Because of pride and exceeding wealth, the Nephites during the time of Jacob were “weighed down” with many sins, particularly the sin of immorality. Jacob denounced these evil practices and boldly called the people to repentance.
Before his death, Nephi gave Jacob the responsibility of taking care of the small plates. Nephi also instructed Jacob to write “a few of the things which [Jacob] considered to be most precious” (Jacob 1:2). What things did Jacob consider to be “most precious”? (see v. 4).
“Growing out of the crucifixion of Christ is the concept that any great affliction or trial that comes upon the saints does in itself constitute a cross they must bear as part of their obligation to overcome the world. . . .
“. . . Similarly, the gospel cause commands every man to take up his cross and follow him who carried his own cross to Golgotha. That is, the saints are to carry the cross of service and consecration, the cross of devotion and obedience” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 173; see also Matthew 16:24d).
“President John Taylor said on one occasion, speaking to the brethren of the priesthood: ‘If you do not magnify your callings, God will hold you responsible for those you might have saved, had you done your duty.’
“This is a challenging statement. If I by reason of sins of commission or omission lose what I might have had in the hereafter, I myself must suffer and, doubtless, my loved ones with me. But if I fail in my assignment as a bishop, a stake president, a mission president, or one of the General Authorities of the Church—if any of us fail to teach, lead, direct, and help to save those under our direction and within our jurisdiction, then the Lord will hold us responsible if they are lost as the result of our failure” (Hugh B. Brown, in Conference Report, Oct. 1962, p. 84).
Jacob taught that God would not condemn the wealthy for their riches, but for their pride in being rich (see Jacob 2:13–14). The people of Nephi had made money, rather than God, the center of their life. Their search for wealth had become a means of persecuting their brethren rather than a means for doing good (see vv. 18–19). Jacob 2:12–19 and other related scriptures (see 1 Timothy 6:3–12, 17–19, James 5:1–6, Mosiah 4:16–26, Doctrine and Covenants 56:16–20, 104:13–18) teach the following about the accumulation of wealth:
1. Our first priority should be seeking for and building up the kingdom of God.
2. Money is a medium of exchange and is of itself neutral. Our attitude toward material and spiritual things shifts wealth out of its neutral position.
3. Two basic relationships help determine our attitude toward spiritual and material things—
a. Our relationship with God. If we turn our hearts away from God, the things of the world become our top priority. This is why Paul called covetousness “idolatry” (see Ephesians 5:5, Colossians 3:5).
b. Our relationship with our fellowmen. If we lose sight of the brotherhood of men, our desire for material wealth can lead us to such sins as dishonesty, covetousness, and neglect of the poor.
President David O. McKay counseled: “What seek ye first? What do you cherish as the dominant, the uppermost thought in your mind? What this is will largely determine your destiny. Notwithstanding the complexity of human society, we can encompass all purposes by two great important ones. First, the world of material gain; and, second, the world of happiness consisting of love and the power to do good. If it is your purpose to get worldly gain, you may obtain it. You may win in this world almost anything for which you strive. If you work for wealth, you can get it, but before you make it an end in itself, take a look at those men who have sacrificed all to the accomplishment of this purpose, at those who have desired wealth for the sake of wealth itself. Gold does not corrupt man; it is in the motive of acquiring that gold that corruption occurs” (Treasures of Life, pp. 174–75).
Unrighteous pride is sometimes called the great sin of the spirit; it was the sin of Lucifer (see Isaiah 14:12–14). President N. Eldon Tanner spoke of how seeking the praise of the world can be a source of many other sins:
“We find examples . . . so often where a person, forgetting who he is, wants to be popular with his peers and wants their praise. So often athletes get so carried away with their success and desire for praise that they forget their duty to God and the importance of his approval and as a result lose their way. This applies equally to politicians, members of fraternal organizations, professions, and business. This craving for praise and popularity too often controls actions, and as they succumb they find themselves bending their character when they think they are only taking a bow.
“. . . If individuals are more concerned with pleasing men than pleasing God, then they suffer from the same virus Satan had, for there are many situations where seeking the praise of men will clearly result in their hurting, not helping, mankind for they will do expedient and temporary things instead of those which are lasting and beneficial.
“How much more satisfying it is when we receive the praise of God, knowing that it is fully justified and that his love and respect for us will persist, when usually the praise of men is fleeting and most disappointing” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1975, p. 115; or Ensign, Nov. 1975, p. 76).
Jacob made it clear that the Lord did not want the Nephites to practice any form of plural marriage. He taught that monogamy was the law unless the Lord commanded otherwise (see Jacob 2:27–30).
In our time, the Prophet Joseph Smith stated: “I have constantly said no man shall have but [other than] one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 324). It should be recognized that during the time members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints practiced plural marriage, the Lord commanded it.
“Zion can be built up only among those who are the pure in heart, not a people torn by covetousness or greed, but a pure and selfless people. Not a people who are pure in appearance, rather a people who are pure in heart. Zion is to be in the world and not of the world, not dulled by a sense of carnal security, nor paralyzed by materialism. No, Zion is not things of the lower, but of the higher order, things that exalt the mind and sanctify the heart” (Spencer W. Kimball, in Conference Report, Apr. 1978, p. 122; or Ensign, May 1978, p. 81).
“It is very clear in the Doctrine and Covenants 76:30–37, that the only persons who will be completely overcome by this dreadful fate are the sons of perdition, who go with the devil and his angels into ‘outer darkness.’ All the rest of mankind, even the wicked, will receive some measure of salvation after they suffer the wrath of God. However, they will of necessity be brought to repentance and acceptance of the gospel of Jesus Christ as far as it will apply to them. They will not be given the ordinances which do not pertain in their kingdoms. From the reading of other passages we discover that there will be great multitudes embracing the vast majority of mankind, who will never be privileged to come back to dwell in the presence of the Father and the Son. These receive banishment from their presence, but not entirely do they get beyond the divine benediction. . . .
“All those who are permanently subject to the second death are those who have had the testimony of the Holy Ghost and who have known the truth and then have rejected it and put Christ to open shame” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:76, 78).
“In the Book of Mormon, Jacob speaks of ancient Judah as having rejected the words of its prophets because individuals living then ‘despised the words of plainness’ and because they ‘sought for things that they could not understand.’ (Jacob 4:14.) Intellectual embroidery seems to have been preferred to the whole clothing of the gospel—the frills to the fabric. In fact, one can even surmise that complexity was preferred over plainness by some because in conceptual complexity there might somehow be escape, or excuse, for noncompliance and for failure. In any event, this incredible blindness which led to the rejection of those truths spoken by prophets and which prevented the recognition of Jesus for who he was, according to Jacob, came ‘by looking beyond the mark.’ Those who look beyond plainness, beyond the prophets, beyond Christ, and beyond his simple teachings waited in vain then, as they will wait in vain now. For only the gospel of Jesus Christ teaches us of things as they really are and as they really will be. There is more realism in the revelations than in reams of secular research, for secularism is congenitally shortsighted. Without revelation and its absolute anchors, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would also follow the fads of the day, as some churches have done; but as Samuel Callan warned, the church that weds itself to the culture of the day will ‘be a widow within each succeeding age.’ This is but one of the marks of the ‘true and living’ Church: it is spared the fruits of fadism” (Neal A. Maxwell, On Being a Light [address delivered at the Salt Lake Institute of Religion, 2 Jan. 1974], p. 1).
■ Jacob had much to say about the role of a prophet. From Jacob’s teachings, what would you say is the role of a prophet? (see Jacob 1:19; 2:2–11; 3:3–4, 10; 4:4–7).
■ Jacob pointed out the sorrow that comes upon families when a family member is involved in immorality. Read Jacob 2:31–35. What did Jacob say are some of the consequences of immorality?
■ How does a person obtain spiritual power? (see Jacob 3:1–2, 4:6–12).
Jacob devoted much space to an allegory given by an ancient prophet named Zenos. This allegory reveals the history and destiny of the house of Israel. Jacob also wrote of his confrontation with Sherem, an anti-Christ. Notice the depth of Jacob’s testimony as he confounded Sherem (see Jacob 7).
An allegory uses symbolic representations to convey moral or spiritual ideas. These symbols provide far more significant meaning to the story than appears on the surface. Almost everything in an allegory represents something else. In Zenos’s allegory, for example, the vineyard, the trees, the branches, the master, and the servants all represent realities of greater significance. The value of the allegory lies in understanding what is represented.
“The parable of Zenos, recorded by Jacob in chapter five of his book, is one of the greatest parables ever recorded. This parable in and of itself stamps the Book of Mormon with convincing truth. No mortal man, without the inspiration of the Lord, could have written such a parable. It is a pity that too many of those who read the Book of Mormon pass over and slight the truths which it conveys in relation to the history, scattering, and final gathering of Israel. Such members of the Church unto whom attention has been called to the great significance of this parable have said they fail to comprehend it. It is simple and very clear to the minds of those who earnestly seek to know the truth” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 4:141).
“Zenos [was a] Hebrew prophet, often quoted by the Nephite servants of God. All we are told of his personal history is that he was slain because he testified boldly of what God revealed to him. That he was a man greatly blessed of the Lord with the spirit of prophecy is shown by that wonderful and almost incomparable parable of the vineyard given at length by Jacob (Jacob 5). His prophecies are also quoted by Nephi (I Nephi 19:10, 12, 16), Alma (Alma 33:3, 13, 15), Amulek (Alma 34:7), Samuel, the Lamanite (Helaman 15:11), and Mormon (III Nephi 10:16)” (George Reynolds, in Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 4:139).
The use of the olive tree as a symbol for the house of Israel is an excellent example of how God uses symbolism to teach his children gospel laws and principles. For centuries the olive tree has been associated with peace. War and its grim attendants of destruction—rape of the land, siege, and death—were hardly conducive to the cultivation of olive orchards, that require many years of careful husbandry to bring into full production. When the dove returned to the ark, it carried an olive leaf in its beak, as though to symbolize that God was again at peace with the earth (see Genesis 8:11). The olive branch was used in ancient Greece and Rome to signify peace, and it is still used in that sense in the great seal of the United States where the American eagle is shown grasping an olive branch in its talons. The only true source of peace is Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace. His peace comes through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. These laws and ordinances are given to the world through the house of Israel, symbolized by the olive tree. Someone once said that Israel was not chosen to be an uplifted people, but an uplifting people.
There is further symbolic significance in the cultivation of an olive tree. If the green slip of an olive tree is merely planted and allowed to grow, it develops into the wild olive, a bush that grows without control into a tangle of limbs and branches producing only a small, worthless fruit (see Harold N. and Alma L. Moldenke, Plants of the Bible, p. 159). To become the productive “tame” olive tree, the main stem of the wild tree must be cut back completely and a branch from a tame olive tree grafted into the stem of the wild one. With careful pruning and cultivating the tree will begin to produce its first fruit in about seven years, but it will not become fully productive for nearly fifteen years. In other words, the olive tree cannot become productive by itself; it requires grafting by the husbandman to bring it into production. Throughout its history Israel has demonstrated the remarkable aptness characterized by the symbol of the olive tree. When they gave themselves to their God for pruning and grafting the Israelites prospered and bore much fruit, but when they turned from Christ, the Master of the vineyard, and sought to become their own source of life and sustenance they became wild and unfruitful.
Two other characteristics of the olive tree further illustrate how it is an appropriate symbol for Israel. First, though requiring nearly fifteen years to come into full production, an olive tree may produce fruit for centuries. Some trees now growing in the Holy Land have been producing fruit abundantly for at least four hundred years. The second amazing quality of the tree is that as it finally grows old and begins to die, the roots send up a number of new green shoots that, if grafted and pruned, will mature into full-grown olive trees. The root of the tree will also send up shoots after the tree is cut down. Thus, while the tree itself may produce fruit for centuries, the root of the tree may go on producing fruit and new trees for millennia. It is believed that some of the ancient olive trees located in Israel today have come from trees that were ancient during Christ’s mortal ministry. How can Israel be compared to an olive tree, which time and again seems to have been cut down and destroyed, yet, each time a new tree springs forth from the roots?
Zenos was not the only prophet to use the olive tree as a symbol for the chosen people of God. Jeremiah, foreseeing the coming destruction of the Jews by Babylonia, compared the covenant people to a green olive tree consumed by fire (see Jeremiah 11:16). The apostle Paul used a brief allegory almost identical to that of Zenos to warn the Roman Christians against pride as they compared their favored position to that of the Jews (see Romans 11:16–24). In modern revelation, the Lord uses the parable of a vineyard and olive trees to show his will concerning the redemption of Zion (see D&C 101:43–58).
An allegory or a parable should not be pushed too far in an attempt to correlate every item precisely with some outside reality. However, certain major elements need to be defined if the allegory itself is to be understood. The following items seem important in Zenos’s allegory:
|
Item |
Interpretation |
|
1. The vineyard |
1. The world |
|
2. Master of the vineyard |
2. Jesus Christ |
|
3. The servant |
3. The Lord’s prophets |
|
4. Tame olive tree |
4. The house of Israel, the Lord’s covenant people |
|
5. Wild olive tree |
5. Gentiles, or non-Israel (later in the parable, wild branches are apostate Israel) |
|
6. Branches |
6. Groups of people |
|
7. The roots of the tame olive tree |
7. The gospel covenant and promises made by God that constantly give life and sustenance to the tree |
|
8. Fruit of the tree |
8. The lives or works of men |
|
9. Digging, pruning, fertilizing |
9. The Lord’s work with his children, which seeks to persuade them to be obedient and produce good fruit |
|
10. Transplanting the branches |
10. Scattering of groups throughout the world, or restoring them to their original position |
|
11. Grafting |
11. The process of spiritual rebirth wherein one is joined to the covenant |
|
12. Decaying branches |
12. Wickedness and apostasy |
|
13. Casting the branches into the fire |
13. The judgment of God |
An anti-Christ is a person who opposes the Lord. This opposition may come in two ways:
An anti-Christ may set himself up as a savior of the people and offer pseudosalvation based on his own principles, calculated to bring him the honor and glory of the world. Through either word or action the anti-Christ says, “I am the source of salvation and power.”
The second way a person can oppose Christ is to set up any other person or system as a substitute for the Savior and then seek to promote this substitute in the hearts and minds of the people. Either way, the result is the same—people are taught to reject the Master and to seek elsewhere for solutions to spiritual problems.
In Jacob 7 we meet the first of the several anti-Christs written of in the Book of Mormon. Sherem, like others who followed, was an expert at oratory and flattering words.
“Some anti-LDS critics of the Book of Mormon have raised the question as to how Jacob could possibly have used such a word as adieu when this word clearly comes from the French language, which was not developed until hundreds of years after the time of Jacob. Such critics evidently overlook the fact that the Book of Mormon is translation literature, and Joseph Smith felt free in his translation to use any words familiar to himself and his readers that would best convey the meaning of the original author. It is interesting to note that there is a Hebrew word Lehitra’ot, which has essentially the same meaning in Hebrew as the word adieu has in French. Both of these words are much more than a simple farewell; they include the idea of a blessing. Would it be unreasonable to remind these critics that none of the words contained in the English translation of the book of Jacob were used by Jacob himself? These words all come from the English language, which did not come into existence until long after Jacob’s time!” (Daniel H. Ludlow, A Companion to Your Study of the Book of Mormon, p. 163).
■ Read President Spencer W. Kimball’s message, “‘When the World Will Be Converted,’” Ensign, Oct. 1974, pp. 3–14. You might want to outline this important message.
■ Read the account of Jacob and Sherem in Jacob 7. Why was Sherem successful at the beginning of his efforts among the Nephites? Why was Jacob able to confound Sherem?
Despite the relative shortness of the books of Enos, Jarom, Omni, and Words of Mormon, they contain priceless information. The book of Enos contains one of the finest examples of personal religion in the scriptures. Jarom points out some of the spiritual and temporal blessings that come to people striving to do what is right. The book of Omni contains the brief words of many record keepers and provides an overview of the people who lived during that period of the Book of Mormon. Finally, the Words of Mormon offers an explanation of why Mormon included the small plates of Nephi with his abridgment of the large plates of Nephi.
The wrestle Enos had before God was with himself (see Enos 1:2). Sometimes the greatest effort is put forth when a person contends with himself before the Lord. Such wrestling is the struggle to find and express one’s real desires which are sometimes hidden behind sin, evasion, and cover-up. Wrestling with oneself involves deep thought, meditation, and concentration. It means going beyond the cliche level of prayer to the point that one truly pours his soul into words and offers them to God. Repetitions cease to be vain, trite, or unfelt. Instead, each phrase is an expression of a yearning desire to do God’s will. Such prayers are assisted and guided by the Holy Spirit, “for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered” (Romans 8:26).
Enos’s choice of words in Enos 1:3–4 (“sunk deep,” “hungered,” “cried,” “mighty prayer and supplication,” “raise my voice high”) effectively shows his efforts to truly communicate with the Lord.
Faith in God’s absolute and perfect truthfulness was a key to Enos’s acceptance of the remission of his sins. Enos said he knew “God could not lie” (Enos 1:6). So when the Lord said, “Thy sins are forgiven thee” (v. 5), Enos believed it.
Joseph Smith taught that a knowledge of the existence of God’s truthfulness is necessary: “And lastly, but not less important to the exercise of faith in God, is the idea of the existence of the attribute truth in him; for without the idea of the existence of this attribute the mind of man could have nothing upon which it could rest with certainty—all would be confusion and doubt. But with the idea of the existence of this attribute in the Deity in the mind, all the teachings, instructions, promises, and blessings, become realities, and the mind is enabled to lay hold of them with certainty and confidence, believing that these things, and all that the Lord has said, shall be fulfilled in their time; and that all the cursings, denunciations, and judgments, pronounced upon the heads of the unrighteous, will also be executed in the due time of the Lord: and, by reason of the truth and veracity of him, the mind beholds its deliverance and salvation as being certain” (Lectures on Faith 4:16).
Enos learned that forgiveness is made possible through faith in the atoning power of Jesus Christ (see Enos 1:8). When complete trust is placed in the Savior, a person repents of his sins and determines to keep all of the Lord’s commandments. Then the Lord, at an appropriate time, speaks peace to the person’s soul.
After he received a forgiveness of his sins, for whom did Enos next feel a concern? (see Enos 1:9). Enos’s love for the Nephites brought this answer to his prayer: “I will visit thy brethren according to their diligence in keeping my commandments” (v. 10). As a result of this answer Enos’s “faith began to be unshaken in the Lord” (v. 11), and he prayed for the welfare of the Lamanites. What promise did Enos then receive?
Enos’s example illustrates the expanding concern of a righteous person, first for himself, next for his own people, and finally for his enemies. As it was with Enos, so it is with us. When we obtain a knowledge of our own forgiveness, we become anxious for others to receive the same blessing.
“[One] way by which we receive revelation is the way that the Prophet Enos spoke of. After he had gone up and received the great commission to carry on the work and to write the record, he penned this very significant statement in his record in the Book of Mormon. ‘And while I was thus struggling in the spirit, behold, the voice of the Lord came into my mind again, saying . . .’ (Enos 10.) In other words, sometimes we hear the voice of the Lord coming into our minds, and when it comes the impressions are just as strong as though he were talking as with a trumpet into our ear. Jeremiah says something like that in Jeremiah 1:4: ‘Then the word of the Lord came unto me, saying . . .’ He was having the voice of the Lord into his mind, as Enos said.
“In the story of the Book of Mormon we have Nephi upbraiding his brothers, calling them to repentance; and in his statement to them he gives voice to the same thought when he says, ‘And he hath spoken unto you in a still, small voice, but ye were past feeling, that ye could not feel his words.’ (1 Nephi 17:45.) Thus the Lord, by revelation, brings into our minds as though a voice were speaking.
“May I bear humble testimony, if I may be pardoned, to that fact? I was once in a situation where I needed help. The Lord knew I needed help and I was on an important mission. I was awakened in the hours of the morning—as though someone had wakened me to straighten me out on something that I had planned to do in a contrary course—and there was clearly mapped out before me as I lay there that morning, just as surely as though someone had sat on the edge of my bed and told me what to do. Yes, the voice of the Lord comes into our minds, and we are directed thereby” (Harold B. Lee, Divine Revelation [address given to the Brigham Young University student body, 15 Oct. 1952], pp. 7–8).
Enos knew that when he died his Redeemer would accept him into the kingdom of God (see Enos 1:27). Enos’s reward for a life of faithfulness to God was made known to him through “the more sure word of prophecy” (D&C 131:5). The Lord explained through the Prophet Joseph Smith that “the more sure word of prophecy means a man’s knowing that he is sealed up unto eternal life” (v. 5).
Jarom’s brief addition to the record teaches the following:
Even at this early period, the Nephites who kept the record understood that it would be for the benefit of the Lamanites (see Jarom 1:2).
Apostasy was rampant among the Nephites (see v. 3).
There was a strong group of believers who “had communion with the Holy Spirit” and kept the commandments (see vv. 4–5).
The Nephite laws were exceedingly strict (see v. 5).
The Lamanites were more numerous than the Nephites and had degenerated into a primitive state of existence (see v. 6).
The Nephites were led by righteous men and thus prevailed in battle (see v. 7).
The Nephites had expanded beyond a simple agricultural form of society (see v. 8).
Only constant preaching kept the Nephites from being destroyed by the Lamanites. Jarom recorded that their prophets “did prick their hearts with the word” (v. 12). It was this principle that later motivated Alma to resign his position as chief judge in order to preach the gospel (see Alma 4:19, 31:5).
The book of Omni begins with a succession of four record keepers in the first eleven verses. In their brief additions to the sacred plates we find a record of growing Nephite apostasy and wickedness. Amaron tells us that because of this wickedness the more wicked part of the Nephites were destroyed (see Omni 1:5).
Amaleki recorded information about a second colony of Jews who escaped to the promised land from Jerusalem and became known in the Book of Mormon as the people of Zarahemla. Because Mulek, a son of Zedekiah, King of Judah (see Omni 1:15, Mosiah 25:2, Helaman 6:10), came with them, the group has often been called Mulekites, even though the name is not used in the Book of Mormon. Thus, to the seed of Manasseh through Lehi (see Alma 10:3), and the seed of Ephraim through Ishmael (see Erastus Snow, Journal of Discourses, 23:184–85), was added the seed of Judah.
“The two pages comprising The Words of Mormon are approximately five hundred years out of context. Note that the approximate date at the end of the book of Omni is 130 B.C. whereas the Words of Mormon are dated about 385 A.D. (See 4 Nephi 48 and Mormon 1:2; 6:5 for the major dates in the life of Mormon.) However, the approximate date of the beginning of the book of Mosiah is once again 130 B.C.
“The Words of Mormon were apparently written near the end of Mormon’s life for the purpose of connecting two major records. It was made known to Mormon ‘by the workings of the Spirit of the Lord’ that the small plates of Nephi (which ended when Benjamin was a relatively young man) might be used to replace his abridgment of the book of Lehi [the first book on the large plates of Nephi] (which ended when Benjamin was an old man about ready to die). So that a gap would not occur in the history of the Nephites, Mormon included the major events of the lifetime of King Benjamin in The Words of Mormon, thus connecting the account on the small plates of Nephi with Mormon’s abridgment of the book of Mosiah” (Daniel H. Ludlow, A Companion to Your Study of the Book of Mormon, p. 171).
The Nephites kept two sets of records, each called the plates of Nephi. On the large plates of Nephi they recorded their secular history, and on the small plates of Nephi they recorded primarily their sacred history (see 1 Nephi 9:2–4).
Nephi did not make the small plates until the Lord told him to do so, some thirty years after Lehi’s colony had left Jerusalem (see 2 Nephi 5:28–31). Nephi did not understand why he was to make a second set of records, but he had faith that it was “for a wise purpose in him [the Lord], which purpose I know not” (1 Nephi 9:5). Nearly a thousand years later, the prophet Mormon echoed words similar to Nephi’s when he testified that along with his abridgment of the large plates of Nephi he was including the small plates of Nephi “for a wise purpose” (Words of Mormon 1:7).
Joseph Smith started the translation of the Book of Mormon with Mormon’s abridgment of the large plates of Nephi. He had completed 116 manuscript pages when Martin Harris pleaded with Joseph to let him take the manuscript and show it to family members. Joseph pleaded with the Lord and eventually Martin’s request was granted. The manuscript fell into the hands of wicked men (see D&C 10:8) and became known as the “Lost Manuscript.”
The loss of the manuscript makes it apparent why the Lord commanded Nephi and Mormon to do what they did. Joseph Smith was told not to retranslate the portion he had already completed, but to translate the small plates of Nephi (see vv. 30, 38–45).
“The Lord knoweth all things from the beginning; wherefore, he prepareth a way to accomplish all his works among the children of men” (1 Nephi 9:6). The Lord inspired Nephi and Mormon to do the necessary things that would allow his work to be accomplished by Joseph Smith, even though they were all separated from each other by hundreds of years.
■ What price would you be willing to pay to know God—not to just know about him, but to really know him? What would the essential ingredients of that price be? Enos answered all of these questions from personal experience. He gave us the formula for knowing God and acquiring a deep love for him and his children. Analyze the book of Enos and develop your personal formula for knowing God.
■ How are you progressing with the Savior’s admonition to love your enemies (see Matthew 5:44)? The following scriptures demonstrate some of the ways people in the Book of Mormon showed love for their enemies: Jacob 7:24–25, Enos 1:9–14, Jarom 1:2, Moroni 1:1–4. What can you do to show more love for enemies you may have?
■ The book of Omni contains a valuable history. Read Omni 1:12–23 and identify the three civilizations being discussed. Identify which civilization each person mentioned belonged to.