Get your own Free Home PageTo go to the beginning, click here.
“Now the king, fearing he should loose his life, said: If thou wilt spare me I will grant unto thee whatsoever thou wilt ask, even to half of the kingdom.” (Alma 20:23)
The problem Br. Clif finds is, quote: “Doesn’t this sound too much like the oath given to Herodias’ daughter, Salome, by King Herod?” (Quote correct as of mid May 1998.)
* * * * *
Nope. I’d like to put the above verse in context and give my illustration of what was going on.
In Alma 20:1-19, Ammon learned his brethren were in a Lamanite prison. He told King Lamoni, a Lamanite convert, about the situation. King Lamoni and Ammon journeyed together to the other Lamanite kingdom to get Ammon’s brethren out of prison. On the way, they met Lamoni’s father, who was the high-king of all the lands ‘round about. The father became angry at Lamoni for missing a feast he had held, and became more furious when he learned Lamoni converted to the Nephite Church. The father commanded Lamoni to kill Ammon, but Lamoni refused. The father became infuriated at Lamoni’s insubordination, and prepared to kill Lamoni. Ammon interceded, reminding the father that by killing Lamoni, he would be shedding innocent blood. The king then decided Ammon was the one at fault for the whole affair, and tried to kill Ammon.
Here is Alma 20:20-27, with commentary added by me. I highlighted the disputed verse.
“(20) And he [the king] stretched forth his hand to slay Ammon. But Ammon withstood his blows, and also smote his arm that he could not use it.” [So, the king tries to kill Ammon and makes the first move. Ammon reacts in self-defense and prevails.]
“(21) Now when the king saw that Ammon could slay him, he began to plead with Ammon that he would spare his life.” [Here the king sees Ammon can kill him and begins pleading for his life. The record does not say exactly what the king said. However, when a wealthy, powerful person pleads for their life, the pleading could go something like: “Please don’t kill me. I’ll give you ____ and ____. Just please don’t kill me.” I think he was probably beginning to make some offers, because Ammon’s next actions use such behavior to his advantage. I don’t think Ammon wants to kill the king, but he does want something the high-king can give. Thus Ammon figures: If the high-king is pleading (and making offers), why not take advantage of it? I think that’s probably what happened, because next Ammon states exactly what he does want...]
“(22) But Ammon raised his sword and said unto him; Behold, I will smite thee except thou wilt grant unto me that my brethren may be cast out of prison.” [Ammon states his basic terms. He’s pretty sure the king will grant it, otherwise he would not have made such a demand...which again leads me to think the king was making some offers back in verse 21.]
“(23) Now the king, fearing he should loose his life, said: If thou wilt spare me I will grant unto thee whatsoever thou wilt ask, even to the half of the kingdom.” [Here the king replies, basically: “Sure, fine, whatever you want, up to half of the kingdom -- Just don’t kill me!” He is willing to be generous enough to save himself...but greedy enough to want to keep plenty. Besides, there’s no apparent need to offer the entire kingdom. He’s not going to offer the whole cake, or 3/4 the cake, when 1/2 or less will suffice.]
“(24) Now when Ammon saw that he had wrought upon the old king according to his desire, he said unto him: If thou wilt grant that my brethren may be cast out of the prison, and also that Lamoni may retain his kingdom, and that ye be not displeased with him, but grant that he may do whatsoever thing he thinketh, then will I spare thee; otherwise I will smite thee to the earth.” [Now, with the door open to him, Ammon expands his terms. He knows the king is angry at Lamoni, so Lamoni could loose his slice of the kingdom. Thus, he adds security for Lamoni to his terms. Ammon asks nothing for himself beyond getting his brethren out of prison. Ammon has no need nor desire for wealth or power. Ammon, as a son of King Mosiah II, is already a prince of Zarahemla...but turned down the throne (probably because he devoted his life to missionary work -- Mosiah 28:5-10; 29:1-3; Alma 17:6-8,18)] (BTW--The high-king agrees, and Ammon and Lamoni continue on their way.)
The king’s offer of 1/2 the kingdom in Alma 20:23 was generous enough to spare his life, while keeping enough to satisfy himself and keep a status. There was no reason to offer the entire kingdom when 1/2 or less would suffice.
“(17) Yea, there are many who do say: If thou wilt show unto us a sign from heaven, then we shall know of a surety; then we shall believe. (18) Now I ask, is this faith? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for if a man knoweth a thing he hath no cause to believe, for he knoweth it. (19) And now, how much more cursed is he that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than he that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression? (20) Now of this thing ye must judge, Behold, I say unto you, that it is on the one hand even as it is on the other; and it shall be unto every man according to his work. (21) And now as I said concerning faith -- faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.” (Alma 32:17-21)
The problem Br. Clif finds is: According to those verses, many Mormons don’t have faith. They testify that they have been given a sign from heaven, the burning in the bosom of the Holy Ghost, thus gaining a sure knowledge of God. During testimony meetings Mormons will often say “I know my Heavenly Father hears and answers my prayers. I know Jesus is the Christ...” etc. (5/98)
* * * * *
By taking Alma 32:17-21 in context with surrounding verses, it is evident that the section is about pride vs. humility....about how one must be humble and believe before gaining knowledge. The numbers of the disputed verses are highlighted:
“(16) Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know, before they will believe.” [Note that Alma says “without being brought to know, before they will believe”. Here an order of events is specifically given. First, one must believe. Then, they may be “brought to know”. Yet, some people are stubborn and refuse to believe unless they are compelled....]
“(17) Yea, there are many who do say: If thou wilt show unto us a sign from heaven, then we shall know of a surety; then we shall believe.” [Here we have the stubborn people mentioned above, who refuse to humble themselves, who demand to know before they will believe....instead of following the prescribed pattern of willingly believing before they may be brought to know.]
“(18) Now I ask, is this faith? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for if a man knoweth a thing he hath no cause to believe, for he knoweth it.” [There’s no need to simply believe in something when tangible evidence is right in your face. In that case, simple belief and faith are totally bypassed; the person proceeds directly to knowledge. Someone who demands to know before they will believe demands a contradiction and lacks faith.]
“(19) And now, how much more cursed is he that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than he that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression?”
“(20) Now of this thing ye must judge, Behold, I say unto you, that it is on the one hand even as it is on the other; and it shall be unto every man according to his work.’
“(21) And now as I said concerning faith -- faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.’
“(22) And now, behold, I say unto you, and I would that ye should remember, that God is merciful unto all who believe on his name; therefore he desireth, in the first place, that ye should believe, yea, even on his word.” [God wants us to believe first, even on his word.]
To me, Alma II basically said this-- No one can expect to say: “OK, ‘God’, if you’re really up there then SHOW me. After you show me, then I’ll believe,” and get an answer. Father does not work that way. They must first humble themselves and willingly believe on His word. They must have faith and be willing to exercise it. Then, they may be “brought to know” (Alma 32:16 above). “Being brought to know” isn’t something that happens overnight. The phrase itself implies that time, a period of belief and faith, is necessary before knowing comes.
Many people, both mainstream Christians and Mormons, must first believe in Father’s word. They first willingly believe and have faith -- and blessed are they. Over time they exercise their belief and faith. By exercising their belief and faith, they come to know Father is real, that He answers prayers, that Yeshua is the Messiah...and anything else that Father deems expedient for them to know. There are mainstream Christians who say they know God exists and answers prayers, that Jesus is the Christ -- I’ve read and heard their statements. Mormons also know those things. For both LDS and non-LDS, that knowledge comes through following the set pattern of humility, belief, faith.....then “being brought to know”.
The Bible encourages knowledge, but first we must have unwavering faith. This is clear in James 1:5-7. There is also John 17:3, where Yeshua says: “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” Plus there is Matthew 7:7-11, where Yeshua says if we ask for good gifts Father will give them. We are encouraged to ask. We are encouraged to know. However, first we must have faith. That is evident from Alma 32:16-22 and James 1:5-7. After we have humbled ourselves, believed and exercised our faith, then we may be brought to know.
That sure knowledge is a gift we receive because we first willingly believed. Father is happy to give us such gifts. That knowledge comes to various people in various ways (...so don’t think all Mormons get the “burning of the bosom”, because all don’t...). That is how many people come to know Father is real, that He does answer prayers, and that Yeshua is the Messiah. That is how may Mormons can stand in Fast & Testimony Meetings and say they know ________. Because first they willingly believed and exercised their faith. Then they asked Father in prayer, nothing wavering. Then, in Father’s own time, in a way He deemed best, they were given the gift to know.
People who say, “I know _____,” still run on faith. Knowledge has a way of bringing new questions-- questions that again there are no immediate visible answers for. So, the process of exercising humility, belief and faith still continues. Some answers, we will never know during our life time. But we have faith and we run on that faith. And while Mormons run on faith, anti-Mormons love to persecute them for it.
I found solutions to Br. Clif’s problems because I have faith there are answers out there, somewhere. I have questions. I may not know the answers to every single one of them...but I don’t let that destroy my faith, as some others have done. I continue to believe. I continue to have faith. With faith I seek answers. I have exercised my belief and faith enough times that I’ve received many answers. I have come to know there is always an answer, somewhere...even if I have to wait years before an answer comes.
First comes humility, belief and faith. Then comes the gift of knowledge by “being brought to know”. Testimony-bearing Mormons follow that pattern, and thus are not in conflict with Alma 32:17-21 (or rather 32:16-22).
“(10) And it came to pass that I fell to the earth; and it was for the space of three days and three nights that I could not open my mouth, neither had I the use of my limbs....(16) And now, for three days and three nights was I racked, even with the pains of a damned soul.” (Alma 36:10,16)
* *
“And it came to pass that I was three days and three nights in the most bitter pain and anguish of soul; and never, until I did cry out unto the Lord Jesus Christ for mercy, did I receive a remission of my sins. But, behold, I did cry unto him and I did find peace to my soul.” (Alma 38:8)
The problem Br. Clif finds is, quote: “Elsewhere, either in the Book of Mormon or some other LDS book, I remember it saying it was either 2 or 4 days. If you find it, let me know...” (Quote correct as of mid May 1998.)
* * * * *
I searched the LDS scriptures trying to find anything that could have even remotely said 2 days or 4 days.... Perhaps the Book of Mormon verse Br. Clif refers to is Mosiah 27:23: “And it came to pass after they had fasted and prayed for the space of two days and two nights, the limbs of Alma received their strength, and he stood up and began to speak unto them, bidding them to be of good comfort;” (Mosiah 27, from whence that verse comes, tells about how the angel came to Alma II and his rebellious friends, the sons of Mosiah II. It tells about how they fell to the ground, how the people fasted and prayed for his recovery, and his subsequent “awakening” and full repentance. Alma 36 & 38, from whence the other verses come, is where Alma II tells about his experience.)
There is nothing in Mosiah 27:23 that states Alma was “unconscious” for 2 days and 2 nights. (Don’t take my word for it--open up a Book of Mormon and study for yourself.) Mosiah 27:33 simply says the people fasted and prayed for him for 2 days and 2 nights before he recovered. So, Alma had already been “out” for 1 day and 1 night, and the people fasted and prayed for him the last 2 days and 2 nights. It’s possible they waited the first day to see if he would recover on his own. -OR- It’s possible it took the first day for the news to spread, for a time of fasting and prayer to be organized (see Mosiah 27:21-22). Since 1 day (the first day) + 2 (the last two days of fasting and prayer) = 3 days...and all Alma II’s statements above say 3 days....there is no problem nor discrepancy.
If Br. Clif saw a discrepancy, it certainly wasn’t official LDS canon he saw it in. I’ve searched the LDS canon for it already. I extend an open invitation for anyone to search it for themselves and see. If he saw a discrepancy, it would have been in un-official literature, such as a novel or a personal commentary. It would have been a typing error, or an individual’s misunderstanding, not a mistake on the part of the LDS Church.
“But behold, my limbs did receive their strength again, and I stood upon my feet, and manifest unto the people that I had been born of God.” (Alma 36:23)
The problem Br. Clif finds is, quote: “How could ‘Alma’ have been born of God when the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on that fateful Pentecost had not even happened yet?” (Quote correct as of mid May 1998.)
* * * * *
Hmmm...Let me see if I understand that question correctly....Acts 2 tells how the Holy Spirit filled the disciples on Pentecost. Is Br. Clif saying that the Holy Spirit was not present before that Pentecost, and therefore Alma II could not have been born of God since he lived before that Pentecost? I will respond to it as such. If my understanding of the question is wrong, someone please e-mail (myriad@oocities.com) and clarify it.
I will: (1) Look at what the Bible says about being born of God and compare it to Alma II’s experience; (2) Explore the presence of the “Holy Spirit” and belief on the Messiah before that Pentecost; (3) Examine what that NT Pentecost was.
(1) 1 John 5:1-4 says: “(1) Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. (2) By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. (3) For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. (4) For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.” (Emphasis added by me -- See also 1 John 12-13)
Curious, I checked around to find what various non-LDS Christians thought about “being born of God”. The consensus was that it’s a life-changing process. Being “born of God” means a person has repented of their sins, accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Savior, and begins a new life of following God.
I’d like to compare that with Alma II’s experience, which is described in both Mosiah 27 and Alma 36. Brief background information can be found in Solution 26. During the 3 days Alma II was “unconscious”, he remembered the many sins he had committed and it racked his soul with inexpressible horror (Alma 36:14). As he was racked with that torment, he remembered hearing his father talking about Jesus Christ and his Atonement. Then he cried within his heart: “O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me, who am in the gall of bitterness, and am encircled about by the everlasting chains of death.” Then he was harrowed up by the memory of his sins no more, and was filled with joy (Alma 36:17-20). After Alma II recovered, he stood and told the people: “(25) And the Lord said unto me: Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters; (26) And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. (27) I say unto you, unless this be the case, they must be cast off; and this I know, because I was like to be cast off. (28) Nevertheless, after wading through much tribulations, repenting nigh unto death, the Lord in mercy hath seen fit to snatch me out of an everlasting burning, and I am born of God.” (Mosiah 27:25-28) From then on, Alma II and his repentant friends began to “...teach the people...traveling round about through all the land, publishing to all the people the things which they had heard and seen, and preaching the word of God...” (Mosiah 27:32) Alma went on to become an outstanding missionary and, in time, the leader of the church.
Alma II’s experience was life-changing. He repented of his sins, accepted Jesus Christ as his personal Savior, and began a new life of following God....and thus was “born of God”.
(2) The Holy Spirit was indeed present before that “fateful Pentecost” when the Spirit filled the disciples (Acts 2:4 uses the word filled). Here’s a few examples (emphasis added by me):
There’s Ex. 31:2-3: “See, I the LORD have called by name Bezalell the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah: And I have filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship.” [Bezalell was filled with the Spirit.] ...AND... Num. 27:18: “And YHWH said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay thine hand upon him.” [I thinks it’s fair to say Joshua was filled with the Spirit.] ....AND.... 1 Cor. 12:3: “Wherefore I give you to understanding, ...that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” [There were many who believed Yeshua was their Lord and Messiah before that Pentecost...some even decades before Yeshua began his ministry (Simeon and Anna, see Luke 2:25-38).] See also Num. 11:25-26; Neh. 19:20; Ps. 51:11.
Furthermore, the faithful, devout people of the Old Testament were looking forward to the prophesied Messiah from whence their redemption would come (Gen. 49:18; Ps. 27:1; 130:4-8). They believed on him, hoped in him, knew that forgiveness was with him, had faith that he would be their salvation, repented of their sins and faithfully kept the Law which he would fulfill. Therefore, I would even go so far as to say..... Those devout who believed on the Messiah before his birth and ministry were just as “born of God” as those who believed on the Messiah during and after his ministry.
(3) The word “pentecost” comes from the Greek and means “the fiftieth day. It was the Greek word for the Jewish feast Shavuot, which comes 49 days after Passover.
On Shavuot, two lambs, a young bull, and two rams were offered as sin and peace offerings, and burned on the altar of sacrifice. Thus, the purpose of the feast was for Israel to gain a remission of sins and obtain a reconciliation with Elohim. Jewish feasts, as performed by the Law, were symbols and reminders of things yet to come. Sacrifice of animals could not really make atonement -- It was a symbol of the blood and sacrifice of the Messiah yet to come. The fire used in the sacrifice was a symbol of the sanctifying, cleansing influence of the Spirit which would be sent. The sacrifices and their burning on the altar was symbolic and signified how Israel’s sins would be truly remitted.
On the first Shavuot after the Crucifixion, the fires of Shavuot would have performed their purifying symbolism....except, the old order no longer prevailed because the Messiah had come and been slain. Instead, on that first Shavuot after, living fire from heaven was sent -- Fire that would dwell in the hearts of mankind and replace all the fires on the altars. So it was, on that Shavuot, that “...suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost...” (Acts 2:2-4)
The Jewish feasts were symbols and reminders of things yet to come. Yeshua said he had not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill the Law (Matt. 5:17). He was slain during Passover (Passover contains symbolism of the Eternal Lamb)....And 49 days later, when Shavuot had fully come, living fire was sent from heaven to dwell in the hearts of mankind. The symbolic sacrifices and fires were no longer necessary.
“Yea, methought I saw, even as our father Lehi saw, God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels, in the attitude of singing and praising their God; yea, and my soul did long to be there.” (Alma 36:22)
The problem Br. Clif finds is, quote: “Methought I saw? They weren’t sure whether they had seen God or not? If they weren’t sure whether they had seen God or not, then they also weren’t sure whether it was Satan and his angels appearing to them or not...” (Quote correct as of mid May 1998.)
* * * * *
I have personal experience with the phrase, “Methought I saw...”. I am not going to publicly announce the details. There is only one other person who knows them. I’m not about to print them here for someone to desecrate.
It suffices to say, the phrase “Methought I saw” is not an expression of doubt. It is not an expression of uncertainty. “Methought I saw” is a phrase of modesty, a phrase used when not wanting to appear boastful. It is a phrase of humble testimony.
Get your own Free Home Page