Their Mothers Knew It
READ Alma 53:10-15
What additional sacrifice, 15
years after they buried their swords at the time of their conversion, did the
Lord require at the hands of the Lamanite-Ammonites and what can we learn from
it?
To watch as others defended them with their lives, unable to
defend themselves without breaking their oath to God.
To have the faith required to trust that God will bless them for
honoring their oath (see Alma 56:6-8).
It is interesting that these righteous Lamanites were still in
danger of losing their souls if they would take up arms again (15 years later),
not because of breaking their oath but because of the concern that the blood
lust would return to their hearts – in other words, this would be an
opportunity for the dark entities that had taken such a strong hold on their
hearts years before to return if they lost the Holy Spirit in the heat of
battle; and even after 15 years, they felt so strongly about the possibility of
this happening that they still refused to take up arms.
Note: As an aside, do not make idle oaths or vows to the Lord; He
will hold you to them and you never know how they will continue to test and try
you in the future. I am not implying
this was a vow (which a man makes or instigates with God), as the text refers
to their “oath” several times as a “covenant”, which only God can make or
instigate with man (see Alma 24:18; Alma 53:14-15), and which is therefore
binding on both parties.
READ Alma 53:16-22
What covenant did the stripling
warriors make with the Nephites?
To stand their ground and fight to the death of the last young
man, in the cause of the liberty of their people, the Nephites.
What advantages and disadvantages
did the stripling warriors have?
Disadvantages: very young, had never fought, had been raised by
non-violent mothers.
Advantages: courageous, strong, fit, responsible/trustworthy
achievers, sober, righteous and obedient so they were filled with a higher than
normal level of truth/intelligence/light/glory.
But as we will see, neither the disadvantages nor the advantages
were relevant to their survival…
READ Alma 56:47-48
Why were their mothers called out
as teaching their sons such faith?
Most of these young men were likely the sons of the 1000 converted
Lamanite men who died willingly at the hands of the non-Christian Lamanite
warriors 15 years previously (see Alma 24:20-27) and may have even watched
their father’s die.
So most of the sons were raised by their single mothers as their
fathers were dead; and it was their mother’s faith, in the face of being
widows, that taught these boys what it meant to depend wholly upon the Lord –
spiritually, emotionally, and physically, as even making a living would have
been difficult.
How had these mothers gained such
faith?
Their mothers had sacrificed their husbands to the Lord, rather
than see them pick up swords again and sin and be cast off forever.
And now those same mothers were sacrificing their sons, who had
not only never fought but had been mainly raised by women who had taken a vow
of non-violence.
What happens when you offer your
all in sacrifice to God?
You, personally, will obtain a promise of salvation directly from
God (see LoF 6:7).
And having personally obtained from God such a promise of salvation
and validation of the course one is pursuing, these women showed a complete
resolve to follow Christ and exercise faith as a principle of power (see LoF
6:2-3, 7; Hebrews 10:34; 2 Corinthians 5:1); their faith had become unshakable.
That is how they KNEW it – how their faith in Christ was so sure;
they had received a personal assurance on account of their sacrifice of all
things. These women had come unto Christ
and KNEW Him.
How did the mothers know that God
would deliver their sons when He had not delivered their husbands?
Lehi had given the sons of Laman and Lemuel a blessing of adoption
(he calls his grandchildren “my sons and daughters” thus by-passing their
wicked parents), which carried with it a promise of protection and mercy, if
they or their posterity ever overcame the unbelief and traditions taught them
by their fathers and came unto Christ and kept His commandments (see 2 Nephi
4:3-7, 9); this was his “first blessing” or the birthright blessing (see 2
Nephi 1:28-29).
The mothers must have searched the Nephite scriptures and found
them, or angels had opened the scriptures to them, revealing their true meaning
so that they could exercise faith in the promise of Father Lehi and his sealing
power, 500 years before.
Incidentally and poignantly, their husbands had activated and
re-sealed Lehi’s covenant through their sacrifices – making the covenant with
God in force through the spilling of their own blood, which was anciently the
way that one made or “cut a covenant” – ensuring the safety of their wives and
children.
READ Alma 56:55-56 and Alma 57:19-27
What was the result of the faith
these mothers had in the covenant they had received from God through Lehi?
These untrained, untried boys could not be killed!
While over a thousand of the other trained and battle hardened Nephite
warriors were killed in the same battles.
The stripling warriors are the proof that God can and will protect
and fight the battles of His people if they honor the covenants they’ve made
with Him and embody the level of faith and charity required of one who is a man
of God and not a man of blood. These
young men lived by the principles of “Christian war” set out in the Book of
Mormon and were justified in their behavior and miraculously enabled in their
victory. God didn’t protect them from
having to fight, but once in the battle, He protected them in a truly
miraculous way, given the lack of training and experience they had; if the veil
were rent and we could see what was happening in the spiritual realm during
these battles, we would likely see angels in defensive combat on their behalf,
and perhaps even their dead fathers would have been allowed to participate in
that angelic force?
The Covenant of the Vassal King & the Emperor
READ Alma 56:10, 44-46
Why did the stripling warriors
call Helaman “father” and why did he call them his “sons”?
In the ancient Near East, there was a covenant relationship
between Emperors and Vassal Kings, and between those vassal kings and their
people (see 1 Samuel 24:11-16; 2 Samuel 7:14; 2 Kings 16:7; Isaiah 63:8, 16).
The emperor was the “father” and the vassal kings were the “sons”;
then the vassal kings were the “fathers” and their people were the “sons”.
Under the terms of such covenant relationships, if a vassal king
kept the law of the emperor, then the emperor was bound to protect both the
vassal king and those over whom the vassal ruled. The same relationship also existed between
the vassal king and his people. Under
this theology, an entire family hierarchy of father-son relationships extended
all the way from the Most High God down to the lowest Telestial person.
How might one ascend or progress
in this “father-son” spiritual hierarchy?
By keeping the “law” of his “father” who lived true to what was
required (the law) to abide at that spiritual level.
Or in other words, by keeping the covenant of obedience to your
“father” – because your “father’s commandments” are only to abide by the Law
that the father lives by himself, so that the son can become as the father is –
because he also now lives that same law.
What is implied about the Law
that must be abided by as one ascends through these kingdoms?
The law becomes more stringent or refined as one ascends upward (see
D&C 88:21-40).
At the same time, the law becomes more expansive and far-reaching
the further one ascends upward (see Isaiah 55:8-9)
For example, to be saved one must be precisely as Christ is and
nothing else, because Christ is precisely as the Father is or Christ would not
be able to take the Father’s place; but Christ became what the Father is, He
hasn’t always been like the Father (see D&C 93:12-14); He did it by
progressing from a lesser degree to a greater degree of light.
Why might the stripling warriors
have selected Helaman to be their leader and “father”?
They must have had a long-standing relationship with Helaman as a
teacher or mentor of spiritual things - in the way that disciples of Old
Testament prophets were called “sons of the prophets” while the prophet was
referred to as “father” (see 2 Kings 2:3-15; 2 Kings 4:1-15; 2 Kings 13:14;
Amos 2:11).
Or the sons (or their mothers) had it revealed to them that
Helaman was the Lord’s choice to be their “father” because he had a connection
with the Lord Himself, having become His son already.
What is the difference between a
“son of a prophet” and a “son of God”?
The nature or refinement of Law that the disciple is living; being
the son of a prophet is living by the law of a Telestial glory (see D&C
76:98-101).
If they are a “son of a prophet”, they are being taught the gospel
by a true messenger but have no covenant “father-son” relationship themselves
with Christ.
Although that is exactly where the teachings of the prophet will
lead, if the disciple will arise from their current situation and ascend to come
unto Christ themselves by living Christ’s Law, as taught to them by the prophet
who is already living it and has already become Christ’s “son” (see LoF
2:54-56).
READ Alma 58:39-41
What did the tutelage of Helaman
through the trials of the war enable the stripling warriors to become?
They kept the Law of God (Christ) in their own right, as a result
of the successful trial of their faith in the war.
They were saved temporally from death during the war (against
great odds).
They were strict to remember the Lord and perhaps, they too, like
Helaman, had now entered the Lord’s presence where they abided “continually”.
If the people of a vassal king keep the Law of that king, and that
king keeps the Law of the Emperor, then by the covenant, the Emperor is bound
to protect both the king and his people.
Who is the “Emperor” who is bound
to protect us if we keep our covenant relationship with our “vassal” king?
Depending upon what law you are currently living and which
“father-son” relationship you currently have…
The “Emperor” is Christ and the “vassal king” is a true messenger
or prophet.
Or the Emperor is the Father and the vassal king is Christ.
It is important to see that the prophet is not doing the
protecting but God (the “Emperor”) is; adherence to a prophet’s words will only
save you to the degree that you successfully come unto Christ yourself.
In either case, that’s some good protection! Although the “fine print” of the covenant
contract may not protect the individual from physical death if their earthly
mission has been successfully completed and their “Father” calls them “home”
(see Mosiah 13:1-3).
Lessons in Leadership
READ Alma 60:1-10
Is Captain Moroni’s issue with
Pahoran legitimate?
Yes.
Pahoran was responsible for recruiting soldiers, arming them, and
ensuring the military was taken care of with supplies.
This had not happened – Moroni’s honest expectations have been, in
fact, violated.
And as a result, thousands of good men had died that would not
have died otherwise.
READ Alma 60:14, 17-21
What are the three possible
explanations Moroni can think of for Pahoran’s failure to perform his duty?
You are a traitor to the country, seeking for power.
You are fearful and selfish; you have surrounded yourself with
soldiers and supplies to defend and pamper yourself instead of sending them to
us, where they were much more needed.
You have forgotten the commandments of God and how the Lord
delivers His people – i.e. that mankind must do his part.
What feedback or coaching might
you give Moroni regarding his letter?
While his cause is just and his argument is strong…
His tone is angry and he makes assumptions of abject incompetence
and nefarious intent (see also v18-19).
He will likely not get want he wants and what he is rightfully
owed, unless he forces Pahoran to comply…
Because Pahoran will no doubt be totally offended at Moroni’s
assumptions and tone, regardless of if they are true or not, because of the way
Captain Moroni delivered the message.
READ Alma 60:23-24, 30
What has Captain Moroni just done
to Pahoran?
Threatened his life as a traitor to the country.
Threatened to launch a military coup.
Threatened to be God’s avenging angel.
He is threatening to force Pahoran to comply to his demands or
die.
READ Alma 60:33-34
Given the actual reasons for
Pahoran’s neglect of his duties (see Alma 61:3-5), did the Lord really tell
Moroni that Pahoran was a traitor who needed to be destroyed?
No, as He knows all things and is a God of truth.
God knows that Pahoran has been cast out and there is a new
government in place in Zarahemla.
What does this teach us about the
nature of revelation?
One has to be very careful about interpreting revelation through
one’s own lens.
One has to continue to ask questions of the Lord or His angels; we
have been commanded to “ask, seek and knock” and God will not violate our own
agency by volunteering information that we didn’t care enough about to inquire
regarding about it.
And that a prophet may not see or understand the full revelation
from God.
READ Alma 61:2-5, 8
How would you interpret God’s
revelation to Captain Moroni now?
Those who have been “appointed” previously have been cast out
(Pahoran) and replaced by a rebellion who “appointed” new leadership because
they had been flattered; in other words, the majority of the people in
Zarahemla seemed to favor this new regime.
This new regime has not repented of their sins and iniquities; in
fact, they are attempting to align themselves with the warlike Lamanites.
Moroni has a remit from God to go up to battle against these
“appointed”, sinful “governors” – not Pahoran.
READ Alma 60:36 and Alma 61:9, 19-21
What can we learn from Pahoran’s
reaction to Moroni’s letter?
Humility is an absolutely critical attribute in effective
leadership – it is demonstrated in Pahoran’s understanding of and forgiveness
of Moroni’s faulty accusations and scary threats, in his choosing to focus on
Moroni’s strengths and his assuming of positive intent, and in his admitting in
not knowing if he should use force against the rebels and thanking Moroni for
bringing clarity to the matter.
Pahoran seems to genuinely feel the pure love of Christ for
Moroni, even in the face of Moroni’s threats and lack of love for Pahoran; it
colors his whole letter and when he closes his letter with “my beloved brother,
Moroni”, it feels very genuine and real.
Pahoran has taught Moroni and us a great lesson in Christlike
leadership.
What can we learn from Moroni’s
letter?
Righteous men are still very subject to the errors and ailments of
the flesh (see also Alma 54:4-14 and Alma 55:1-2), including violating the
Lord’s principles of defense because of his anger (see the last discussion on
what a Christian is justified to do in war).
Anger, stress, fatigue, and faulty assumptions can cloud one’s
ability to discern the truth, particularly if one doesn’t continue to humbly
ask the Lord for understanding and guidance, even after one has received a
revelation directly from Him.
READ Alma 61:10-13
What principles of Christian
warfare does Pahoran remind Captain Moroni of?
We will defend ourselves in our own land unto bloodshed if called
upon to do so to protect our liberty.
We will not attack pre-emptively, preventatively or offensively.
We will resist wickedness and not use it ourselves (including
torture and other evil stratagems).
We will submit to the Lord in all things and trust in Him to fight
our battles.
Even to the point that if it is His will that we are brought into
bondage, then so be it.
Teancum: A Case Study in the Christian Principles of War
Who was Teancum?
Nephite military leader under Captain Moroni.
He defeated Nephite dissenter Morianton’s army and personally
killed the leader (see Alma 50:35).
Led (and possibly was responsible for their training) a group of
soldiers who “exceeded the Lamanites in their strength and skill of war” –
almost a kind of special forces squad (see Alma 51:31).
In the course of the running battle with Amalickiah (another
Nephite dissenter) - which Amalickiah had instigated – Teancum and a squad
member/servant performed and special ops assassination raid on the Lamanite
camp and killed Amalickiah.
Participated in Captain Moroni’s war council where the plan to use
stratagem to get the Lamanites to leave their fortified city and engage with
the Nephites in an open conflict was devised.
Teancum and a smaller part of his special forces squad plays the role of
“bait” (see Alma 52:17-28).
According to Captain Moroni, Teancum (with Lehi and Moroni) was
capable of “going forth against the Lamanites in the strength of the Lord” (see
Alma 61:18).
With Lehi was promoted to lead the large remainder of the Nephite
army (see Alma 62:3).
Conducts another special ops assassination raid on Ammoron (leader
of the Lamanites and brother of Amalickiah) and kills him.
A valiant warrior and patriot for the Nephites, a “friend of
liberty”, who had suffered “very many exceedingly sore afflictions” (see Alma
62:37).
READ Alma 62:30-34
Describe the current state of the
war?
Nephites seem to finally have a numbers advantage over the
Lamanites as they’ve taken many prisoners while gaining back many of their own
soldiers who had been prisoners of war themselves.
They had the Lamanites on the run – from city to city.
The Lamanites were met in a pincer move – Moroni pursuing them
towards the waiting armies of Lehi and Teancum; as a result, the Lamanites
turned towards the sea and the wilderness, affectively boxing themselves in;
the Nephites take advantage of this and surround the Lamanite army camp.
The Lamanites are out in the open (no structural defenses), boxed
in by the wilderness and seashore, tired from running for days, and surrounded
by the larger (and fresher – at least Lehi and Teancum’s squads) Nephite army –
they are in big trouble.
READ Alma 62: 35-37
What prompted Teancum’s attack on
Ammoron?
Teancum’s anger with Ammoron and Amalickiah (who had been killed
by Teancum seven years before this).
Teancum “went forth in his anger” – it is what drove him.
The fact that Teancum is still angry with Amalickiah gives us a
clue into how deeply seeded this anger was for Teancum – it was deep in his
heart.
This is not to say that Teancum didn’t feel justified in this
anger – given the unnecessary war, death and famine that the traitorous and
evil acts of the two Nephite brothers had caused on their own nation.
However, this was an unauthorized attack which Teancum designed
and conducted completely on his own without consent from his leader, Captain
Moroni.
Is Teancum’s attack justified by
the Christian principles of war?
The “stratagem” used by Teancum (a sniper attack on an enemy that
is surrounded and to a great degree neutralized) does not seem to be in line
with the Lord’s will as the Lord did not defend Teancum in the aftermath.
Teancum’s anger is also a sign that he had lost the Spirit, as was
the fact that this was not a defensive move but a preemptive strike or at least
an avenging strike.
God allowed him to be killed after his attack – He let the natural
result of Teancum’s actions play out without divine intervention – Teancum was
left to his own strength, which was sufficient to kill his enemy but not
sufficient to escape himself.
READ Alma 62:38
Given the situation described in
the preceding verses, what were the likely outcomes of the battle if Ammoron
had lived through the night?
Likely the Lamanites would have still been soundly defeated –
slain with a “great slaughter” and driven out of the land, not to return at
that time against the Nephites.
Ammoron had been leading the flight from city to city and had at a
minimum approved the decisions that had led them to being boxed in and
surrounded by the Nephites; there is nothing to suggest that he had a great
stratagem which would have saved them or that his presence would have inspired
the Lamanites to victory had he lived.
It is likely that he would have died in the battle, but if he had
somehow survived, there is a possibility that he would have gone his way with
the rest of the defeated army and perhaps rallied them sooner than they
otherwise would have, to return to fight the Nephites at some future time, but
we don’t know; we do know that they had lost a great deal of their military
might by this time and that many Lamanites had defected and joined the People
of Ammon and embraced the gospel of Christ.
What was gained and lost by
Teancum’s stratagem?
Nothing really was gained by Teancum’s assassination of Ammoron.
The saddest part of this story is that not only did Teancum’s
anger result in the loss of his own life on the eve of the final (victorious)
battle, but that one has to wonder about the state of his soul having been
driven by so much anger for so long and then losing his life having just
murdered an enemy as a result of that anger.
Because of the War…
READ Alma 62:39-41
If all the Nephites had been
significantly affected by this long war, why did some become hardened and some
become softened?
They had all suffered the same level of loss, affliction, famine
and death because of the war…
But some people CHOSE to harden their hearts and become angry at
their circumstances and allow the violence and hatred of the war to consume
them; some chose to hate, become bitter, and seek just vengeance for their
wrongs.
While others CHOSE to soften their hearts in the face of all this
loss and humbly go to the Lord for succor and healing; some chose to love,
forgive and intercede on behalf of those who harmed them.
This verse is one of my favorites in illustrating the level and
nature of the choices we have with regards to our lives; as Stephen Covey used
to say, “between what happens to us and our response to it, there is a space”
and within that space is where we choose to either react to what is happening
to us or to choose to behave in a way which is more fully aligned with who we
want to be – and it is in those moments that our lives are truly defined.
READ Alma 62:50
Why does it say we should
remember “how great things the Lord has done” instead of “what great things the
Lord has done”?
What great
things the Lord has done for others is essentially an exercise in voyeurism –
which can lead to either pride (if you associate with those to whom great
things were done) or bitterness (if you don’t) or despair (if you believe you
can’t qualify for “great things” yourself); at best it establishes the
possibilities of what the Lord can do and provides a seed of faith that we can
begin to inquire after ourselves (see LoF 2:54-56).
How great
things the Lord has done is an exercise in what YOU need to do and how you come
about participating yourself in receiving the fullness of the gospel of Jesus
Christ.
We must learn “how great things are done” so that they can be done
to or for or with us.
