[This is an excerpt from a thread on S-L during the last week of 
June 1997 discussing the execution of Laban by Nephi.  Someone 
forwarded the possibility that the "Spirit" referenced by Nephi 
wasn't literally a personage of spirit or the Holy Ghost, but 
rather was something akin to the "spirit of vengeance" (i.e. 
Nephi was filled with the desire to kill Laban in return for the 
injustice suffered at his hands). -Kurt]

 ___
| It is possible in my mind that this overwhelming thought to 
| execute a helpless drunk was the same spirit in the Book of 
| Mormon that today encourages us to exact blood vengance of 
| our enemies.
 ___

While all these things are possible, I think we have to ask
what is likely.  This is not to criticize your viewpoint.  I've
met several people who hold it and I respect those views.  I
just think that in doing any exegesis of scriptures we have
to take into consideration the surrounding text to ascertain
the rhetorical use of terms and images.

In the rest of the text the Spirit is *always* the Spirit of
God.  It is never rhetorically used by Nephi as an abstraction
of some particular type of behavior or thinking.  i.e. "the spirit 
of repentence," "the spirit of the times," "the spirit of baseball."
 
Instead we have it representing the presence of God, the influence
of God (roughly the Holy Ghost) and the communication given by
God, and also a roughly anthromorphisized communication.  This
latter use is fairly consistently portrayed by Nephi with the
terms "spoke to me" and so forth.  Notice the almost identical
rhetorical treatment of "Spirit" in 1 Nephi 11 with 1 Nephi 7.
This is telling as Nephi does not describe it as the spirit of
revelation or a more vague influence of the spirit.  He uses words
like "spoke," "voice," "said," and so forth.  This would rhetorically
indicate that a stronger influence than a "feeling" is meant.

Next lets look at the more applied aspects of Spirit in Nephi's
account.  The event with Laban starts off with Nephi saying, 
"and I was led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things 
which I should do."  Clearly the spirit here is being attributed
to some divine source of knowledge and influence.  Thus contextually
that would be the Lord.  

A more important aspect to consider is the setting prior to the
rhetorical appearance of the "Spirit."   Nephi follows this 
"Spirit" *after* an angel has physically appeared to the party.  
The angel (1 Nephi 3:29) says that "the Lord will deliver Laban 
into your hands."  Rhetorically that phrase is significant.  Let's
compare it's use in the Book of Mormon with the scriptures.

1. God hath delivered into your hands the princes of Midian, 
   Oreb and Zeeb.  (Judges 8:3)  

   Context: military victory - the death of the princes of these 
   people.  Specifically their heads were cut off.

   And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb; and 
   they slew Oreb upon the rock Oreb, and Zeeb they slew at the 
   winepress of Zeeb, and pursued Midian, and brought the heads of 
   Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon on the other side Jordan.

2. When ye go, ye shall come unto a people secure, and to a large 
   land: for God hath given it into your hands; a place where there 
   is no want of any thing that is in the earth.  (Judges 18:10)

   Context: some might read this as saying the land is simply
   promised to the Danites.  However the context shows that 
   the Danites are talking about the defeat of the inhabitants of
   that land.  (See the prophecy in verse 4)  Thus this too refers
   to military conquest.

3. If any of the men whom I have brought into your hands escape, 
   he that letteth him go, his life shall be for the life of him.
   (2 Kings 10:24)

   Context: This might simply mean that Jehu was giving them these
   men.  However, in context it is talking about killing all the
   Baal worshipers.  Thus this too means killing.

4. As ye have kept my commandments, and also the commandments of 
   my father, and have prospered, and have been kept from falling 
   into the hands of your enemies, even so if ye shall keep the 
   commandments of my son, or the commandments of God which shall 
   be delivered unto you by him, ye shall prosper in the land, and 
   your enemies shall have no power over you.  (Mosiah 2:31)

   Context: military victory

5. I will not recall the words which I have spoken unto you 
   concerning this people, for they are true; and that ye may know 
   of their surety I have suffered myself that I have fallen into 
   your hands.  (Mosiah 17:9)

   Context: death of Abinadi by priests.  Abinadi's use of "into
   your hands" is here a euphemism for his death which constitutes
   the nature of his prophecy.  (As he fell into their hands, they
   fall into the hands of the Lamanites)

6. . . .behold, ye are in our hands, and I will command my men that 
   they shall fall upon you, and inflict the wounds of death in your 
   bodies, that ye may become extinct; (Alma 44:7 also verse 9)

   Context: military victory.  Verse 9 has the same meaning, only
   applied to the Lamanites rather than the Nephites.

(There are others, but those should do)

From the above we can see that the use of the phrase "deliver into 
your hands" is always a euphemism for killing.  Also notice that 
when the angel says this in 1 Nephi 3:29 that Laban and Lemuel have
absolutely no misunderstanding about what is meant.  They ask how the 
Lord can deliver Laban (let them kill him) as Laban is such a powerful 
military leader.  Thus they immediately interpret the angel's 
statement in martial terms.  Notice that Nephi interprets the angel's 
statement in like terms.

   . . .let us go up; let us be strong like unto Moses; for he 
   truly spake unto the waters of the Red Sea and they divided 
   hither and thither, and our fathers came through, out of 
   captivity, on dry ground, and the armies of Pharaoh did follow 
   and were drowned in the waters of the Red Sea.  (1 Nephi 4:2)

Thus Nephi ties the angel's comments in a parallel fashion to the
Lord delivering Pharaoh into the hands of Moses.  Thus even before
Nephi heads out, he heads out with the faith that the Lord intends
him to kill Laban.

Finally the Spirit says "delivered into your hands" several times
to Nephi when urging him to kill Laban.  This ties the event back
to the prophecy by the angel.

Given all this, I think the idea that the spirit Nephi refers to
is just his feelings of revenge is untenable.  To summarize we have
the following:

1. an angel tells Nephi that Laban is to be killed
2. the word "Spirit" is only used by Nephi to refer to divine
   influence
3. the word "Spirit" is presented anthromorphically in a conversation
   and not as a feeling, belief, or desire

Bob mentioned Nephi's uneasiness with killing Laban.  This is true.
However notice that *before* Nephi feels unease about killing Laban
that he draws Laban's sword.  Nephi knows what he is to do.  It is
just that when he goes to do it, he is unable.  The comment Nephi
says is not "this is wrong" but rather "I've never done this before."
The Spirit then says, "behold the Lord hath delivered him into thy 
hands."  As I pointed out, this is the Lord saying, "kill him."  Nephi
then thinks of several points.

   1. Laban sought Nephi's life
   2. Laban rejected the commandments (covenant breaker)
   3. Laban stole Lehi's property

Why does Nephi think of those things?  They act as three witnesses
to convict Laban.  They first off justify Nephi in what he is about
to do but more importantly act as a way for Nephi to work up the
nerve to actually carry forth with the killing.

The Spirit again says, "slay him."  We then get a play on the covenants.
Laban must die so that the covenant can go forth to Nephi's descendents.
This brings Nephi's mind to the importance of the Law and having it.  
More important is the repetition of the words of the Lord to Nephi where
a covenant relating to his descendents was made.  (1 Nephi 2:19-24)
Thus the Spirit is replaying to Nephi the covenant.   

Nephi sums up his line of thought by going back to the statement of angel.

    I knew that the Lord had delivered Laban into my hands [kill him]
    for this cause--that I might obtain the records according to his 
    commandments.  (1 Nephi 4:17)

That last phrase, "according to his commandments" is important, both
because of the commandment to get the scriptures (1 Nephi 3:4) but also
because Nephi's personal covenant was contingent on Nephi keeping the
commandments (1 Nephi 2:20).  Thus the Spirit is pointing out to Nephi
first off that the covenant was contingent on Nephi's descendents 
keeping the commandments but also on Nephi's keeping the commandment.
The Spirit is really saying, "either kill Laban, or all the promises
of the Lord that were given will be taken away."  

The overall rhetorical structure is actually more complex than all this.
We have the three attempts of the Lehites to obtain the plates.  We have
the attempts of Laban to kill them.  We have the covenant patter of
covenant, test, fulfillment.  We have the repetition of the Exodus pattern.
Notice, for instance, not only Nephi's tying of his events to the Exodus,
but Moses' appearance before the Pharoah to the Lehites appearance before
Laban.  Also notice the implied tie between the Brass Plates and the
freeing of the Hebrews from Egypt.  The Brass Plates represent the freedom
of Nephi's descendents in a later Exodus pattern.  To a degree the plates
actually represent the freedom of Nephi from Egypt (a type for wicked
Jerusalem)

Here are a few more parallels that suggest Nephi may be rhetorically 
connecting his experiences to Gideon's.  Here are a few events from 
the story of Gideon.  I should note that there are a few contradictions 
in the story.  Scholarly consensus is that the story was originally in 
two versions that was then "reconciled" to fit into the history here.  
Given that, it may be that the account of Gideon differed somewhat on the
plates of brass from what we have today.  Interestingly Gideon is of the 
tribe of Manasseh (Judges 6:15).  As Nephi is as well, this may well be a 
hero of his genealogy, with whom Nephi is well acquainted.

1.  The story starts off with the Israelites being wicked. (Judges
    6:1)

2.  A prophet says, "thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I brought 
    you up from Egypt, and brought you forth out of the house of 
    bondage; and I delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, 
    and out of the hand of all that oppressed you, and drove them 
    out from before you, and gave you their land;"  (Judges 6:8-9)
 
    // Nephi's use of the escape from Egypt as a type  (1 Nephi 4:
    2-3)

3.  An angel appears to Gideon (Judges 6:11) and tells him that 
    the Lord will let Gideon smite the Midianites.  (Judges 6:16)

4.  The Lord tells Gideon that the Midianites are delivered into
    his hand with the image being Gideon's sword.  (Judges 7:14)

5.  Gideon captures the leaders of the Midianites and cuts off their
    heads.  (Judges 7:25)


What is interesting to me is how much of the language of the story
of Gideon Nephi uses in the account of the slaying of Laban.

_______________________________________________________________________


[This below is an additional post sent a few days later to S-L
addressing the issues of the legality of the execution of Laban.  -Kurt]

OK, I completely agree with Greg that from a modern Mormon's point
of view, the legalistic view of Nephi's actions is largely 
irrelevant.  I find it interesting though as Nephi was not a modern
Mormon.  He was a Jew, and so how he thought about it seems very
interesting to me.  So here are a few more notes now that I've
checked the Talmud, Mishnah and so forth a little.  Feel free to
stop reading if you don't care about this.  <grin>

The big point to recall in Nephi's relationship with Laban is that
Laban had sought Nephi's life.  

   . . .[Laban] thrust us out, and sent his servants to
   slay us, that he might obtain our property.  (1 Nephi
   3:25)

Regarding such matters, Adin Steinsaltz writes of Talmudic Law,

   It is a basic assumption in the Torah that "if anyone comes
   to kill you, you should kill him first"; what is more, every
   individual has the right to kill those about to commit a
   grave crime (murder or rape).  There is no room for caution-
   ing the legal deliberations where self-defense is concerned,
   nor is there a prescribed method of implementation.  
   (Steinsaltz, _The Essential Talmud_, 173)

It is also important to realize that our modern division between
religious matters and criminal or civil matters simply wasn't
present in Biblical times.  "All the spheres of legal activity
are seen only as different aspects of one comprehensive body of
teaching."  (ibid, 163)  Thus the mixing of what appears to be
religious and criminal matters by Nephi would be natural.  

What is even more ironic is that the punishment for murders in
the Talmud was beheading.  (ibid, 173)  Related to the recent
discussion of the method of beheading and it's results is the
following:

   Decapitation was performed by striking off the head with
   a sword, after the manner of the [Roman] government.  R.
   Judah said, "Such a method would be shameful; but the 
   head should be placed on a block and chopped off with a 
   hatchet."  The Rabbis replied to him, "There is no more
   shameful death than that!"  (Sanh, 7:2)

Also ironic in relation to Laban was the giving of wine to the 
condemned.

   He who goes forth to be executed is given a grain of
   frankincense in a cup of wine, that his senses should
   become numbed; as it is said, "Give strong drink unto
   him that is ready to perish, and wine unto the bitter
   in soul." (Prov 31:6)  (Sanh 43a)

Laban's false witness was also considered extremely serious.
Since as a member of the Elders of Jerusalem Laban may well
have been on the equivalent of the courts, this was doubly
so.  Recall that Laban first accused Laman of being a robber.
Note that a robber is not just a thief, but a member of a
band of outlaws who form a secret combination and are almost
a quasi-military force. Later Laban bears false witness again
to obtain Lehi's property.  According to Josephus the bearer
of false witness was to suffer what he intended the results
of his actions to be.

   If anyone be believed to have borne false witness, let
   him, if convicted, suffer the same punishment which he,
   against whom he bore witness, would have suffered.
   (Josephus, Antiquites, 4:8:15)

Likewise the Sages agreed that Deut 19:19 was to be taken
very literally.

   Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done 
   unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from 
   among you.

None of this, however, accounts for Nephi's actual taking of
the plates of brass.  By any account they were not his. 
However, because of Laban's thievery, Laban would have been
required to pay not only Lehi's property back, but also a 
fine of twice the value of the property stolen.  Nephi may
have considered the plates to be Laban's payment.  Of course
he should have gone through the courts, so this doesn't
excuse Nephi legally.  However Nephi might appeal that by
taking the property, Laban engaged in a contract - a contract
that was not finished until Nephi grasped the plates. 


\\\ Clark Goble \\\\ cgoble@fiber.net \\\