General Comments on 2 Nephi As the author stays the same, why did Nephi split the books into two parts rather than just leaving it as one large book? I would assume the primary reason for the split is the small plates go real time (i.e., no longer a selective abridgement of the large plates, cf. 5:28-32). This would form a natural division between the two books as one would be a highly edited recounting and the second would be selective documentation as it occurred. This would especially be the case if Nephi started writing the second book in real time before he had completed abridging the large plates into the portion of the small plates that ended up comprising the first book. Another reason might be the death of Lehi (ch. 1-4), the obvious patriarch, and the resulting conflict over power which causes division (cf. 5:1-7) resulting in Nephi being the political and religious leader of one of the groups (cf. 5:8-18). General Comment on 2 Nephi 1-4 These chapters form Lehi's closing comments and blessings on his sons. The blessings and pronouncements are classically Semitic and comparable to any of the blessings pronounced by the other OT patriarchs upon their sons. However, while the Genesis account of the early patriarchal benedictions, and occasionally maledictions, are quite terse, the blessings here are preserved in great detail by a firsthand witness. Thus, this account sheds a great deal of light on a custom which is oftentimes obscure in the OT record. Comments on 2 Nephi 1 v1-3 After accounting for the various things he taught to his brothers (cf. 1 Ne. 19:23-24 and 1 Ne. 20-22), Nephi turns his attention to Lehi's teachings to his other sons. Lehi points out what a great work the Lord has done for them (v. 1), despite their rebellions (v. 2), in giving them a land of promise for their inheritance (v. 3). v4-6 While the land promised to Abraham to be possessed by his posterity is presently occupied by Gentiles (v. 4), Lehi has obtained lands for inheritance by covenant for his own lineage (v. 5-6). v4 The underlying thesis is Lehi's concern over the fact that Israel's land of inheritance, via the Abrahamic Covenant is presently lost. Yes, naturally, it is a good thing the family escaped the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, but the wider consequence is none of Abraham's seed are in possession of the land promised to him. Much to Lehi's benefit, he has obtained another land for his lineage by covenant. So, even if the original ancestral land has been presently forfeited, a new one has been obtained. But, if his sons repeat the same mistakes the rest of Israel has made, then they will be destroyed and swept off this land even as those they left behind were first swept from Northern Israel by Assyria and from Jerusalem by Babylon. This forms the thesis for v. 7-22. v6 The political, social, and theological implications of this verse are extraordinary. Lehi makes it perfectly clear the Lord takes a very active hand in crafting human history as He sees fit, in so much that He controls emigration. As we in present times look back at the little bit of well-documented history and see how complicated the social and political factors were resulting in the colonization of the Americas and subsequent waves of emigration, we would have to admit the Lord is very much "hands on" when it comes to earthly matters. People often see God as diffident and distant. How could He be when He is engineering populations so actively as to control who does and who does not emigrate to certain areas? As such, this verse should impact how we form our opinions on emigration issues. The ambiguity of this verse is offset by the detail given in 1 Ne. 13 concerning who these people are who will be led to this land promised to Lehi. v7-22 These verses form an emphatic exhortation by Lehi aimed at his rebellious sons. Lehi has seen the same visions of what is to occur in the New World as did Nephi (cf. 1 Ne. 14:29). He is well aware they will probably not repent, and has seen their wars and ultimate demise at the hands of Gentiles. Regardless, being the soft-hearted father he is (cf. 1 Ne. 8:37), he attempts to entreat them one last time before he dies. Lehi is drawing a parallel between the current events forcing their family to flee Jerusalem (v. 3-4) and the potential fate of his sons. Just as Israel and Judah rebelled against the Lord and were subsequently scattered for it, so will this branch of Joseph be scattered and dispossessed in the same manner if they follow in their predecessor's footsteps. Which fate is prescribed for all of natural Israel in Lev. 26 and Deut. 28 as a result of rebelling against the Lord their God. Lehi is clearly addressing an audience wider than just Laman and Lemuel. His predictions are aimed at subsequent generations who dwindle in unbelief. These verses form a very well defined synthetical parallelism centering on v. 14-15. The outer portions of the parallelism (v. 7-12, 18-22) deal with matters of corporate salvation, whereas the center of the parallelism (v. 13-14, 15- 17) deal with individual salvation. The parallelism shapes up like this: A - Subsequent generations dwindle in unbelief and scattered and smitten by other nations B - Shake off the awful chains of hell[, Laman and Lemuel] C - A few more days and I [Lehi] go the way of all the earth C - But behold, the Lord hath redeemed my [Lehi's] soul from hell B - [Laman and Lemuel] be cut off and destroyed forever A - A cursing should come upon you for the space of many generations While Lehi is confident he will be embraced by the Lord upon giving up his mortal body (the subject of the C's), he is quite concerned about these rebellious sons of his not being embraced by the Lord (B's). Thus, while Lehi is righteous and has obtained the covenant, there is no guarantee of salvation for any of his children by birthright. And if his sons are rebellious and do not walk in their father's footsteps, then their children probably will not either, and the whole lineage is jeopardized (A's). Lehi's statements effectively dispose of the notion of children obtaining salvation based upon the merits of lineage, a false doctrine popular during Christ's mortal ministry. It also warns against the impact an individual can have on entire populations. Laman was just one man, but he negatively influenced generations to come. v7 "a land of liberty unto them", cp. 10:11-14. Note the promise here is completely conditional upon the righteousness of the inhabitants. v9 "shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land", this formula is repeated frequently throughout the entire BofM and is definitely one of the main themes. If one were to distill this parallelism into one phrase, this would be it. v10 is couched in legalistic rhetoric. Lehi cites several arguments and points of evidence against the rebellious: 1. Having a knowledge of the creation of the earth and all its inhabitants, referring to the Genesis account of the Creation and origin of Israel, 2. Knowing the great and marvelous works of the Lord performed since the Creation, referring to the history of the origin of Israel, 3. Having power given to them to do all things by faith, referring to the contemporary miracles performed in their very sight, 4. Having all the commandments from the beginning, referring to the documentation of the various laws given to humans, and particularly the Law of Moses, 5. Having been brought into the land of promise, cp. 1 Ne. 17:13. As the brothers have access to the Law, History, and Prophets, have witnessed firsthand several notable miracles, and have even been brought to a completely different continent, the evidence supporting the reality and presence of the Lord is damning. These rebellious sons are without excuse. This evidence would also apply to any of Lehi's descendants as well, particularly the Nephites, as they have access to the Scriptures and witness various miracles and know full well they are a branch of Israel nowhere near the land of Israel. Lehi is appealing not only to his immediate sons, but to all of this posterity as is plain from v. 12. v11 is a distillation of the message of 1 Ne. 13. v13-14 The various images of waking, casting off chains, and shaking off dust are drawn from Isa. 52:2. This chapter in Isaiah is summoning Zion up from an obscurity imposed upon her as a result of her rebellion. As such, Lehi is using the rhetoric from Isaiah to summon his own branch of Israel to lift themselves up from the same fate. v15 "I am encircled about eternally in the arms of his love", typically when referring to the arm of the Lord the context is that of Judgement, cf. 2 Ne. 8:5. And that is the main theme of the present text as well, with the rebellious sons of Lehi being judged and punished. However, in sharp contrast to this is the relationship Lehi has with the Lord. Rather than the Lord's arm being exposed in judgement against him, it is extended in mercy to him, cp. Jacob 6:5, Alma 5:33, Moroni 5:11. Lehi's intent is to show the Lord is always willing to embrace and show mercy, and to get his sons to obtain it rather than be smitten by the Lord's hand. Another point which comes across is Lehi's plain and simple testimony of the Lord. He states flat out he has a very good relationship with the Lord, one close enough that he is confident that when he dies he will be embraced by the Lord. As such, Lehi is exhibiting his faith in the Lord as well as of the afterlife. His rebellious sons probably don't give much stock to either of these things as they have little faith, so Lehi bears down on them with his personal witness of their reality. v16-17 again show Lehi's loving and compassionate disposition towards his sons. Lehi is no harsh authoritarian or diffident fascist. v18-19 The "my sons" is inclusive of subsequent generations as well as the present, as indicated by the "many generations" and "a favored people of the Lord" statements. Lehi has seen the fate of his lineage so he is well aware of the broad scope what is going to happen, hence the confession "his will be done" in v. 19. But, he doesn't let this prevent himself from exhorting whatever individual he might reach to repent. We also have to remember a father and prophet's duty is to warn and exhort so as to release himself from the responsibility of leaving them in ignorance. Thus, Lehi is shaking the blood off his own cloak when it comes to his rebellious sons. Lehi does not explicitly state this (as his less genteel son Jacob later does, cf. Jacob 1:19), but the effect is the same nonetheless. v23-29 While Lehi made a series of general arguments against the rebellion of both his immediate sons and later generations in v. 10, he now addresses the present sons with detailed examples of their rebellion by citing specific cases (v. 24-26). His comments are cast in the light of his imminent death. He is clearly aware of the struggle between Laman, the oldest son, and Nephi, the spiritual son, with regard to leadership. His death will result in Laman establishing himself as patriarch. Given this power and the past resentment of Nephi's spirituality, Lehi knows the result will mean trouble. In an attempt to minimize contention, Lehi endorses Nephi as the patriarch of the family after Lehi's death (v. 27-29). v28-29 "I leave unto you a blessing, yea, even my first blessing", the tradition of a father's blessing was such that he could give it to whoever he liked as he saw fit. The birthright was not something the father had power over, it was automatically transferred to the eldest son unless he did something to jeopardize his standing. However, the blessing, sometimes called the "birthright blessing", was entirely up to the father, as was the case with Joseph blessing Ephraim above Manasseh. Tradition developed such that the firstborn son received both, but that was merely a tradition. The details of this conditional blessings are given in 4:3- 9. v28 "and Sam", we need not include Sam in with Laman and Lemuel when it comes to labeling him as rebellious just because he is grouped together with them here. In 4:11 we are informed Sam is blessed along with Nephi and is not blessed in the same manner as is Laman and Lemuel in 4:3-9. What Lehi is doing is listing his sons in age order and telling them to defer to Nephi. The traditional order of ascension in the family is eldest first. But, in this case Lehi makes it plain to the three older brothers their younger brother Nephi is to lead them. Note Jacob and Joseph, who are younger, are left out of the equation. v30-32 Lehi offers a blessing to Zoram even though he isn't his father or master (v. 30). The blessing he offers him is one that is based upon his personal righteousness and willingness to listen to Nephi (v. 31). As such, he and his children will be blessed as is Nephi. The underlying context is Lehi isn't in the position to offer a father's blessing on Zoram. But, since he is the departing patriarch he shows his respect for Zoram by mentioning the general blessings of righteousness which are available to him and his posterity. Contrast this blessing with what is said of the sons of Ishmael in 4:10. There, Lehi is not recorded as blessing them because that would have been Ishmael's responsibility. However, with Zoram having nobody to bless him, Lehi goes ahead and does what he can. Copyright © 2001 by S. Kurt Neumiller . All rights reserved. No part of this text may be reproduced in any form or by any means for commercial gain without the express written consent of the author. Digital or printed copies may be freely made and distributed for personal and public non-commercial use.