However I don’t think theological sophistication which seems more conceptual rather than translational develops. I say that since from my perspective the most sophisticated parts theologically are Mosiah and the first half of Alma. While there are some sophisticated typology in 2 Nephi that seems a different issue.

While one could argue relative to baptism a development, the problem is that 2 Nephi baptism is less developed than what we see in Mosiah 18 onwards. Also if we’re going with the translation rather than composition model I’d not expect that to appear.

To me the most interesting symbolism you don’t really find as strong in the New Testament (although elements are there) is the exodus pattern. That makes a lot of sense in terms of our particular understanding of the plan of salvation. We wander in the wilderness then baptism is the imitation of Christ that brings us to the promised land that is the kingdom of God.

Some people have latched on to Margaret Barker’s ideas about the temple in the period around Jeremiah and Josiah. (Kevin Barney has written a fair bit using Barker) Barker tends to see the Deuteronomists as centralizing the religious cult so that only practice in Jerusalem was accepted. In the Old Testament you see some of that tension surviving the redactions in the post-exilic period when the canon was finalized. So the high places are condemned, in part because of their use in syncristic worship. Yet Lehi and Nephi have no trouble following the pattern of sacrifice in high places and other alters more akin to what you see with Abraham or Moses. Barker suspects that the divinine feminine in this period gets removed due to the connection with Baal worship. Yet most scholars assume that at some point in pre-exilic Israel the divine pantheon was much closer in similarity to the Canaanite pantheon with a heavenly mother. The removal of the high places outside of the centralized temple was often seen as tied to the divine mother. A few apologists have argued that these earlier traditions are present in the Book of Mormon in the form Nephi’s vision takes. A lot of the description of the Tree of Life as well as Mary have elements of the divine feminine in them.

As to the rites themselves, it’s hard to say what develops when. Most of the evidence we have is from after the exile when the various traditions are more solidified. The Book of Mormon doesn’t really specify much. The closes we get is Alma 12-14 but that’s really vague. We know that whatever is going on, that there’s an early tradition of imitating Christ. With Mosiah 15 we have something very similar to Merkebah literature such as in 3 Enoch. Yet obviously this is after 400 years of Nephite and Palestinian Jewish evolution. So what these Merkabah traditions (often tied to kingship and being made a priest) were like for Nephi isn’t clear. The emphasis for both Benjamin and Abinadi is taking Christ’s name in an apparently quasi-mystic and covenant fashion. Is that new among the Nephites or does it reflect something Lehi held? It’s hard to say. I’m going to touch upon a few speculations in my next post.

Your point about priests is worth commenting on too. The Deuteronomists, as I mention, centralize the cult in Jerusalem presumably elevating the place of the Levitical tribe. Lehi and Nephi clearly practice sacrifice independent of the Levitical priesthood. The question of how the Law of Moses was practiced without Levites is a traditional question of the Book of Mormon. There have been lots of speculations ranging from they brought a Levite with them to the old distinction between the Sons of Levi and the Sons of Moses having two rival priesthoods. In this case the Nephites take the Sons of Moses tradition that has only hints in the existing Old Testament as a rival priesthood. (Interesting the Sons of Moses make a reappearance in D&C 84) The paper “Priestly Lineages in History and Rhetoric” is worth reading on this.

“Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye *have entered* into a covenant”

I seem to recall (whether from a class or some instruction manual) that the assumption is that Nephi and his descendants officiated using the Melchizedek priesthood. Not sure how I feel about that assertion, but it’s interesting to contemplate New World non-Levite Israelites trying to replicate rites that they’ve never witnessed with instruction from a man who was 14 or 15 the last time he was in Jerusalem.