Concerning this record the Prophet Joseph Smith said: “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”

Specifically, we discussed the idea of what a keystone is. If you haven’t seen a keystone before, here’s what one looks like (it’s at the centre of the arch):

The usual discourse involves something like removing the keystone will make the entire arch fall. But that’s not quite accurate. After all, if you remove any stone, the arch will likely fall.

What the keystone actually does is turn the arch into a load-bearing structure. Because the keystone and each voussoir (the stones of the arch) are all wedge shaped, they each transfer the thrust of the stone above it until the thrust finally transfers to the vertical supports.

When Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon is the keystone of Mormonism, he wasn’t suggesting that the church would fall apart without it; he was suggesting that the Book of Mormon allows all the components of Mormonism to work together to support and sustain the religion.

The U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a rare and valuable first edition copy of the Book of Mormon was eligible for bankruptcy exemption under a personal property exemption statute which allows “exemption for a bible”.

On February 25, 2013 Ms. Anna F. Robinson filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition seeking to reprieve $23,834.00 in debt. Among her personal property, Ms. Robinson included an “old Morm[o]n bible” of unknown value which she acquired while cleaning a storage area at work and was given permission to keep any of the old books she found. From the Seventh Court’s ruling:

Ms. Robinson testified that, in 2003, while employed at the local public library, she made an agreement with the library director that, if she cleaned out a storage area, she could use the area as an office and keep any books she found. While cleaning, Ms. Robinson found the Book of Mormon and later had it authenticated as an 1830 first edition Book of Mormon, one of only 5,000 copies printed by Joseph Smith. At the time, it was valued at $10,000.00. Ms. Robinson explained that she stores the Book of Mormon in a Ziploc bag to preserve it. She does not use it regularly, but does take it out occasionally to show her children and fellow church members.

The bankruptcy court denied the exemption citing the fact that she had other copies of the Book of Mormon, but the district court reversed the ruling:

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. Anna F. Robinson filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition in the Southern District of Illinois seeking a discharge of unsecured debts. Ms. Robinson claimed an exemption for a rare, first edition Book of Mormon under the Illinois personal property exemption statute, 735 ILCS 5/12- 1001(a), which provides an exemption for a bible. The bankruptcy court denied the exemption, but the district court re- versed. Because we agree with the district court that the plain wording of the Illinois personal property exemption statute allows the exemption for Ms. Robinson’s Book of Mormon, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

The thought that expensive bibles (or in this case a rare Book of Mormon) can be used to disrupt bankruptcy laws made me wonder if it’s possible to skirt the law by running up debt, moving to Illinois, buying up tons of expensive bibles and then declaring bankruptcy.

Nope, at least not if it’s done less than 6 months before the filing, according to the Illinois Legislative Reference Bureau:

If a debtor owns property exempt under this Section and he or she purchased that property with the intent of converting nonexempt property into exempt property or in fraud of his or her creditors, that property shall not be exempt from judgment, attachment, or distress for rent. Property acquired within 6 months of the filing of the petition for bankruptcy shall be presumed to have been acquired in contemplation of bankruptcy.

The image above from wikimedia is a photograph of the 1841 First European (London) edition of the Book of Mormon, at the Springs Preserve museum, Las Vegas, Nevada.

(via)

I have personally found several of the articles encouraging because they cover things I never learned growing up: things I learned only as an adult and only through blogs, podcasts, and anti-Mormon websites.

I don’t know why I never learned these things. What I do know is that I never learned them in Primary, Sunday School, Aaronic Priesthood classes, Seminary, or Institute, or even on my mission. I never read them in a church magazine (although recently a handful of them have appeared in Ensign issues) or lesson manuals.

I present below several recent articles and direct quote from each showing facts and ideas I had to learn through non-official channels.

Book of Mormon Translation

• “The other instrument, which Joseph Smith discovered in the ground years before he retrieved the gold plates, was a small oval stone, or ‘seer stone.’”
• “As a young man during the 1820s, Joseph Smith, like others in his day, used a seer stone to look for lost objects and buried treasure.”
• “Apparently for convenience, Joseph often translated with the single seer stone rather than the two stones bound together to form the interpreters.”
• “According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument.”

First Vision Accounts

• “he wrote or assigned scribes to write four different accounts of the vision.”
• “In addition to the firsthand accounts, there are also five descriptions of Joseph Smith’s vision recorded by his contemporaries.”
• “1832 account . . . He wrote that ‘the Lord’ appeared and forgave him of his sins.”
• “1835 account . . . the appearance of one divine personage who was followed shortly by another. This account also notes the appearance of angels in the vision.”

Race and the Priesthood

• “During the first two decades of the Church’s existence, a few black men were ordained to the priesthood.”
• “There is no reliable evidence that any black men were denied the priesthood during Joseph Smith’s lifetime.”
• “In 1852, President Brigham Young publicly announced that men of black African descent could no longer be ordained to the priesthood”
• “Even after 1852, at least two black Mormons continued to hold the priesthood.”

Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham

• “Other times, his translations were not based on any known physical records.”
• “Neither the rules nor the translations in the grammar book correspond to those recognized by Egyptologists today.”
• “some Egyptologists had said that Joseph Smith’s explanations of the various elements of these facsimiles did not match their own interpretations of these drawings. ”
• “None of the characters on the papyrus fragments mentioned Abraham’s name or any of the events recorded in the book of Abraham. ”
• “Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham”

Peace and Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints

• Everything in the section about the Danites
• Everything in the section about the Mountain Meadows Massacre

Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo

• “Joseph married many additional wives”
• “The oldest [of Joseph’s wives], Fanny Young, was 56 years old. The youngest was Helen Mar Kimball, daughter of Joseph’s close friends Heber C. and Vilate Murray Kimball, who was sealed to Joseph [at 14 years old].”
• “Joseph Smith was sealed to a number of women who were already married.”
• “Emma approved, at least for a time, of four of Joseph Smith’s plural marriages in Nauvoo, and she accepted all four of those wives into her household.”
• “[Emma’s] decision to ‘receive not this law’ permitted him to marry additional wives without her consent.”

The Manifesto and the End of Plural Marriage

• “Under exceptional circumstances, a smaller number of new plural marriages were performed in the United States between 1890 and 1904”
• “Of the 315 marriages recorded in the ledger, research indicates that 25 (7.9%) were plural marriages . . . . Of the 25 plural marriages, 18 took place in Mexico, 3 in Arizona, 2 in Utah, and 1 each in Colorado and on a boat on the Pacific Ocean.”
• The entire section on The Second Manifesto.

I see these new articles as a step in a positive direction, where the Church has begun accepting the fact researchers have known for decades. I’m happy to see the Church moving towards openness and transparency on topics for which historians were excommunicated just a few short years ago.

I am happy my children can potentially grow up in a Church where these things are taught readily.

It’s not their fault. After all, they view it the same way as most everyone does and how it is portrayed in popular LDS art. A careful reading of the scriptures, however, shows us that the most popular conception of the strait and narrow path is an assumption we have made, which has no scriptural support.

To see the strait and narrow path from a new perspective, we must use a scripture chain. 

Let’s start in 2 Ne 31:17–18:

Wherefore, do the things which I have told you I have seen that your Lord and your Redeemer should do; for, for this cause have they been shown unto me, that ye might know the gate by which ye should enter. For the gate by which ye should enter is repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost. And then are ye in this strait and narrow path which leads to eternal life . . .

Notice that, according to Nephi, to enter the strait and narrow path, we have to enter through a gate, which is repentance and baptism.

Now look at 2 Ne 9:41:

O then, my beloved brethren, come unto the Lord, the Holy One. Remember that his paths are righteous. Behold, the way for man is narrow, but it lieth in a straight course before him, and the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate; for he cannot be deceived, for the Lord God is his name.

Jesus is the gatekeeper. If the gate is repentance and baptism, then this makes sense. Jesus is the one who redeems us when we repent, and it is through baptism that we become his children (see Mosiah 5).

So, now we know that in addition to the strait and narrow path that Lehi described in 1 Nephi 8, there is a gate at the beginning of the path and Jesus is at the gate to let us through.

Now, let’s move on to Moses 7:53:

. . . I am Messiah, the King of Zion, the Rock of Heaven, which is broad as eternity; whoso cometh in at the gate and climbeth up by me shall never fall; wherefore, blessed are they of whom I have spoken, for they shall come forth with songs of everlasting joy.

So, this is interesting. Two words that stick out to me are “climbeth” and “fall”. They are odd words when you view the strait and narrow path as depicted in the image that accompanies this article. But consider the 1828 definition of “strait”:

1. Narrow; close; not broad.
2. Close; intimate; as a strait degree of favour.
3. Strict; rigorous.
4. Difficult; distressful.
5. Straight; not crooked.

Of interest to me are definitions 3 and 4. If we simply walk along a level path, using the iron rod as a guide, then these don’t make much sense. On the other hand, if we must climb the strait and narrow path, which brings with it a risk of falling, then those definitions do make sense.

The first definition seems to indicate that “strait” is sometimes synonymous with “narrow”. But why call it the narrow and narrow path? That seems redundant. Perhaps the reason it’s called the strait and narrow path is not to emphasize its narrowness, but to highlight another aspect of the path: its difficulty.

Now that it seems we must climb up the path, consider 1 Ne 8:20, 24:

And I also beheld a strait and narrow path, which came along by the rod of iron . . . 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.

Is it any wonder that the people in Lehi’s dream were clinging to the iron rod? It wasn’t just because they were afraid of being lost in the mists of darkness; they were afraid of falling (literally) off the path while they climbed it.

So what is the rod of iron? 1 Ne 11:25 says it’s the word of God. Our children tonight interpreted that to mean the gospel, and based on my anecdotal experience, it seems to be a common interpretation.

But there is one more interpretation. The first 17 verses of John 1 tells us that Jesus is also known as the Word of God. This is consistent with Moses 7:53 above, which tells us that we must climb up by Jesus.

So, what have we learned about the strait and narrow path?

1. The path starts at a gate.
2. That gate is repentance and baptism.
3. Jesus is the gatekeeper.
4. The strait and narrow path is more like a climb up a mountain than it is a stroll through a park.
5. Jesus is also the means by which we climb up the strait and narrow path.

I find comfort, actually, knowing that Jesus is there not only when we start on our journey towards eternal life, but he is there beside us to help us the entire way, never leaving our side, always waiting for us to reach out to him.

Knowing all this provides a different perspective on why Nephi said the following in 2 Ne 31:29–20:

And now, my beloved brethren, after ye have gotten into this strait and narrow path, I would ask if all is done? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for ye have not come thus far save it were by the word of Christ with unshaken faith in him, relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save.

Wherefore, ye must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ, having a perfect brightness of hope, and a love of God and of all men. Wherefore, if ye shall press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ, and endure to the end, behold, thus saith the Father: Ye shall have eternal life.

When Nephi told us we must press forward and endure to the end, he wasn’t joking.

>”Now the people which were not Lamanites were Nephites; nevertheless, they were called Nephites, Jacobites, Josephites, Zoramites, Lamanites, Lemuelites, and Ishmaelites.” (Jacob 1:13)

So why isn’t Sam listed? Jacob and Joseph are. Laman and Lemuel are. All of Nephi’s brothers are except for Sam.

Any thoughts?

“For behold, we will not have him to be our ruler; for it belongs unto us, who are the elder brethren, to rule over this people.” (2 Ne 5:3)

“I, Nephi, did take my family, and also Zoram and his family, and Sam, mine elder brother and his family, and Jacob and Joseph, my younger brethren, and also my sisters, and all those who would go with me.” (2 Ne 5:6)

Does it seem odd to anyone else that Laman and Lemuel would refer to their family, which amounted to fewer than 20 adults and a handful of children, as “this people”? Why would Nephi add “and all those who would go with me” when he had already listed everyone we would have thought would go with him.

Take 1 Ne 20:1-2 for example.

Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob, who are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, who swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, yet they swear not in truth nor in righteousness. Nevertheless, they call themselves of the holy city, but they do not stay themselves upon the God of Israel, who is the Lord of Hosts . . .

Prior to this, I would have slogged through it. I am glad I didn’t though. What a strong statement on hypocrisy. Made me cringe just thinking what possibly I might have been doing hypocritically.

I, Nephi, being exceedingly young, nevertheless being large in stature, and also having great desires to know of the mysteries of God, wherefore, I did cry unto the Lord; and behold he did visit me, and did soften my heart that I did believe all the words which had been spoken by my father; wherefore, I did not rebel against him like unto my brothers.

According to this passage, Nephi seems to imply that his being young and his desire to learn God’s mysteries caused him to pray. He also seems to imply that those two things, along with his praying caused the Lord to visit him and soften his heart, which in turn caused him to believe everything his father had said.

In the next few verses, he tries sharing what he learned with his brothers. I don’t think it comes a surprise to anyone that Sam accepted what Nephi had to say, and Laman and Lemuel did not.

After his interaction with his brothers, Nephi went to his father. Right when Nephi returned to the tent, Lehi told him he and his brothers needed to go back to Jerusalem to get the brass plates. Nephi says the following:

I will go and do the things which the Lord hath commanded, for I know that the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them.

I wonder how Nephi came to know this. Was it something he had known for a long time? Or perhaps this was one of the mysteries he mentioned earlier.

If you were to play that variation with the average Mormon and said the word “Nephi”, the other person would likely say “Laman” or “Lemuel”. For good reason. Nephi seems to do the opposite of what his brothers do.

In fact, I came across an example of this tonight.

In 1 Nephi 17, the Lord told Nephi to build a ship. Naturally, his brothers didn’t beleive him when they found out what he was up to. Let’s read verse 17:

I, Nephi, was exceedingly sorrowful because of the hardness of their hearts; and now when they saw that I began to be sorrowful they were glad in their hearts, insomuch that they did rejoice over me, saying: We knew that ye could not construct a ship, for we knew that ye were lacking in judgment; wherefore, thou canst not accomplish so great a work.

This verse in particular stood out to me for two reasons. Both reasons have to do with opposition.

First, let’s compare this verse to 1 Ne 16:5, which is shortly after Nephi explains to his brothers his father’s dream:

they did humble themselves before the Lord; insomuch that I had joy and great hopes of them, that they would walk in the paths of righteousness.

In the first scripture, Nephi is sorrowful; in the second, he is joyful. In the first, the brothers were hardhearted; in the second, they were humble. It really shows Nephi’s love: he’s joyful if his brothers are doing right and sorrowful if they’re being pigheaded.

The second reason becomes apparent when we read in 1 Ne 17:9 when Nephi responds to the Lord’s request:

I said: Lord, whither shall I go that I may find ore to molten, that I may make tools to construct the ship after the manner which thou hast shown unto me?

When Nephi’s brothers found out he was to build a ship, they ridiculed him and and said he lacked judgement. When Nephi received the direction to build the ship, he didn’t stop to think whether doing so would be good judgement or whether he could “construct a ship”. Rather, he accepted the command and showed initiative.

I wonder what it could take for me to stop being part Laman and part Nephi.

What it used to say:

?¢‚Ǩ?ìAfter thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians?¢‚Ǩ¬ù

and what it says now:

“After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.?¢‚Ǩ¬ù

(emphasis mine)

So, is this a manifestation of the church?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s efforts to bring its teachings in line with the scientific realm—as if the doctrine was held in the hands of men and arbitrarily changed to fit the tides of secular progress? Or something else? Or is the introduction not technically scripture, and therefore, not a big deal to change?

Honestly, I’m glad they aren’t in denial about the science and see the change as a positive indication that the First Presidency is admitting the evidence has merit.