It is here that he begins to fear, to not know what to say (since he no longer is sure these questioners on really on his side), and to deny his guilt and declare his innocence.  But his denials are too delayed.. and they are desperate.

Then, they examine Seantum and find blood on the skirts of his cloak.  This puzzled me for a long time because it seemed incredibly stupid that Seantum didn’t get rid of his cloak or have it washed or something.  I mean, really!  You’d think he would be smart enough to notice he had blood on him, right?  It kept bothering me until I noticed it talks about “the skirts of his cloak,” and not “skirt.”  It may have been multiple panels of cloth that made up this cloak, not just one, possibly to indicate status.  The more cloth involved, the more difficult it would be to catch and clean blood spatters.

The next questions the Gadianton judges asked –“From whence cometh this blood? Do we not know that it is the blood of your brother?”—might sound to them like they are making a wild assertion, especially since for all they know Seantum could have killed other people since killing his brother.  But to Seantum it would sound like his questioners had seen his animosity and jealousy against Seezoram building for a long time and had predicted that it was only a matter of time before he struck.  It would make him wonder, “Am I that transparent?”  This would make him worry that other Gadiantons saw it too and disapproved.   This made him tremble and look pale as he worried he would have to deal with the anger of other Gadiantons.

The next thing the Gadianton judges say seems even more strange.  “Because of this fear and this paleness which has come upon your face, behold, we know that thou art guilty.”  It seems odd to tell someone they are guilty just because of the fear they manifest.  It is contrary to all our ideas of justice!  People are supposed to be pronounced guilty because of direct evidence or a collection of circumstantial evidence that strongly supports an inference they committed the crime over other options.  The blood on Seantum’s clothes could be called circumstantial evidence, but they don’t really have a way to say with scientific certainty that it is Seezoram’s blood.   And yet, this wacky line is enough to put the fear of God into Seantum and make him confess everything!  So what is it about that observation that scared Seantum even more?

To the judges making those statements, it would sound like another bold assertion that was full of hot air.  To Seantum, it sounded different—menacing.  Why?  As I pondered  and prayed about this, my mind fastened on the words “thou art guilty,” and I remembered another verse earlier in Helaman:

And whosoever of those who belonged to their band should reveal unto the world of their wickedness and their abominations, should be tried, not according to the laws of their country, but according to the laws of their wickedness, which had been given by Gadianton and Kishkumen. (Helaman 6:24)

Seantum thought he was being pronounced guilty by Gadianton law in an impromptu trial and that he was about to be punished for his crime.  If he had been innocent, being called guilty just because of his fear and paleness would have made him angrily declaim against the injustice of it, but Seantum was too well acquainted with Gadianton trials to see that declaration as meaningless.  It is possible he himself had condemned other Gadiantons under similar groundless causes with flimsy or nonexistent evidence.  Further, he thought he was being condemned for revealing Gadianton doings to the prophet Nephi, thus his fear, his confession, and his violent insistence that Nephi knew nothing about the matter except it were given by the power of God.

So, the miracle of Nephi’s second sign is that even with Gadiantons trying to protect their own in the questioning process, the questions that looked harmless and laughable forced them to condemn one of their own and prove Nephi’s innocence.  It is a prime example of how the Lord takes the wicked in their own craftiness. 

The house that Cain built

In Moses 5:41-56, the sordid story of Cain’s family is set forth. What makes this story odd to a reader (and it does seem odd) is the way we are given a jumble of small bits of information that seems to have little if anything to grab onto and learn from.

41 And Cain was shut out from the presence of the Lord, and with his wife and many of his brethren dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
42 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bare Enoch, and he also begat many sons and daughters. And he builded a city, and he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch.
43 And unto Enoch was born Irad, and other sons and daughters. And Irad begat Mahujael, and other sons and daughters. And Mahujael begat Methusael, and other sons and daughters. And Methusael begat Lamech.
44 And Lamech took unto himself two wives; the name of one being Adah, and the name of the other, Zillah.
45 And Adah bare Jabal; he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and they were keepers of cattle; and his brother’s name was Jubal, who was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.
46 And Zillah, she also bare Tubal Cain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron. And the sister of Tubal Cain was called Naamah.
47 And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah: Hear my voice, ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech; for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.
48 If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech shall be seventy and seven fold;
49 For Lamech having entered into a covenant with Satan, after the manner of Cain, wherein he became Master Mahan, master of that great secret which was administered unto Cain by Satan; and Irad, the son of Enoch, having known their secret, began to reveal it unto the sons of Adam;
50 Wherefore Lamech, being angry, slew him, not like unto Cain, his brother Abel, for the sake of getting gain, but he slew him for the oath’s sake.
51 For, from the days of Cain, there was a secret combination, and their works were in the dark, and they knew every man his brother.
52 Wherefore the Lord cursed Lamech, and his house, and all them that had covenanted with Satan; for they kept not the commandments of God, and it displeased God, and he ministered not unto them, and their works were abominations, and began to spread among all the sons of men. And it was among the sons of men.
53 And among the daughters of men these things were not spoken, because that Lamech had spoken the secret unto his wives, and they rebelled against him, and declared these things abroad, and had not compassion;
54 Wherefore Lamech was despised, and cast out, and came not among the sons of me n, lest he should die.
55 And thus the works of darkness began to prevail among all the sons of men.
56 And God cursed the earth with a sore curse, and was angry with the wicked, with all the sons of men whom he had made;
57 For they would not hearken unto his voice, nor believe on his Only Begotten Son, even him whom he declared should come in the meridian of time, who was prepared from before the foundation of the world.
58 And thus the Gospel began to be preached, from the beginning, being declared by holy angels sent forth from the presence of God, and by his own voice, and by the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Moses 5:41-58)

Principles and doctrines are noticeably absent and it is hard to grab onto enough to form even a cautionary tale. (Why should we care that Jabal was the father of those who dwelt in tents or that Tubal Cain instructed every artificer in brass and iron? Why give us a map of Lamech’s genealogy and posterity if they were wicked? Why do we care that Lamech told his wives about the murder he committed? Why would he tell them if he was part of a secret combination? Why is this included in the Pearl of Great Price? What is valuable about it?)

The first thing I did when studying this section was to pray to understand it and learn from it. (Always smart to do when confused.) Then I started by comparing the verses in this block to the verses in Genesis 4. The Genesis account ends abruptly after Lamech reveals the murder to his wives, so I knew that everything after that in Moses 5 is supposed to throw some light on it.

Verse 49 reveals that Lamech killed Irad. Who is Irad? Suddenly the genealogy in v42-43 becomes important; Irad is Lamech’s great grandfather. What an enormous crime to kill someone so instrumental in giving you life! And notice how Lamech refers to his victim—“I have slain a man..” Irad is only “a man” to Lamech.

Verse 50 says that Lamech killed Irad for the sake of the oath and not to get gain. We learn what kind of oath this was from Ether 8:13 in which Akish makes his family and friends take the oath that if they should vary from the assistance asked of them or divulge what was made known to them, they should lose their lives. This is evidently what Irad did—he made known their secret. The only reason that I can think of for Irad to expose those secret combinations is if he wanted to escape them and work to make an end of them. It seems that Irad had begun to repent. But Lamech would not tolerate that, even if Irad was his great grandfather. So he killed him. So we can clearly see that Moroni’s words about secret combinations are true; the devil uses these oaths to keep men in darkness (Ether 8:16), to make the cost of repentance seem too high and discourage anyone from leaving secret combinations.

Verse 51 tells us this secret combination was from the days of Cain, with works in the dark, and they knew every man his brother. It was a family matter, and everyone knew everyone else who was in on it and Cain involved his posterity in it.

Verse 52 says the Lord cursed Lamech and his house. How terrible that all Lamech’s family had to share in that curse. This may have been why Lamech came to his wives in the first place, to get the torment of the murder off his chest. “Hear my voice, ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech; for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.” (v47) It sounds like a confession, but it isn’t, since he conceals his relationship to the victim and even tries to cover his tracks and deflect investigation by calling his victim a “young man.” All he wants is sympathy for the hurt he feels for committing this grave sin. His wives are the ones closest to him; he should at least have some rest around them, shouldn’t he?

You have to give Adah and Zillah credit. Rather than comforting him, they manifest the proper feeling—outrage. “They rebelled against him, and declared these things abroad, and had not compassion.” (v53) And because of the big stink Adah and Zillah made, no other man in these secret combinations dared to tell his wife(s) anything about their involvement in secret combinations, for fear their wife(s) would react the same way as Adah and Zillah. “And it was among the sons of men. And among the daughters of men these things were not spoken because that Lamech had spoken the secret unto his wives, and they rebelled against him” (v52-53). The secret combinations didn't kill Lamech, though, because he hadn't revealed the secret combination; he had just revealed the murder. (Another reason why Lamech was so cagey.) Yet to put on a show of respectability for their wife(s), those of the secret combination had to publicly repudiate Lamech. “Wherefore Lamech was despised, and cast out, and came not among the sons of men, lest he should die.” (v54)

Something else that stuck out to me was where it said “Wherefore the Lord cursed Lamech, and his house, and all them that had covenanted with Satan; for they kept not the commandments of God, and it displeased God, and he ministered not unto them” (v52). These people were not ignorant of the gospel and the commandments; they had been taught the truth. They knowingly disobeyed.

And even though Lamech’s sons were talented people—Jabal could make tent living comfortable and deal very well with cattle, and Jubal was an amazing musician and music teacher, and Tubal Cain excelled at working with brass and iron (v45-46)—even with their great talents, they were cursed for their wickedness and we are told that “their works were abominations, and began to spread among all the sons of men.” (v52) They used their talents for evil and corrupted others as well, when they could have been a great benefit instead.

I’m sure there is more to learn from this section. When I started looking at this scripture block, it seemed to be a mishmash, but once you get into it, you begin to see that it is actually a story (and a cautionary one) like a three act play, where even the seemingly unimportant details become significant eventually. Actually, from another perspective, it is perfectly organized. All you have to do is think of questions those verses answered and we see how the Lord revealed this to Joseph Smith in response to his questions.

v49 answers the question “Who did Lamech kill?”
v50 answers the question “Why did Lamech kill Irad?”
v51 answers the question “How long was this going on?”
v52 answers the question “Did they know it was wrong?”
v53 answers “How did Lamech’s wives react when they learned Lamech had committed murder?” and “How did everyone else react?”
v55 answers “Did this stop secret combinations?”
v56 answers “How did God feel about it, and how did He try to stop it?”

Ultimately, the greatest thing that we learn from this scripture block that we don’t get from the Genesis account is that God was not pleased with what Cain and his family was doing. We learn God tried everything in His power to reclaim them by having repentance preached to them (v58), that He became angry with them (v56) for their stubbornness and finally punished them by cursing both them (v52,56) and the earth (v56). While the Genesis account makes it seem as if God is ambivalent about all this wickedness and violence and didn’t do anything to try to reclaim them or punish them, the Moses account shows us that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and that He will strive with man to repent until they utterly reject Him.