This isn\u2019t a lesson; it is the notes from which I will prepare a lesson. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Note: \u00a0I\u2019m following the lesson outline the Gospel Doctrine manual uses (Lesson #3: \u00a01 Nephi 8-11, 12:16-18, 15 and Lesson #4: \u00a01 Nephi 12-14), but I won\u2019t be teaching it that way. \u00a0In the past, I\u2019ve never found it possible to get past chapter 8 anyway, so it is a moot point for me, but even if I could cover more material, I think it is better to consider Nephi\u2019s experience (1 Nephi 11-15) in its entirety. \u00a0I have no idea why they decided to separate 1 Ne 12-14; I think it is counterproductive to try to understand those chapters outside of their native context in Nephi\u2019s vision. \u00a0This<\/a> article, particularly the second section, explains why.<\/p>\n Write on the board:<\/p>\n strait=narrow (could be crooked) CHAPTER 8<\/strong><\/p>\n 1 And it came to pass that we had gathered together all manner of seeds of every kind, both of grain of every kind, and also of the seeds of fruit of every kind.<\/strong><\/p>\n Is this a deliberate allusion to the creation account in Genesis?<\/p>\n I can\u2019t help but feel that instead of a throw-away line, this is somehow the interpretive key to the vision. \u00a0This<\/a> article suggests that you can\u2019t gather seeds without eating fruit, so this becomes a real-world link to Lehi\u2019s vision; one where L&L have been eating fruit, and in a context where they likely would have understood that their future physical survival depended on eating the fruit. \u00a0This experience would have involved eating fruit but with a focus on seeds, whereas Lehi\u2019s vision is focused on eating fruit with no mention of seeds. \u00a0Why might that be? \u00a0(It might work well to start class with v2 and then read this verse after studying the vision. \u00a0At that point, ask the class what difference v1 makes and then discuss the paragraph above.)<\/p>\n \u00a02 And it came to pass that while my father tarried in the wilderness he spake unto us, saying: Behold, I have dreamed a dream; or, in other words, I have seen a vision.<\/strong><\/p>\n How will this vision compare to his previous ones?<\/p>\n I\u2019m going to ask my class as we read to just stick to the text of Lehi\u2019s vision and not, at this point, incorporate insights that they get either from Nephi\u2019s vision or from Nephi\u2019s later explanations to his brothers. \u00a0I think this is important because (1) it honors the way the BoM is structured and (2) the visions are different and serve different purposes, and so it is helpful at this point to take them separately. \u00a0But we\u2019ll integrate next week!<\/p>\n How is your interpretation of the vision affected by the fact that the vision is presented in the context of Lehi sharing it with his family, and not just the vision itself?<\/p>\n 3 And behold, because of the thing which I have seen, I have reason to rejoice in the Lord because of Nephi and also of Sam; for I have reason to suppose that they, and also many of their seed, will be saved.<\/strong><\/p>\n (How) does this relate to the \u201cseed\u201d reference in v1?<\/p>\n We\u2019ll learn later that partaking of the fruit doesn\u2019t guarantee salvation (because some of the partakers are later ashamed and wander off). \u00a0So what are we to make of this conclusion?<\/p>\n Joe Spencer:<\/p>\n It\u2019s interesting that Lehi here speaks of being \u201csaved.\u201d What does he mean by this term? Should this be understood in a strong soteriological sense\u2014saved from death and hell, etc.? Or does it have a more down-to-earth meaning\u2014saved, say, from the destruction of Jerusalem.\u00a0 Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n 4 But behold, Laman and Lemuel, I fear exceedingly because of you; for behold, methought I saw in my dream, a dark and dreary wilderness.<\/strong><\/p>\n Skousen omits \u201cin my dream\u201d from the most likely original reading. \u00a0How would you understand the verse differently without those words?<\/p>\n Should we be concerned that Lehi\u2019s communication of this vision to his sons functions as a sort of predestination? \u00a0That is, could it have left them feeling that they had no choice in the matter? \u00a0(The same could apply to Nephi and Sam in the previous verse.)<\/p>\n Why is Sariah mentioned in neither v3 nor v4?<\/p>\n Shouldn\u2019t the \u201cbehold\u201d be followed by either \u201cI have reason to suppose that you wouldn\u2019t be saved\u201d or \u201cbecause you didn\u2019t eat the fruit\u201d to parallel the previous verse? \u00a0Does Lehi leave open why he is afraid or is he afraid because of the dark and dreary wilderness? \u00a0The latter might work grammmatically, but is somewhat odd in that *Lehi* was in the wilderness, \u00a0not (just) his sons.<\/p>\n It is probably fair to say that Lehi is currently, in real life, living in a dark and dreary wilderness and v1 told us that his family (presumably all of them?) were partaking of fruit. \u00a0How do Lehi\u2019s actual circumstances relate to the vision?<\/p>\n Was Lehi commanded to convey this information, or was this his choice? \u00a0If so, was it a mis-step? \u00a0Was he sowing problems by dividing his boys this way? \u00a0(Any parenting expert today would tell you never to compare your kids.)<\/p>\n NB joy in v3 and fear here. \u00a0Are these the emotions that we would have expected? \u00a0Do we consider fear and joy opposites? \u00a0Should we?<\/p>\n What is accomplished–either for the boys or for the reader–by relating the impact that the dream had on Lehi before relating its content?<\/p>\n Does \u201cmethought\u201d mean \u201cI thought but perhaps I was wrong\u201d? \u00a0The only other use of \u201cmethought\u201d in scripture is Alma 36:22, which refers to a vision of Lehi\u2019s (but not this one).<\/p>\n Lehi did not directly address Nephi and Sam in the previous verse but speaks directly to L&L here. \u00a0Is that significant?<\/p>\n \u00a05 And it came to pass that I saw a man, and he was dressed in a white robe; and he came and stood before me.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why man and not angel? \u00a0Are we being asked to assume that this is a mere mortal, or should we assume otherwise?<\/p>\n Elder Jeffrey R. Holland:<\/p>\n From the beginning down through the dispensations, God has used angels as His emissaries in conveying love and concern for His children. \u00a0. . . Usually such beings are not seen. Sometimes they are. But seen or unseen they are always near. Sometimes their assignments are very grand and have significance for the whole world. Sometimes the messages are more private. Occasionally the angelic purpose is to warn. But most often it is to comfort, to provide some form of merciful attention, guidance in difficult times. When in Lehi\u2019s dream he found himself in a frightening place, \u201ca dark and dreary waste,\u201d as he described it, he was met by an angel, \u201ca man \u2026 dressed in a white robe; \u2026 he spake unto me,\u201d Lehi said, \u201cand bade me follow him.\u201dLehi did follow him to safety and ultimately to the path of salvation. \u00a0In the course of life all of us spend time in \u201cdark and dreary\u201d places, wildernesses, circumstances of sorrow or fear or discouragement. Our present day is filled with global distress over financial crises, energy problems, terrorist attacks, and natural calamities. These translate into individual and family concerns not only about homes in which to live and food available to eat but also about the ultimate safety and well-being of our children and the latter-day prophecies about our planet. More serious than these\u2014and sometimes related to them\u2014are matters of ethical, moral, and spiritual decay seen in populations large and small, at home and abroad. But I testify that angels are still sent to help us, even as they were sent to help Adam and Eve, to help the prophets, and indeed to help the Savior of the world Himself.\u00a0 Oct 2008 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n It is interesting to me that (1) he reads the man as an angel and (2) that he suggests that this sort of divine aid is the norm, not the exceptional expereince.<\/p>\n Read Rev 6:11, 7:9, 13-14, JS-H 1:31-32. \u00a0These are the only other scriptural references to \u201cwhite robe.\u201d \u00a0(Although, more generally, there are some other similar situations.) \u00a0What do you conclude?<\/p>\n Charles Swift:<\/p>\n Though there have been other interpretations of whom the man in the white robe represents in Lehi’s dream, from a messenger to a Christ-figure to Moses, I believe that John the Revelator is one important possibility.\u00a0 Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n What I find more interesting here than trying to peg down who the mysterious man in the white robe was (I think settling on John the Revelator is too speculative) is this question: \u00a0why aren\u2019t we just told who it was?<\/p>\n 6 And it came to pass that he spake unto me, and bade me follow him.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why don\u2019t we get the man\u2019s direct speech? \u00a0Did the man say more than \u201cfollow me\u201d?<\/p>\n 7 And it came to pass that as I followed him I beheld myself that I was in a dark and dreary waste.<\/strong><\/p>\n Is this \u201cwaste\u201d different from the dark and dreary wilderness in v4? \u00a0(These are the only scriptural references to \u201cdark and dreary.\u201d)<\/p>\n Are we to draw a contrast between the white robe and the dark waste? \u00a0If so, what would be conclude?<\/p>\n Charles Swift:<\/p>\n An excellent example of reversal occurs when Lehi finds himself in “a dark and dreary wilderness,” a guide in a white robe appears, and Lehi follows him to “a dark and dreary waste” (see 1 Nephi 8:4\u20147). We expect Lehi’s guide to bring him to a place of light and safety, but instead the prophet is taken to yet another dark and dreary place. What kind of deliverance figure, clothed in the powerful symbol of a white robe, would take a prophet from one dark place to another?\u201d \u00a0Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n 8 And after I had traveled for the space of many hours in darkness, I began to pray unto the Lord that he would have mercy on me, according to the multitude of his tender mercies.<\/strong><\/p>\n We always rush past the \u201cmany hours.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0Pause for a moment to think about how terrifying it would be to travel for many hours in the dark. \u00a0What should we learn from this?<\/p>\n What do you think Lehi was feeling during this time? \u00a0Why did the Lord put Lehi through this uncomfortable experience? \u00a0Is it punitive?<\/p>\n What happened to the man in the white robe? \u00a0Is he no longer there–and that\u2019s why Lehi has to pray to the Lord? \u00a0Or is \u201cpraying to the Lord\u201d the same as \u201casking the man in the white robe\u201d?<\/p>\n We\u2019ll later find out that people who try to travel in the dark (or: \u00a0is that different because it is a mist?) get lost. \u00a0Does that happen to Lehi here? \u00a0I\u2019ve seen some semi-critical commentary of this vision for not picturing repentance (it does seem that once you get lost, you\u2019re toast), but I am wondering if it would be legitimate to read this verse as Lehi\u2019s return to the path through prayer (even though no sin is implied, or is it?).<\/p>\n Why is \u201cmercy\u201d what is needed here? \u00a0Is \u201cmercy\u201d the same as \u201clight\u201d or \u201cguidance\u201d?<\/p>\n 9 And it came to pass after I had prayed unto the Lord I beheld a large and spacious field.<\/strong><\/p>\n Do you conclude that the field is an example of the Lord\u2019s tender mercies?<\/p>\n What might the field symbolize? \u00a0Is this related to the references about the field being white and ready to harvest?<\/p>\n Mosiah 11:8-9 and Ether 10:5 are the only times outside of Lehi\/Nephi\u2019s vision that \u201cspacious\u201d is used in the scriptures; both refer to buildings made by the wicked. \u00a0Is the field evil? \u00a0Neutral? \u00a0Good? \u00a0Why is it described as \u2018spacious\u2019 and what does that mean, given that other scriptural uses of \u2018spacious\u2019 are negative?<\/p>\n What does this verse teach you about what you can expect from prayer?<\/p>\n Not much is done with \u201cthe field;\u201d our attention quickly shifts to the tree and remains there. \u00a0Why mention the field at all? \u00a0Why not just behold the tree?<\/p>\n 10 And it came to pass that I beheld a tree, whose fruit was desirable to make one happy.<\/strong><\/p>\n How does this tree relate to the tree of knowledge of good and evil and\/or the tree of life?<\/p>\n How does Lehi know that the fruit is desireable?<\/p>\n \u201cHappy\u201d is interesting. \u00a0Not a lot of scriptures about happiness per se. \u00a0(Some modern translations use happy instead of blessed in the beatitudes.) \u00a0Happy seems a little . . . tepid . . . to me.<\/p>\n The fruit is symbolic (right?). \u00a0What does it symbolize?<\/p>\n Alma 32:39 is the only other scriptural reference to desirable fruit. \u00a0How does that story relate to this one?<\/p>\n It is hard to avoid comparing this verse with Genesis 3:6 (\u201cAnd when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.\u201d) \u00a0What do you make of the similarities and differences between these two stories?<\/p>\n 11 And it came to pass that I did go forth and partake of the fruit thereof; and I beheld that it was most sweet, above all that I ever before tasted. Yea, and I beheld that the fruit thereof was white, to exceed all the whiteness that I had ever seen.<\/strong><\/p>\n NB that \u2018partake\u2019 is not used in the KJV.<\/p>\n W1828 partake: \u00a0\u201cTo take a part, portion or share in common with others; to have a share or part.\u201d \u00a0Why focus on the communal nature of the fruit here?<\/p>\n Was he commanded to do this or did it just seem like the right thing to do?<\/p>\n Joe Spencer:<\/p>\n I think it\u2019s significant that once he gets to the tree, Lehi finds something small, round, and white to press to his lips in a gesture not at all unlike that of Isaiah in Isaiah 6. Remember that Isaiah there, in what I argued in my \u201cpreliminaries\u201d post is a crucial text for Nephi\u2019s record, has a white stone taken from the altar of incense pressed to his lips, thus giving him to join the seraphic throng in singing and shouting praises to God enthroned. Lehi has something of the same experience here, and it is a clear echo of 1 Nephi 1, where we similarly see Lehi being given to ascend into heaven, through the mediation of an angelic figure (with a book, rather than a stone), so that he can shout praises along with the angels surrounding the throne of God. Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Note that he just \u201cgoes forth,\u201d nothing about a rod, path, mists, etc. \u00a0Why is his trip to the fruit so much less complicated than it will be for other people in this vision?<\/p>\n Before he tastes the fruit, he knows that it will make him happy. \u00a0After he tastes it, he notes that it is sweet and white. \u00a0Shouldn\u2019t he have been able to note that it is white *before* he tastes it? I am wondering if [symbolically] only the inside is white and the outside is a different color. And how did he know about \u2018happy\u2019 before he tasted it? \u00a0It seems that the whiteness of the fruit would be noticed first, since he would see it before he tastes it. \u00a0Why does he tell us how it tastes before he tells us how it looks?<\/p>\n (Why) are sweet and white used as proxies for happy?<\/p>\n Virtually all OT references to \u201csweet\u201d refer to the smell of the ceremonial incense, which is generally symbolic of prayer. \u00a0Is that relevant here?<\/p>\n In the NT, Rev 10:9-10 refers to a sweet taste (\u201cAnd I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. \u00a0And I took the little book out of the angel\u2019s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.\u201d). \u00a0Is that relevant here?<\/p>\n Is Alma 32:42 (\u201cAnd because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst.) relevant here?<\/p>\n Does the whiteness of the fruit tie it to the white robe?<\/p>\n Why privilege taste and sight above other senses here?<\/p>\n Other combos of \u201cexceed\u201d and \u201cwhite\u201d include JS-H 1:31-32, Mark 9:3, 1 Ne 13:15, 2 Ne 5:21, and Ether 3:1. \u00a0Do any of those passages nuance your understanding of this one?<\/p>\n 12 And as I partook of the fruit thereof it filled my soul with exceedingly great joy; wherefore, I began to be desirous that my family should partake of it also; for I knew that it was desirable above all other fruit.<\/strong><\/p>\n Skousen reads \u201cdesirous\u201d instead of \u201cdesirable\u201d here. \u00a0Does it make a difference in your understanding of the verse?<\/p>\n Why do sweet and white lead to joy?<\/p>\n Is joy different from happiness? \u00a0I think you could make the case that, before he tasted it, he knew that it would lead to happiness, but only after did he realize that it would lead to joy, and that these are not the same thing. \u00a0I think Alma 27:18 (\u201cNow was not this exceeding joy? Behold, this is joy which none receiveth save it be the truly penitent and humble seeker of happiness.\u201d) is interesting here, because it suggests that seeking happiness can lead to joy. \u00a0We might also link this to the desire for his family to partake–when he thought the fruit just made you happy, he wasn\u2019t focused on sharing it with his family. \u00a0But now that he knows that it leads to joy, he is compelled to share it. \u00a0I wonder if we might also tie this in to Eve\u2019s experience: \u00a0is it fair to say that she thought beforehand that eating the fruit would have a certain effect but it actually had something a little different? \u00a0I also am thinking that he didn\u2019t realize that it was desireable above all other fruit until after he had eaten it.<\/p>\n I like to experiment with new recipes and I am frequently amazed at the results: \u00a0sometimes I think something will rock, and I can barely eat it. \u00a0Other times I have pretty low expectations, but a dish knocks my socks off. \u00a0You just can\u2019t know until you taste it . . .<\/p>\n What\u2019s with all of the superlatives?<\/p>\n Elder Richard G. Scott:<\/p>\n When in a dream Lehi partook of the fruit of the tree of life and was filled with joy, his first thought was to share it with each member of his family, including the disobedient.\u00a0 April 1988 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I like the \u201cincluding the disobedient\u201d there. \u00a0I think too often we treat it as our role to exclude the disobedient, to be sure that they are adequately punished for their choices.<\/p>\n Marion D. Hanks:<\/p>\n I conceive this to be the simplest and most understandable of human emotions. That which is beautiful and good and satisfying to the soul is infinitely more so when shared with those we love. I believe this is the foundation of the missionary work of the Church, of the Primary program and the genealogical program and the serviceman’s program, and every other effort made by the Church to lift and inspire and strengthen the individual child of God. Oct 1961 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I love that.<\/p>\n 13 And as I cast my eyes round about, that perhaps I might discover my family also, I beheld a river of water; and it ran along, and it was near the tree of which I was partaking the fruit.<\/strong><\/p>\n I think \u201ccast . . . eyes . . . round about\u201d may be a technical phrase in the BoM with a connotation of spiritual eyes opening. \u00a0It doesn\u2019t seem to always work this way, but many references suggest something more than just \u201clooking over there.\u201d \u00a0If my hunch is right, then I think we can\u2019t avoid the conclusion that \u201cLehi\u2019s eyes were now opened as a result of partaking of the fruit.\u201d \u00a0Additionally, he is casting his eyes in order to \u201cdiscover his family,\u201d and it is the opening of Eve\u2019s eyes that makes it possible for her to have children (right?). \u00a0Further, despite the fact that we ignore those verses, the rivers in the creation story get a ton of airtime (=verses), and look, folks, we\u2019ve got a river here, too. \u00a0In which case, we can\u2019t avoid comparing this story with Eve\u2019s experience. \u00a0Some thoughts on that: \u00a0What happens by changing the gender of the eater? \u00a0How does Sariah\u2019s role in the dream compare with Adam\u2019s role in the garden? \u00a0Where\u2019s Satan in Lehi\u2019s dream? \u00a0Does the fruit symbolize the same thing in both visions? \u00a0In what other ways are Lehi\u2019s and Eve\u2019s experiences similar and different? \u00a0Following this analogy, are L&L and Nephi readable as Cain and Abel?<\/p>\n Thoughts about the river here<\/a>.<\/p>\n What does the river symbolize? What about the river in the New Jerusalem at the end of the book of Revelation?<\/p>\n Given that he was actually looking for his family, does seeing the river constitute some sort of a fail?<\/p>\n Is the running of the river and\/or its nearness to the tree significant?<\/p>\n 14 And I looked to behold from whence it came; and I saw the head thereof a little way off; and at the head thereof I beheld your mother Sariah, and Sam, and Nephi; and they stood as if they knew not whither they should go.<\/strong><\/p>\n Is this a criticism of the faith of Sariah, Sam, and Nephi? \u00a0How else could you read it?<\/p>\n Why \u201cyour mother\u201d? \u00a0Don\u2019t they know that?<\/p>\n Why are they unsure about where to go? \u00a0(Lehi wasn\u2019t.)<\/p>\n 15 And it came to pass that I beckoned unto them; and I also did say unto them with a loud voice that they should come unto me, and partake of the fruit, which was desirable above all other fruit.<\/strong><\/p>\n This seems unusually participatory for a dream\/vision. \u00a0Why is it that way?<\/p>\n Why the loud voice?<\/p>\n 16 And it came to pass that they did come unto me and partake of the fruit also.<\/strong><\/p>\n Is it significant that they came unto -Lehi- and not the tree?<\/p>\n Again, there\u2019s no path, rod, or mists for them. \u00a0Why?<\/p>\n Lehi partook because of his assessment that the fruit would make him happy. \u00a0They partake because Lehi told him to. \u00a0Is this significant? \u00a0And, getting back to the garden, is it significant that Eve partook because of an assessment of the fruit and Adam partook because Eve told him to?<\/p>\n 17 And it came to pass that I was desirous that Laman and Lemuel should come and partake of the fruit also; wherefore, I cast mine eyes towards the head of the river, that perhaps I might see them.<\/strong><\/p>\n So they are near S, S, and N. \u00a0Why didn\u2019t he see them in v14?<\/p>\n Is Lehi\u2019s attitude toward L&L the same as our attitude toward L&L?<\/p>\n 18 And it came to pass that I saw them, but they would not come unto me and partake of the fruit.<\/strong><\/p>\n Does he extend the same invitation that he did in v15? \u00a0If so, why isn\u2019t it narrated? \u00a0If not, why not?<\/p>\n Why won\u2019t they come?<\/p>\n Joe Spencer:<\/p>\n Lehi\u2019s desire to give the tree\u2019s fruit to his family is duly famous. But the role it plays in the unfolding of Lehi\u2019s dream is almost universally overlooked. It is specifically in looking for his family that Lehi begins to see more of his surroundings, beginning to see the terrain\u2014the difficult<\/em> terrain\u2014he has just passed through. . . .\u00a0They\u2019re interested, it seems, in neither the valley of Lemuel (preferring to stay in Jerusalem\u2014echoes, here, of 1 Nephi 7) nor the privilege of ascension into the presence of God (\u201ca visionary man,\u201d they\u2019ve complained before). . . . what readers tend to fail to notice is that it\u2019s specifically the refusal on the part of Laman and Lemuel that expands Lehi\u2019s vision beyond the bounds of his family. It\u2019s just when they refuse to come that he begins to see more, far more, than just the basic surroundings of the tree. He now begins to see not only a much larger stage with many more props, but whole multitudes of people begin to appear in the scene. . . . it\u2019s important only to recognize that it\u2019s Laman and Lemuel who draw Lehi\u2019s attention to the way others<\/em>, apparently non-familial others, relate to the fruit he\u2019s tasted in the wake of listening to the prophets. Citation<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p><\/blockquote>\n 19 And I beheld a rod of iron, and it extended along the bank of the river, and led to the tree by which I stood.<\/strong><\/p>\n Charles Swift:<\/p>\n The rod, which is such a crucial element of the vision from that point on, does not even exist for Lehi and his family when they are making their way to the tree. (One might argue that perhaps the rod exists but Lehi simply does not see it. However, this is a dream\u2014a vision\u2014not reality. If the viewer of the vision does not see something in the vision, then it does not exist as a part of the vision.) Citation<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Is (one of the) purpose(s) of the rod to keep people from falling in the river?<\/p>\n Is the discovery of the rod in any way related to what comes immediately before it, which is L&L\u2019s refusal to listen to Lehi?<\/p>\n John Tvedtnes:<\/p>\n The term rod of iron is found in Psalm 2:9 and in three passages in the book of Revelation. The first of these (Revelation 2:27) paraphrases the Psalm, while the others (Revelation 12:5; 19:15) build on it. All of them imply that the rod is a symbol of ruling power. In the Old Testament, the rod is typically used to chastise children and wrongdoers (2 Samuel 7:14; Proverbs 13:24; 29:15). . . . Anciently, the rod was used both for correction and for gentle guidance. . . . The shepherd’s rod was a weapon, normally a piece of wood with a knob at one end. With it, he could defend the flock from predators. It was also used to count the sheep at day-end (Leviticus 27:32; Ezekiel 20:37). The staff was a long walking stick, sometimes with a crook at the top. It could also be used for handling sheep, including separating sheep and goats. . . . The use of the rod or staff as a symbol of rule is mentioned in a number of Bible passages (Psalm 110:2; Isaiah 14:5; Jeremiah 48:17; Ezekiel 19:11\u201412, 14; cf. D&C 85:7). The Israelite crown prince Jonathan, son of king Saul, carried a rod (1 Samuel 14:27, 43). Ezekiel 19:11 equates rods with scepters. In Numbers 24:17, the scepter of the Messiah is symbolically used to smite Israel’s enemies. Later Jewish tradition indicates that possession of the rod denotes rule over the world (Midrash Ba-Midbar Rabbah 13:14). \u00a0It is interesting that when Laman and Lemuel were stopped from beating their younger brothers Sam and Nephi with a rod, the angel said to them, “Why do ye smite your younger brother with a rod? Know ye not that the Lord hath chosen him to be a ruler over you, and this because of your iniquities?” (1 Nephi 3:29; cf. 1 Nephi 2:22; 2 Nephi 5:19). It is possible that the elder brothers deliberately selected the rod to punish their brother to symbolize their claim to ruling authority in the family. Compare the story in Numbers 17:2\u201410, where Aaron’s authority as high priest in Israel was established by the miraculous blossoming of his rod. . . . The use of a rod to represent words or speech is found in Proverbs 10:13 and 14:3. In other passages, it refers specifically to the word of God. In Isaiah 30:31, “the voice of the Lord” is contrasted with the rod of the Assyrians. In a few passages, the rod is compared to a covenant with God which, like a rod, can be broken (Ezekiel 20:37; Zechariah 11:10, 14). Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n (How) do these biblical uses of the rod shape your view of the rod here? \u00a0(How) do you think they shaped Lehi\u2019s view?<\/p>\n Later in 11:25, we will find out that the rod of iron is \u201cthe word of God.\u201d To what extent is it appropriate to import that meaning into this chapter?<\/p>\n What is the word of God: \u00a0the scriptures, the spoken word of God, or Jesus Christ? \u00a0Here\u2019s a link<\/a> to all of the scriptural references to word of God.My sense is that in the BoM, \u2018word of God\u2019 is roughly synonymous with \u201cgospel,\u201d not \u201cwritten scriptures.\u201d \u00a0Luke 8:11 is also interesting (\u201cThe seed is the word of God.\u201d).<\/p>\n 20 And I also beheld a strait and narrow path, which came along by the rod of iron, even to the tree by which I stood; and it also led by the head of the fountain, unto a large and spacious field, as if it had been a world.<\/strong><\/p>\n For whether this should read straight or strait, see here<\/a>, here<\/a>, here<\/a>, here<\/a>, and here<\/a>.\u00a0 Skousen goes with \u201cstraight\u201d here. \u00a0Which do you think is right, and how does it affect your interpretation of the vision? \u00a0How might it apply to your life?<\/p>\n I think we usually read the rod as something that helps you stay on the path, but I think you can read this verse to suggest that the path is something that develops when people have been walking along holding the rod. \u00a0How would this impact your interpretation of the vision?<\/p>\n Again, was the path there when Lehi went to the tree, or does it appear now?<\/p>\n Is this the same field Lehi was in before?<\/p>\n W1828 fountain: \u00a0\u201cA spring, or source of water; properly, a spring or issuing of water from the earth.\u201d<\/p>\n Does the \u201cas if\u201d language mean that it is not<\/em> a\/the world? \u00a0Does the \u201cit\u201d in that phrase refer to the field, or the entire scene?<\/p>\n Joe Spencer:<\/p>\n If we look at this moment of Lehi\u2019s vision through Nephi\u2019s later comments\u2014according to which the rod is the word of God, which we usually interpret as the scriptures\u2014there\u2019s a really nice little lesson in here. The pathway to the celestial kingdom is not self-sufficient; it only serves if one is quite as attentive to the scriptures as to the path itself. Still better, one might conclude that the path is only the worn ground where those clinging to the scriptures have trod; it\u2019s nothing in itself. Thus, to seek the path alone\u2014to attempt just to \u201clive a good life\u201d or just to \u201cserve others\u201d or just to \u201cdo what we\u2019re expected,\u201d etc.\u2014is to run into major difficulties. It\u2019s only those who are buried in scripture who actually make it to eternal life, because they alone can feel their way through the mystifying darkness of the philosophies of men, etc.<\/p>\n I like this little lesson for a lot of reasons, but I want to stick to Lehi\u2019s vision on its own terms, not to turn too quickly to what Nephi has to say about the dream. To be a bit more minimalist, then: the crucial point is just to subordinate the path to the rod. It\u2019s the rod that leads to the tree, and the path is more incidental than anything. To seek the path is to set oneself up for disaster, because it leads through mists of darkness before it arrives at the tree. One might thus say that the path is itself a kind of temptation, a distraction, a simulacrum of the way to the tree. Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n 21 And I saw numberless concourses of people, many of whom were pressing forward, that they might obtain the path which led unto the tree by which I stood.<\/strong><\/p>\n Does \u201cnumberless\u201d allude to the promises re Abraham\u2019s descendants?<\/p>\n W1828: \u00a0concourse \u201cA moving, flowing or running together; confluence; as a fortuitous concourse of atoms; a concourse of men.\u201d \u00a0(I didn\u2019t get the idea of movement until I read that definition; I saw them as stationary, with only some pressing forward. \u00a0Now I am thinking that they are -all- moving, but only some are -moving forward.-)<\/p>\n Why is the path something you have to \u201cobtain\u201d? \u00a0Isn\u2019t it obvious?<\/p>\n Does the \u201cthey\u201d who might obtain the path just refer to the people pressing forward, or to everyone? \u00a0Is there any indication in this verse as to what makes the difference between those who are part of the numberless and those who press forward?<\/p>\n We saw the phrase “numberless concourses” in 1 Nephi 1:8.\u00a0 Is that passage relevant here?<\/p>\n 22 And it came to pass that they did come forth, and commence in the path which led to the tree.<\/strong><\/p>\n Was it Lehi\u2019s calling out to S, S, and N that caused this, or is that coincidental? \u00a0What causes this to happen?<\/p>\n 23 And it came to pass that there arose a mist of darkness; yea, even an exceedingly great mist of darkness, insomuch that they who had commenced in the path did lose their way, that they wandered off and were lost.<\/strong><\/p>\n W1828: \u00a0mist: \u00a0\u201cWater falling in very numerous, but fine and almost imperceptible drops. That which dims or darkens, and obscures or intercepts vision.\u201d \u00a0In other words, a dark fog.<\/p>\n Does the mist arise as a response to people seeking the path?<\/p>\n What does this verse teach us about opposition? \u00a0(My thought: \u00a0good intentions are not enough.)<\/p>\n Boyd K. Packer:<\/p>\n The mist of darkness will cover you at times so much that you will not be able to see your way even a short distance ahead. You will not be able to see clearly. But you can feel<\/em> your way. With the gift of the Holy Ghost, you can feel<\/em> your way ahead through life. Grasp the iron rod, and do not let go.\u00a0 Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Neal A. Maxwell:<\/p>\n A few who have not been Saints, but merely tourists passing through, will depart from the path.\u00a0\u00a0 Oct 1982 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n So there is a point to which you can walk on the path without the iron rod and be OK, but once that mist of darkness shows up, you have to use the rod. \u00a0What does this imply about the symbolism of the path, which seems to be a somewhat neglected topic in the interpretation of the vision? \u00a0My guess would be that it is \u201ctraditional religion,\u201d by which I mean not a specific religious tradition, but rather being religious because it is traditional. That kind of religion can keep you on the path in easy times, but when temptations arise, it is not enough.<\/p>\n Ezra Taft Benson:<\/p>\n When pride has a hold on our hearts, we lose our independence of the world and deliver our freedoms to the bondage of men\u2019s judgment. The world shouts louder than the whisperings of the Holy Ghost. The reasoning of men overrides the revelations of God, and the proud let go of the iron rod.\u00a0 Apr 1989 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Only other scriptural references to mist outside of this vision:<\/p>\n Acts 13:11: \u00a0And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand. Are they related to the mist in this vision?<\/p>\n Is this mist from the filthy water? \u00a0If so, what would that symbolize?<\/p>\n 24 And it came to pass that I beheld others pressing forward, and they came forth and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press forward through the mist of darkness, clinging to the rod of iron, even until they did come forth and partake of the fruit of the tree.<\/strong><\/p>\n What distinguishes these people from those in v23, by which I mean: \u00a0why are these guys and gals able to reach the rod despite the mist but the last group wandered off?<\/p>\n \u2018Clinging\u2019 is not used elsewhere in the scriptures (\u2018cling\u2019 is in D&C 122:6). \u00a0It would seem that the clinging is a good thing, since their attachment to the rod distinguishes themselves from the people in v23 who wander off. \u00a0And yet, come v25, they fail. \u00a0So was the clinging bad? \u00a0Does clinging mean that you regard the rod as an end in itself?<\/p>\n What does the image of clinging to the rod and moving through a dark mist convey to you?<\/p>\n Feast wiki:<\/p>\n Lehi sees that they are “clinging” to the rod of iron. In such a dark setting you might expect people to be holding hands. But nothing is said of people clinging together. No person is leading another by the hand. Maybe the significance of this is that the rod of iron, or as we learn later, the word of God, must be grasped directly, individually, of our own choice. We must know the truth for ourselves. Others can “beckon” us, as Lehi did his family, but we each need to grasp the word of God individually if we are to press forward.\u00a0 Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n 25 And after they had partaken of the fruit of the tree they did cast their eyes about as if they were ashamed.<\/strong><\/p>\n What causes this?<\/p>\n I would have thought that after you ate the fruit you were \u201cdone\u201d or \u201csafe.\u201d \u00a0What does it mean to say that you can still mess up after eating the fruit? \u00a0Is this a hint as to what the fruit symbolizes?<\/p>\n Is there a link to the creation account, where eating the fruit leads to the shame of nakedness?<\/p>\n Wouldn\u2019t you think that knowing the taste of the fruit would prevent you from being swayed by the reaction of others? \u00a0Since that is apparently not the case, what are we to learn from this?<\/p>\n The way v26 reads, it is almost as if Lehi doesn\u2019t notice the building and its inhabitants until the people in v25 do–or *because* the people in v25 do. Why is this?<\/p>\n 26 And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building; and it stood as it were in the air, high above the earth.<\/strong><\/p>\n Brant Gardiner:<\/p>\n The most difficult image is the building standing in the air \u2013 \u201chigh above the earth.\u201d It appears likely that the building is shown detached from the \u201cworld\u201d because the large and spacious field in which Lehi stands is representative of the larger path to celestialization, and the building has no part in that. It is visible to it, it obviously can effect it, but has no true place in the world of the tree. Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Boyd K. Packer:<\/p>\n Largely because of television, instead of looking over into that spacious building, we are, in effect, living inside of it. That is your fate in this generation. You are living in that great and spacious building. Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Is it useful to think of this as an anti-temple?<\/p>\n Is the point that the building has no foundation? \u00a0If so, what does that mean?<\/p>\n Do we assume that a \u201cmist\u201d would be low to the ground and, if so, does that have any relationship to the fact that the building appears high above the earth? \u00a0If so, what is that relationship and what does it symbolize? \u00a0Is the point that people surrounded by mist but no path or rod can see nothing but the building? \u00a0(These questions poached from here<\/a>.)<\/p>\n How can Lehi apprehend that the building is in the air? \u00a0That is, shouldn\u2019t the mist make it impossible for him to tell what the first floor of the building looks like?<\/p>\n President Thomas S. Monson:<\/p>\n The great and spacious building in Lehi\u2019s vision represents those in the world who mock God\u2019s word and who ridicule those who embrace it and who love the Savior and live the commandments (\u201cMay You Have Courage,\u201d Liahona and Ensign, May 2009, 126).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n What does the standing in the air (or: \u00a0as it were iin the air) symbolize?<\/p>\n Is the shift from \u2018field\u2019 to \u2018earth\u2019 significant here?<\/p>\n Is Lehi\u2019s eye casting different from the eye casting in v25? \u00a0If so, how and how do you know?<\/p>\n How do people get in the building if it doesn\u2019t touch the ground? \u00a0How does a building with no foundation stand up? \u00a0Shouldn\u2019t people be afraid to enter it? \u00a0Are they?<\/p>\n Elder L. Tom Perry:<\/p>\n The current cries we hear coming from the great and spacious building tempt us to compete for ownership in the things of this world.\u00a0 Oct 1995 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n 27 And it was filled with people, both old and young, both male and female; and their manner of dress was exceedingly fine; and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit.<\/strong><\/p>\n Skousen reads \u201ccame up\u201d instead of \u201ccome at\u201d here. \u00a0Does that imply that the tree is higher up than the surrounding area? \u00a0Or is it more metaphorical?<\/p>\n Boyd K. Packer:<\/p>\n All of the mocking does not come from outside of the Church. Let me say that again: All of the mocking does not come from outside of the Church. Be careful that you do not fall into the category of mocking. Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n There aren\u2019t too many shout-outs to the ladies in the BoM (although Sariah has been mentioned in this vision); why is this one here? Boyd K. Packer:<\/p>\n One word in this dream or vision should have special meaning to you young Latter-day Saints. The word is after.<\/em> It was after<\/em> the people had found the tree that they became ashamed, and because of the mockery of the world they fell away. . . .\u00a0At your baptism and confirmation, you took hold of the iron rod. But you are never safe. It is after<\/em> you have partaken of that fruit that your test will come. Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The only thing that unifies these people is their dress, and attention is called to this fact. \u00a0What does this symbolize?<\/p>\n Why don\u2019t they go about their own business? \u00a0Why do they bother paying attention to the fruit eaters?<\/p>\n Is the point that partaking of the fruit is public? \u00a0Is the point that it irritates wealthy people?<\/p>\n L. Tom Perry:<\/p>\n Many of you are trying too hard to be unique in your dress and grooming to attract what the Lord would consider the wrong kind of attention. In the Book of Mormon story of the tree of life, it was the people whose \u201cmanner of dress was exceedingly fine\u201d who mocked those who partook of the fruit of the tree. It is sobering to realize that the fashion-conscious mockers in the great and spacious building were responsible for embarrassing many, and those who were ashamed \u201cfell away into forbidden paths and were lost.\u201d Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Neal A. Maxwell:<\/p>\n Church members will live in this wheat-and-tares situation until the Millennium. Some real tares even masquerade as wheat, including the few eager individuals who lecture the rest of us about Church doctrines in which they no longer believe. \u00a0. . . Like the throng on the ramparts of the \u201cgreat and spacious building,\u201d they are intensely and busily preoccupied, pointing fingers of scorn at the steadfast iron-rodders.\u00a0 Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n How does their dress compare with the man in the white robe?<\/p>\n Lehi was mocked as he preached in Jrsm. \u00a0Is that relevant here?<\/p>\n Does the pointing fingers (used nowhere else in scripture) show an example of mocking, or is it something other than mocking? \u00a0What might it be?<\/p>\n If they are mocking those eating the fruit, why did they eat the fruit and then be ashamed later? \u00a0Why did they just not eat it in the first place?<\/p>\n What do these people gain from the finger pointing and the mocking? \u00a0Why aren\u2019t they just doing their own thing?<\/p>\n Joe Spencer:<\/p>\n Though I\u2019m not aware of anyone having offered this interpretation, it seems more than obvious to me: the building in question is the Jerusalem temple. Jeremiah had for years, by this point, been profoundly criticizing the institution of the temple, in particular criticizing the blind faith the people had in it\u2014their conviction that, because they had a temple, Babylon could never destroy the city. It would certainly be fitting that the temple would be filled with the wealthy, and that it was precisely the wealthy establishment who would spend their time mocking those who attain the tree. They mock those who claim to have seen through the veil without having been inside the temple, as they mock those who would leave Jerusalem for the desert to escape from a destruction decreed by \u201cvisionary men.\u201d . . .\u00a0For Latter-day Saints acquainted with the sorts of covenants one makes in the temple, the association of the temple with wealth and excess, not to mention mockery and loud laughter, should be a bit shocking. I suspect the author of the dream\u2014God, that is\u2014meant it to be a bit shocking, though it was probably also quite accurate. I can only hope it\u2019s not accurate today. Same source.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n 28 And after they had tasted of the fruit they were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.<\/strong><\/p>\n Is scoffing just a variation? \u00a0Why not use mocking here?<\/p>\n This verse is out first indication that there is a path that you have to stay on *after* you eat the fruit. \u00a0(How) does this change our understanding of the symbolism of the fruit?<\/p>\n Is it fair to say that people who haven\u2019t (yet) eaten the fruit are spared the mocking?<\/p>\n Going back to the Fall, is there a parallel to the mocking in Eve\u2019s experience? \u00a0If so, what is it?<\/p>\n Why would shame put you on the wrong path? \u00a0Why would lack of shame keep you on the right path?<\/p>\n What makes a path forbidden? \u00a0Are there signs? \u00a0Does the process of feeling shame obscure one\u2019s ability to heed the signs?<\/p>\n Notice the word \u201cfell\u201d in this verse. \u00a0Is this a reference to the fall?<\/p>\n Joseph B. Wirthlin:<\/p>\n The ideal course of life is not always easy. Comparatively few will find it and complete it. It is not a well-marked freeway, but a narrow path with only one entrance. The way to eternal life is straight and narrow. When I think of staying on the right path, I am reminded of Lehi\u2019s dream about the tree of life. In it, the love of God was likened to a tree that bore delicious fruit, fruit that was desirable above all others. As Nephi recorded his father\u2019s words: \u201cAnd I also beheld a strait and narrow path, which came along by the rod of iron, even to the tree. \u2026 And I saw numberless concourses of people, many of whom were pressing forward, that they might obtain the path which led unto the tree.\u201d (1 Ne. 8:20\u201321.) Many of these people later \u201cfell away into forbidden paths and were lost.\u201d (1 Ne. 8:28.) But those who ignored the scoffing and ridicule of the world and held tightly to the rod of iron enjoyed the fruit of the tree. The rod of iron represents the word of God, that leads us to the love of God. (See 1 Ne. 11:25.) You must hold firmly to the rod of iron through the mists and darknesses, the hardships and trials of life. If you relax your grip and slip from the path, the iron rod might become lost in the darkness for a time until you repent and regain your grasp of it.\u00a0 Oct 1989 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n So compared to the v23 people, are these guys better off or worse off?<\/p>\n Why is this the first we are hearing of forbidden paths?<\/p>\n 29 And now I, Nephi, do not speak all the words of my father.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why not, Nephi?<\/p>\n Why \u201cspeak\u201d and not \u201cwrite,\u201d especially since he uses \u201cwrite\u201d in the next verse?<\/p>\n Given v30, I can\u2019t help but feel that it is the 4 Nephi principle at work: \u00a0if everything is going well, we don\u2019t\/won\u2019t have a lot to say about it.<\/p>\n 30 But, to be short in writing, behold, he saw other multitudes pressing forward; and they came and caught hold of the end of the rod of iron; and they did press their way forward, continually holding fast to the rod of iron, until they came forth and fell down and partook of the fruit of the tree.<\/strong><\/p>\n This is what we have seen so far, except that they \u201chold fast\u201d instead of \u201ccling\u201d and they \u201cfell down\u201d before they partake. \u00a0In what ways might those changes be significant?<\/p>\n NB \u201ccontinually.\u201d<\/p>\n Is \u201cfell down\u201d the necessary opposite to \u201cfell away\u201d in v28?<\/p>\n Falling down usually is related to worship; is that the case here? \u00a0If so, what are they worshipping? \u00a0Did Lehi do this?<\/p>\n 31 And he also saw other multitudes feeling their way towards that great and spacious building.<\/strong><\/p>\n Skousen reads \u201cpressing\u201d instead of \u201cfeeling\u201d here. \u00a0That is, I think, a pretty significant change, since \u2018press\u2019 is in the previous verse and it suggests that pressing is a neutral action (could be used for good or ill) and removes the introduction of the concept of \u201cfeeling.\u201d<\/p>\n What, no rod to get you to the building? \u00a0Why not? \u00a0You\u2019d think that would be easier and better guided than getting to the tree.<\/p>\n This is the first group that we have met that have the building as a goal.<\/p>\n 32 And it came to pass that many were drowned in the depths of the fountain; and many were lost from his view, wandering in strange roads.<\/strong><\/p>\n So–is the fountain a bad thing? \u00a0What does it symbolize? \u00a0Is the fountain a symbol for Christ (a good, but not a tame, lion)?<\/p>\n Lost from whose view? \u00a0Was the goal to stay in view? \u00a0What might that symbolize?<\/p>\n Why is wandering bad?<\/p>\n Is there a significant distinction between the strange roads and the forbidden roads? \u00a0Is there a distinction between roads and paths?<\/p>\n Ann M. Dibb:<\/p>\n Nephi says, \u201cAnd many were lost from his view, wandering in strange roads\u201d (1 Nephi 8:32). In difficult times in our own lives, we may find we are also \u201cwandering in strange roads.\u201d Let me reassure you that it is always possible for us to find our way back. Through repentance, made possible by the atoning sacrifice of our Savior, Jesus Christ, we can regain and recommit to a strong grip on the iron rod and feel the loving guidance of our Heavenly Father once again.\u00a0 Oct 2009 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n 33 And great was the multitude that did enter into that strange building. And after they did enter into that building they did point the finger of scorn at me and those that were partaking of the fruit also; but we heeded them not<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Neal A. Maxwell:<\/p>\n So let us have patience and faith as did Lehi who saw pointing fingers of scorn directed at those who grasped the iron rod, which rod, ironically, some of those same fingers once grasped (see 1 Ne. 8:27, 33).\u00a0 Oct 1993 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Nice pick up, since the only use of hands in this vision: \u00a0holding the rod, eating the fruit, pointing.<\/p>\n If (v32) many were lost who were aiming for the building but many people made it, then there must have been a *lot* of people aiming for the building. \u00a0Why? \u00a0Why didn\u2019t they have Lehi\u2019s knowledge that the fruit would make them happy?<\/p>\n Is there a relationship between the strange road and the strange building?<\/p>\n W1828: \u00a0strange: \u00a0\u201cForeign; belonging to anther country.\u201d<\/p>\n The eruption of \u201cme\u201d in this verse is interesting; all previous referents to Lehi had been in the third person. \u00a0Why does this happen here?<\/p>\n W1828: \u00a0heed: \u00a0\u201cTo mind; to regard with care; to take notice of; to attend to; to observe.\u201d \u00a0One of my class members pointed this out and it was a lightbulb moment for me–I had always assumed that \u201cheed\u201d primarily meant \u201clisten to\/obey,\u201d but the nuance of \u201cnotice\u201d puts a different spin on it. \u00a0What are you noticing (even if you are not obeying) that could cause you trouble?<\/p>\n \u201cFinger of scorn\u201d is not used elsewhere in the scriptures. \u00a0It sounds like it should be a part of Festivus.<\/p>\n The vision sets up \u201cbe ashamed\u201d and \u201cignore\u201d as possible reactions to scorn. \u00a0What might we learn from that?<\/p>\n Ted Gibbons:<\/p>\n Take some time to identify the four groups of people mentioned in the dream. Compare the characteristics of each of the groups. You will find Charles Swift:<\/p>\n Lehi’s dream can be divided into three fundamental experiences: that of Lehi (see 1 Nephi 8:5\u201413), his family (see vv. 14\u201418), and the world (see vv. 19\u201433).\u00a0 Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Does that division work for you?<\/p>\n Charles Swift:<\/p>\n Elements of the vision often seem to suddenly appear, without any hint of prior awareness of them and with no foreshadowing in the text. For example, Lehi is standing next to the tree of life but does not see the river until he is looking for his family, even though the river is next to the tree by which he is standing. Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Why is that? \u00a0Is it just accidental to the visionary experience, or are we to learn from it?<\/p>\n Harold B. Lee:<\/p>\n An interesting distinction between those who bring forth good fruit and those who do not is well illustrated in the parable of the sower, as you recall, where the Master described the three categories of presumably church members\u2014those who brought forth fruit\u2014”some an hundredfold,” he said, “some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold” (Matt. 13:8). And in the interpretation of Lehi’s dream in the Book of Mormon, he has four categories.\u00a0 Apr 1964 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Joe Spencer:<\/p>\n Also, I think the simplest, most straightforward interpretation of 1 Nephi 8 has to be in terms of the family\u2019s immediate situation: the tree and the river are where they are staying in the desert, the large and spacious building is Jerusalem or even the temple (as Jeremiah would have interpreted it), etc.\u00a0 Citation: \u00a0comment #2<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n So here are the groups of people:<\/p>\n (1) numberless concourses (so: \u00a0people moving randomly) (How) do these groups relate to Lehi\u2019s family, who face different circumstances? \u00a0And why are those circumstances different?<\/p>\n What modern situations would be represented by these groups? \u00a0I think we all want to be in (4); what is the key to that?<\/p>\n 34 These are the words of my father: For as many as heeded them, had fallen away.<\/strong><\/p>\n Skousen reads \u201cthus is\u201d instead of \u201cthese are.\u201d \u00a0What difference would that make to this verse?<\/p>\n I presume that the \u201cthem\u201d does not refer to \u201cthe words of my father,\u201d but the \u201cthem\u201d at the end of v33, or the people in the building. \u00a0Why does Nephi find the need to insert \u201cthese are the words of my father,\u201d especially given that it introduces an unfortunate ambiguity into the text? \u00a0Since v33 was the words of his father, what is the purpose of reiterating that at the beginning of this verse? \u00a0Presumably it is to call attention to it, but why?<\/p>\n To reiterate the point above, if \u201cheed\u2019 means notice, then simply \u201cpaying attention\u201d is enough to cause you to fall away. \u00a0It doesn\u2019t need to rise to \u201cobeying.\u201d \u00a0That is a powerful warning.<\/p>\n 35 And Laman and Lemuel partook not of the fruit, said my father.<\/strong><\/p>\n Which group were they in? \u00a0Why doesn\u2019t he tell us?<\/p>\n Why the \u201csaid my father\u201d? \u00a0We know, Nephi, we know.<\/p>\n 36 And it came to pass after my father had spoken all the words of his dream or vision, which were many, he said unto us, because of these things which he saw in a vision, he exceedingly feared for Laman and Lemuel; yea, he feared lest they should be cast off from the presence of the Lord.<\/strong><\/p>\n What in the vision led Lehi to conclude that not partaking of fruit = cast off from presence of Lord? \u00a0(Particularly interesting when you make a comparison with Eve, for whom taking the fruit = cast out of the presence of the Lord.)<\/p>\n 37 And he did exhort them then with all the feeling of a tender parent, that they would hearken to his words, that perhaps the Lord would be merciful to them, and not cast them off; yea, my father did preach unto them.<\/strong><\/p>\n The last reference to mercy was when Lehi prayed for it in the dark–(how) is that relevant here?<\/p>\n 38 And after he had preached unto them, and also prophesied unto them of many things, he bade them to keep the commandments of the Lord; and he did cease speaking unto them.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why the last line–isn\u2019t that a given?<\/p>\n Is it appropriate to analyze the BoM looking for parenting fails on Lehi\u2019s part? \u00a0If so, is there one here? \u00a0Are v37-38 and v3-4 the right thing to do with wayward kids?<\/p>\n CHAPTER 9<\/strong> Why see-hear-speak?<\/p>\n Is it significant to the narrative that he was in the valley of Lemuel? \u00a0Is that a point of contact with the field in the vision?<\/p>\n 2 And now, as I have spoken concerning these plates, behold they are not the plates upon which I make a full account of the history of my people; for the plates upon which I make a full account of my people I have given the name of Nephi; wherefore, they are called the plates of Nephi, after mine own name; and these plates also are called the plates of Nephi.<\/strong><\/p>\n Between \u201cafter my own name\u201d and \u201calso called the plates of Nephi,\u201d I feel like Nephi is \u00a0. . . a \u00a0. . . little . . . slow.<\/p>\n What work is this verse doing? \u00a0What effect does it have on the reader?<\/p>\n 3 Nevertheless, I have received a commandment of the Lord that I should make these plates, for the special purpose that there should be an account engraven of the ministry of my people.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cEngraven\u201d strikes me as a really important word in this verse–what does it accomplish?<\/p>\n Usually, we think of a ministry as being the ministry of a leader of some sort–what does Nephi mean by the ministry of my people?<\/p>\n 4 Upon the other plates should be engraven an account of the reign of the kings, and the wars and contentions of my people; wherefore these plates are for the more part of the ministry; and the other plates are for the more part of the reign of the kings and the wars and contentions of my people.<\/strong><\/p>\n Not only are v3-4 terribly redundant, but why do we need to know them? \u00a0Won\u2019t it be obvious when we read?<\/p>\n What does this verse tell us about dividing the world into \u2018secular\u2019 and \u2018religious\u2019 matters? \u00a0Or about \u2018religion\u2019 and \u2018politics\u2019? \u00a0Or about how we should keep our histories? \u00a0Or think about the world?<\/p>\n 5 Wherefore, the Lord hath commanded me to make these plates for a wise purpose in him, which purpose I know not.<\/strong><\/p>\n Moral: \u00a0we don\u2019t always know why we are commanded to do things.<\/p>\n How can he not know the purpose? \u00a0Wouldn\u2019t the Laban experience and surrounding dialogue have made the purpose of keeping a religious record 100% clear to him?<\/p>\n 6 But the Lord knoweth all things from the beginning; wherefore, he prepareth a way to accomplish all his works among the children of men; for behold, he hath all power unto the fulfilling of all his words. And thus it is. Amen.<\/strong><\/p>\n Thinking about this (brief) chapter in its entirely, I am wondering why Nephi included it. \u00a0Particularly given the utter lack of any discussion of writing\/record keeping in the Bible, it stands out as a monument to the self-consciousness of Nephi. \u00a0What purpose(s) does it serve?<\/p>\n CHAPTER 10<\/strong> This seems crazy: \u00a0\u201cI\u2019m going to give my own account, but to do that I have to tell you about my father, which is exactly what I\u2019ve been doing, except when I haven\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n Isn\u2019t the \u201creign\u201d and \u201cministry\u201d combo exactly what he just said he wouldn\u2019t do in the last chapter?<\/p>\n 2 For behold, it came to pass after my father had made an end of speaking the words of his dream, and also of exhorting them to all diligence, he spake unto them concerning the Jews\u2014<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cThe words of his dream\u201d is interesting because it had no direct speech in it.<\/p>\n What is the link–why go from the dream to the Jews?<\/p>\n 3 That after they should be destroyed, even that great city Jerusalem, and many be carried away captive into Babylon, according to the own due time of the Lord, they should return again, yea, even be brought back out of captivity; and after they should be brought back out of captivity they should possess again the land of their inheritance.<\/strong><\/p>\n Did Lehi preach of the return to the people in Jrsm? \u00a0Is there something about his vision that made the return apparent to him? \u00a0If so, was that new knowledge to him?<\/p>\n What effect would this info have had on Sariah, L&L, Sam, and Nephi?<\/p>\n 4 Yea, even six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem, a prophet would the Lord God raise up among the Jews\u2014even a Messiah, or, in other words, a Savior of the world.<\/strong><\/p>\n What is accomplished by labelling him a prophet first?<\/p>\n The juxtaposition of v3 and v4 makes it sound as if the Messiah would be involved in ending the Babylonian captivity, but the timeframe (600 years) makes this impossible. \u00a0What is going on here?<\/p>\n \u201cMessiah\u201d and \u201cSavior\u201d are not the same word in Hebrew. \u00a0Why does Nephi label Savior \u201cother words\u201d for Messiah?<\/p>\n Why is the timing (600 years) significant enough for it to have been revealed to Lehi and for Nephi to record it? \u00a0Wouldn\u2019t this information have been *much* more useful to the people in Jrsm than for the people going to the New World?<\/p>\n 5 And he also spake concerning the prophets, how great a number had testified of these things, concerning this Messiah, of whom he had spoken, or this Redeemer of the world.<\/strong><\/p>\n This time \u201cRedeemer\u201d instead of \u201cSavior\u201d is added to \u201cMessiah.\u201d \u00a0Why? \u00a0In OT usage, all of these words have different nuances; why do they get amalgamated here? \u00a0On idea that seems plausible to me is that in the OT, there are various expectations (suffering servant, anointed one, etc.) that the majority of people do not expect to be fulfilled in one person, but in a variety of figures and that this is why many have a hard time recognizing who Jesus is. \u00a0If that reading is correct (and I grant that it may not be), it would seem very significant that pretty much as soon as Lehi & Co. detach from the main body of the covenant people, he begins to preach to them in a way that would help them understand the unity in fulfillment of these various OT images.<\/p>\n 6 Wherefore, all mankind were in a lost and in a fallen state, and ever would be save they should rely on this Redeemer.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cWherefore\u201d = \u201cfor which reason.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0What about v5 leads to this \u201cwherefore\u201d? \u00a0What is the chain of logic? \u00a0It almost reads as \u201cbecause this redeemer will come, therefore all mankind was lost,\u201d but that\u2019s backwards. \u00a0What is going on here?<\/p>\n Does the \u201clost\u201d and \u201cfallen\u201d state refer to the various multitudes in the vision?<\/p>\n In the OT, a \u2018redeemer\u2019 was (usually) a family member who could \u2018redeem\u2019 one from debt (slavery). \u00a0What does that word choice teach us about Lehi\u2019s conception of this Redeemer?<\/p>\n 7 And he spake also concerning a prophet who should come before the Messiah, to prepare the way of the Lord\u2014<\/strong><\/p>\n Why would he have told his kids about this? \u00a0What benefit would it be to them?<\/p>\n In the grand scheme of things, this really doesn\u2019t seem important enough to warrant a mention 600 years in advance. \u00a0Why include it (esp. considering v8 and the \u201cmuch spake\u201d at the end)?<\/p>\n 8 Yea, even he should go forth and cry in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight; for there standeth one among you whom ye know not; and he is mightier than I, whose shoe\u2019s latchet I am not worthy to unloose. And much spake my father concerning this thing.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why the specificity? \u00a0And what happens to John\u2019s agency when his very words are prophesied before his birth?<\/p>\n Is this \u201cstraight\u201d and \u201cpath\u201d related to the same concepts in the vision?<\/p>\n Is the crying meant to relate to Lehi\u2019s loud voice used to call his family?<\/p>\n 9 And my father said he should baptize in Bethabara, beyond Jordan; and he also said he should baptize with water; even that he should baptize the Messiah with water.<\/strong><\/p>\n What would \u201cbaptism\u201d have meant to Lehi?<\/p>\n Skousen reads \u201cspake that he should baptize\u201d instead of \u201csaid that he should baptize.\u201d \u00a0I wonder if the speaker in that case could be John instead of Lehi?<\/p>\n 10 And after he had baptized the Messiah with water, he should behold and bear record that he had baptized the Lamb of God, who should take away the sins of the world.<\/strong><\/p>\n Skousen reads \u201csin\u201d instead of \u201csins.\u201d \u00a0That would be a very significant difference, and fit into the somewhat corporate view of this vision.<\/p>\n This is a HUGE emphasis on the role of John the Baptist, esp. when there is nothing here about Jesus\u2019 \u00a0mortal ministry (just the titles) or about Jesus\u2019 mission or significance (except what we glean from the titles). \u00a0Why?<\/p>\n John Welch:<\/p>\n One of Nephi’s favorite titles for Jesus Christ was “the Lamb of God.” Forty-four references to “the Lamb” appear in Nephi’s vision in 1 Nephi 11\u201414 alone.\u00a0 Citation<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Possible meanings for Lamb of God: 11 And it came to pass after my father had spoken these words he spake unto my brethren concerning the gospel which should be preached among the Jews, and also concerning the dwindling of the Jews in unbelief. And after they had slain the Messiah, who should come, and after he had been slain he should rise from the dead, and should make himself manifest, by the Holy Ghost, unto the Gentiles.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cUnbelief\u201d is interesting here; what do you think Lehi meant by it? \u00a0While there were various flavors of Judaism both in Lehi\u2019s and in Jesus\u2019 time, they usually tended to be characterized more by divergences in *practice* than in *belief*. \u00a0Does this verse refer specifically to unbelief that Jesus was the Messiah, or to something more general?<\/p>\n In what sense did the resurrected Christ make himself manifest \u201cby the Holy Ghost\u201d?<\/p>\n Notice the differing roles of Jews and Gentiles in this verse. \u00a0Why does Lehi make this distinction?<\/p>\n 12 Yea, even my father spake much concerning the Gentiles, and also concerning the house of Israel, that they should be compared like unto an olive-tree, whose branches should be broken off and should be scattered upon all the face of the earth.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why would the fate of the Gentiles have been important to them?<\/p>\n Is \u201chouse of Israel\u201d the same as or different from \u201cthe Jews\u201d when Lehi and\/or Nephi use those terms?<\/p>\n In the OT, the olive branch makes prominent appearances after the flood and perhaps also in the lampstand in the tabernacle\/temple. \u00a0See also Judges 9:8f, 1 Kings 6:31f, Ps 52:8. \u00a0See also Romans 11:17f. \u00a0What do you make of this reference here? \u00a0Is this related to the tree in the vision?<\/p>\n 13 Wherefore, he said it must needs be that we should be led with one accord into the land of promise, unto the fulfilling of the word of the Lord, that we should be scattered upon all the face of the earth.<\/strong><\/p>\n So their fate will mirror that of the Gentiles in v12. \u00a0How would they have responded to that?<\/p>\n If \u201cwherefore\u201d is roughly synonymous with \u201ctherefore,\u201d then how does this verse function as a \u201ctherefore\u201d to the thoughts of v12?<\/p>\n If we follow the chronology, v11 got us to shortly after the Resurrection, v12 is ambiguous in timing, and v13 takes us backward to Lehi\u2019s present. \u00a0Does this seem logical? \u00a0What is happening to the time sequence here?<\/p>\n \u201cWith one accord\u201d is interesting. \u00a0It is used<\/a> primarily in Acts. Does its inclusion explain the temporal disjunct that I asked about above?<\/p>\n It doesn\u2019t appear to be true that they went to the promised land \u201cwith one accord.\u201d \u00a0What work did that phrase do for Lehi, for Nephi (writing some years later), and for us?<\/p>\n \u201cThe Lord wants us scattered\u201d is something of a bitter pill to hear. \u00a0How do you think it affected Lehi, L&L, and Nephi\u2019s self-awareness? \u00a0What might it mean to us? \u00a0What does it teach us about the Lord?<\/p>\n 14 And after the house of Israel should be scattered they should be gathered together again; or, in fine, after the Gentiles had received the fulness of the Gospel, the natural branches of the olive-tree, or the remnants of the house of Israel, should be grafted in, or come to the knowledge of the true Messiah, their Lord and their Redeemer.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u2018Lord\u2019 is a new title here.<\/p>\n What does the multiple scatter\/gather events in scripture teach us about the Lord, about ourselves, about community, and about the covenant? \u00a0How are these teachings relevant in the age of social media?<\/p>\n The phrase \u201cin fine\u201d is used frequently in the BoM<\/a> but not elsewhere. (I\u2019m not counting references to \u201cin fine linen\u201d and the like.)<\/p>\n Checking W1828, \u201cin fine\u201d: \u00a0\u201cIn the end or conclusion; to conclude; to sum up all.\u201d \u00a0If that is the meaning here, then it would be a pretty significant phrase, almost along the lines of \u201cand thus we see.\u201d<\/p>\n This verse seems to equate being grafted in with coming to a knowledge of the Messiah. \u00a0Is that accurate? \u00a0If so, what does that teach us about the scattering process?<\/p>\n 15 And after this manner of language did my father prophesy and speak unto my brethren, and also many more things which I do not write in this book; for I have written as many of them as were expedient for me in mine other book.<\/strong><\/p>\n Again with the self-conscious record keeper . . .<\/p>\n 16 And all these things, of which I have spoken, were done as my father dwelt in a tent, in the valley of Lemuel.<\/strong><\/p>\n See previous notes for possible significance of all of the tent references.<\/p>\n 17 And it came to pass after I, Nephi, having heard all the words of my father, concerning the things which he saw in a vision, and also the things which he spake by the power of the Holy Ghost, which power he received by faith on the Son of God\u2014and the Son of God was the Messiah who should come\u2014I, Nephi, was desirous also that I might see, and hear, and know of these things, by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is the gift of God unto all those who diligently seek him, as well in times of old as in the time that he should manifest himself unto the children of men.<\/strong><\/p>\n This is first \u2018Son of God\u2019 reference. \u00a0I\u2019m captivated by the titles in this section–they seem to come fast and furious, they seem to build on each other, etc. What do you make of them?<\/p>\n What to make of see-hear-know?<\/p>\n Start paying attention to references to Nephi\u2019s desires.<\/p>\n Ezra Taft Benson:<\/p>\n Nephi had listened to his father, had believed his father, but he wanted to know through the same source his father knew\u2014revelation.\u00a0\u00a0 Oct 1985 GC.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Do you think it is fair to say that Nephi doubted his father?<\/p>\n Nephi appears to be referring to his own times as \u201ctimes of old\u201d here. \u00a0That\u2019s unusual. \u00a0But then in v19, he says that his times are *not* times of old. \u00a0What does Nephi mean by these phrases?<\/p>\n 18 For he is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever; and the way is prepared for all men from the foundation of the world, if it so be that they repent and come unto him.<\/strong><\/p>\n I\u2019ve never understood \u201cthe same\u201d line–it just doesn\u2019t seem true on the face of it. \u00a0How do you understand it?<\/p>\n Does this \u201cway\u201d relate to the \u201cpath\u201d in the vision? \u00a0Does the \u201cfoundation\u201d relate to the building without a foundation?<\/p>\n 19 For he that diligently seeketh shall find; and the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the Holy Ghost, as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the course of the Lord is one eternal round.<\/strong><\/p>\n Skousen reads \u201cin this time\u201d instead of \u201cin these times.\u201d<\/p>\n References<\/a> to the mysteries of God.<\/p>\n Feast wiki:<\/p>\n In this verse Nephi says the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto those who diligently seek them. When referring to the mysteries of God, the verb unfolded is often used. See Jacob 4:18<\/a>, Mosiah 8:19<\/a>, Alma 40:3<\/a>, and D&C 10:64<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n What does it suggest about the mysteries of God if we say that they can be unfolded?<\/p>\n
\nstraight=not crooked (could be broad)<\/p>\n
\n2 Peter 2:17: \u00a0These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
\n3 Nephi 8:22 And there was not any light seen, neither fire, nor glimmer, neither the sun, nor the moon, nor the stars, for so great were the mists of darkness which were upon the face of the land.
\nMoses 3:6 But I, the Lord God, spake, and there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
\nAbraham 5:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.<\/p>\n
\nDo the other BoM references (link here<\/a>) shape your view of why \u201cfemale\u201d was included here? \u00a0Why emphasize the diversity of the inhabitants of the building?<\/p>\n
\nan interesting comparison between these groups and the four groups in the parable of the sower in Matthew 13. Citation<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n(2) some of (1) press forward, but when the mist arises, they wander off
\n(3) some of (1) press forward, cling to the rod and therefore reach the tree despite the mist, partake, are ashamed, forbidden paths, lost
\n(4) other multitudes (v30), hold fast, fall down, partake
\n(5) other multitudes (v31), feel for building. \u00a0Some drown, some lost, some wander.
\n(6) (v33) enter building<\/p>\n
\n 1 And all these things did my father see, and hear, and speak, as he dwelt in a tent, in the valley of Lemuel, and also a great many more things, which cannot be written upon these plates.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\n 1 And now I, Nephi, proceed to give an account upon these plates of my proceedings, and my reign and ministry; wherefore, to proceed with mine account, I must speak somewhat of the things of my father, and also of my brethren.<\/strong><\/p>\n
\n(1) It refers to the Passover lamb (see Exodus 12).
\n(2) It refers to the sacrificial lamb (see Exodus 29:38?46).
\n(3) The lamb is a metaphor for the suffering servant of God (see Isaiah 53).
\n(4) Some post-Old Testament Jewish literature features a lamb that will destroy all evil in the last days (see also Revelation 7:17 and 17:14).
\n\u2018Lamb of God\u2019 is the preferred title for Jesus in this vision. \u00a0Why?<\/p>\n