• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

FAIR

2022 FAIR Conference videos are now available to watch!

  • Find Answers
  • Blog
  • Media & Apps
  • Conference
  • Bookstore
  • Archive
  • About
  • Get Involved
  • Search

Prophets

Lehi’s Lasting Legacy

February 29, 2016 by Neal Rappleye

Tree

Nephi tells us that his father, Lehi, kept a record (1 Nephi 1:17). That record is lost to history, but nonetheless his legacy lives on. His son recorded a number of his most profound prophecies and visions. These include his prophetic call vision, powerful poetic declarations to his two oldest sons while encamped in an Arabian wadi, his moving dream about the tree of life, and his prophecies about the Messiah.

Lehi’s legacy was solidified by the testament he left behind. While nearing his death, Lehi called together his posterity, warned them of temptations, taught them to live righteously, blessed them, and related prophecies (2 Nephi 1–4). Book of Mormon Central has dubbed this the “Testament of Lehi” because it has all the characteristics found in the Jewish testamentary literature. Book of Mormon Central also comments on the legacy this creates for Lehi:

It provides an example for fathers and patriarchs today. The tradition, initially but briefly present in Genesis 49, was not maintained and developed only by the Jews after their return to Jerusalem in the Second Temple period but was called upon extensively and effectively by Lehi in the sixth century BC. Building from there, later prophets in the Book of Mormon followed Lehi’s example, as Alma does in Alma 36–42 and Helaman does in Helaman 5:5–13. Latter-day Saint fathers today also follow these patriarchal examples as they bless, instruct, exhort, and testify to their children and grandchildren.

Some of Lehi’s most influential teachings were given as part of his testament. For instance, drawing on the imagery of the Psalms, Lehi taught about the importance of offering the Lord your broken heart and contrite spirit. Of this teaching, Book of Mormon Central pointed out, “This presents an important lesson for modern Book of Mormon readers. No matter what sacrifice we offer to the Lord—be it our time, our talents, etc.—if this is not done with the true sacrifice of our hearts and spirits, then it cannot be fully acceptable to the Lord.”

It is also as part of his testament that Lehi gave his epic discourse on the Fall. Drawing from the hints found in the Old Testament and Israelite temple traditions, Lehi provided the most complete teaching on the Fall presently on record. According to Book of Mormon Central,

Lehi’s teaching was the foundation for several other important sermons in the Book of Mormon by Alma, Amulek, and others, and continues to be the foundation upon which we build when we teach the Fall today.

Nephi’s love for Isaiah may have come from Lehi, since Lehi appears to be drawing on Isaiah 14:12 when he describes Satan. Isaiah 14 is drawing on a rich ancient Near Eastern mythos of a fallen deity, and like he does with the Fall, Lehi expands on Isaiah’s use to provide a fuller view of the Adversary. Indeed, Lehi seems well versed in the great literature of his day and time, as he poetically describes death in a way the resonates not only with the much later Shakespeare, but also with ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Canaanite, and Israelite motifs.

Drawing on both the literary form and the language of the Psalms, Nephi lamented after his father passed away. Nephi, however, was not the only one of Lehi’s sons who was profoundly impacted by their father’s influence. In his first sermon recorded in the Book of Mormon, Jacob taught many of the same doctrines Lehi had taught to him. As Book of Mormon Central puts it,

Tracing Jacob’s understanding of the plan back one generation earlier, it appears that his inspired summation carried forth the influence of his father’s instructions to him in 2 Nephi 2. Although Lehi never called it a “plan,” he taught these same doctrines in his final blessing to Jacob.

Comparing the two also illuminates which doctrines both Lehi and Jacob most related to:

Though they taught the same doctrines, Lehi’s emphasis was focused more on the fall, opposition, and the agency afforded to all to choose between good and evil. Jacob, meanwhile, put more emphasis on the atonement, resurrection, and the eternal outcome from choosing either righteousness or filthiness.

Jacob also shows an awareness of Israelite and ancient Near Eastern conceptions of death. Given that Jacob was born in the wilderness and was still very young when the family arrived in the promised land, this knowledge surely came to him through his father’s teachings.

Given the reverence both Nephi and Jacob had for Lehi, it may seem odd that Nephi summoned Isaiah to act as a third witness of the Redeemer alongside Nephi and Jacob. Lehi had already born witness of Christ, multiple times (1 Nephi 1:19; 1 Nephi 10; 2 Nephi 2). Yet, this may actually be one of the most powerful reflections of Nephi’s love for his father.

Lehi was believed to be a false prophet by both the Jews at Jerusalem and also his two oldest sons, Laman and Lemuel. The penalty for false prophecy was death, and Laman and Lemuel try to kill him multiple times. Biblical law required two or three witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15) to testify in a trail. As such, coming on the heels of Lehi’s passing, and the division of Nephi from his brothers, 2 Nephi 6–30, recording the testimonies of Nephi’s three witnesses—Jacob, Isaiah, and Nephi—could be read as the Apology of Lehi.

That is, it is Nephi’s defense of Lehi as a true prophet, marshalling the biblically required three witnesses to verify Lehi’s own prophecies about the Messiah. This would explain why Lehi himself was not considered one of the witnesses—he was the defendant. If this is correct, then it would speak powerfully to the legacy of Lehi, as nearly all of 2 Nephi would be dedicated to him in some capacity.

In either case, there is no denying the abundant legacy of Lehi left behind by his sons.

Neal Rappleye is a Research Project Manager for Book of Mormon Central. He blogs on Latter-day Saint topics at http://www.studioetquoquefide.com/

Filed Under: Book of Mormon, LDS Scriptures Tagged With: apologetics, Book of Mormon, FairMormon, Lehi, Prophets

Articles of Faith – Sustaining the Brethren – Interview with Duane Boyce

July 14, 2015 by NickGalieti

https://media.blubrry.com/mormonfaircast/www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/AOF-DuaneBoyce-SustainingTheBrethren.mp3

Podcast: Download (48.5MB)

Subscribe: RSS

duane-boyceDuane Boyce received his academic training in psychology, philosophy, and the clinical treatment of families. He received a PhD from Brigham Young University and conducted his postdoctoral study in developmental psychology at Harvard University. He was a member of the Moral Studies Group at Brigham Young University (BYU) and served on the faculty there before becoming vice president of a steel company headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri. He is a founding partner of the Arbinger Institute, a worldwide management consulting and educational firm, and is the coauthor of four books. He has published academic essays on scriptural topics in BYU Studies, The FARMS Review, Religious Educator, and the Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture. He is also the author of the book, Even Unto Bloodshed: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on War (Kofford, 2015). Among other callings, he has served as a bishop and a stake president. He is the author of an article in The Interpreter entitled, “Sustaining the Brethren.”

Questions addressed in this interview:

In your article you call sustaining the brethren a “vital topic.” What about sustaining the brethren is vital?

This is a part of the making and keeping of sacred covenants within the church. Is there a distinction between sustaining the brethren, and sustaining our local leaders as it relates to these covenants?

When we raise our right arm to the square, is that a sort of covenant renewal? Almost sacramental in that regard?

Your article sets up an interesting paradigm where you discuss the differences between God’s character and humankind’s character and the vast differences that currently rest in chasm between the two. Could you please lay out that foundation for the rest of our discussion on sustaining the brethren?

For some this may sound a little like a forwarding of the “sheep” mentality, we should just do what they leaders tell us because God is telling them, and God is smarter, therefore let’s just be sheep to what they say. I don’t think that is what you are saying, but I can see how that position would be the conclusion some could come to with this paradigm. How would you respond to that position?

When it comes to sustaining the brethren, what is the difference (as you see it) between following the words of the combined Quorum of the Twelve and the First Presidency, as opposed to statements made by individuals within those council’s?

I want to now address some common criticisms that come up with respect to sustaining the brethren, and have you offer a few approaches to these criticisms:

There are waves of discord, disagreement, or discontent that seem to crash against the Church at different times and in slightly different ways. One that I have observed over the past five to seven years or so, is the idea that is clothed in the notion that the general church membership has a role or a place to be an advocate of systemic change to doctrines or practices in the church—and that this perspective allows a person to remain in a faithful position. How does that reconcile with the concepts that you present in your article on sustaining the brethren? Can one be an advocate for systemic change, and sustain the brethren at the same time?

There is a quote that you give from Elder Dallin H. Oaks that I love. It is an interesting perspective because critics of this idea of sustaining brethren at all, or even those who find it difficult to place their faith in the hands of leaders, forget that we are all operating in mortal capacities. The quote reads: “Revelations from God … are not constant. We believe in continuing revelation, not continuous revelation. We are often left to work out problems without the dictation or specific direction of the Spirit. That is part of the experience we must have in mortality. Fortunately, we are never out of our Savior’s sight, and if our judgment leads us into actions beyond the limits of what is permissible and if we are listening … the Lord will restrain us by the promptings of His Spirit.” How does this quote lay a solid foundation for sustaining the brethren while also giving room for their mortal fallibility?

Sustaining the brethren seems to be a great deal about the issue of trust. We are placing our trust in individuals who are hopefully placing their trust in God. Because we are dealing with eternal salvation, this trust is not an issue that should be taken lightly. So, how then do you, in your article make recommendations on how to navigate this issue moving forward?

Duane Boyce is the author of an article in The Interpreter entitled, “Sustaining the Brethren” as well as the book, Even Unto Bloodshed: A Latter-day Saint Perspective on War (Kofford, 2015).

Filed Under: Articles of Faith, Hosts, Nick Galieti, Podcast, Prophets Tagged With: Apostles, covenants, Prophets, Sustaining

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe to Blog

Enter your email address:

Subscribe to Podcast

Podcast icon
Subscribe to podcast in iTunes
Subscribe to podcast elsewhere
Listen with FAIR app
Android app on Google Play

Pages

  • Blog Guidelines

FAIR Latest

  • FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 9 Days!
  • Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 9: The Early Church – The Witnesses [B]
  • FAIR’s Countdown to Conference – 10 Days!
  • The Gospel Brings Life and Immortality to Light
  • History Came to Life in First Ever Wilford Woodruff Papers Foundation Conference

Blog Categories

Recent Comments

  • Mark de St. Aubin on Letter For My Wife Rebuttal, Part 9: The Early Church – The Witnesses [B]
  • Sasha Kwapinski on Come, Follow Me with FAIR: Faithful Answers to New Testament Questions – Matthew 3; Mark 1; Luke 3
  • John E. Enslen on The Gospel Brings Life and Immortality to Light
  • Raymond Takashi Swenson on The Gospel Brings Life and Immortality to Light
  • Don Norton on The Gospel Brings Life and Immortality to Light

Archives

Footer

FairMormon Logo

FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Our Friends

  • BYU Religious Studies Center
  • BYU Studies
  • Book of Mormon Central
  • TheFamilyProclamation.org
  • Interpreter Foundation
  • Wilford Woodruff Papers Project

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • iTunes
  • YouTube

Donate to FAIR

We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.

Donate Now

Donate to us by shopping at Amazon at no extra cost to you. Learn how →

Site Footer

Copyright © 1997-2023 by The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

The views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of FAIR, its officers, directors or supporters.

No portion of this site may be reproduced without the express written consent of The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc.

Any opinions expressed, implied, or included in or with the goods and services offered by FAIR are solely those of FAIR and not those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) Logo

FAIR is controlled and operated by the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR)