Shavuot and Abinadi’s Message to King Noah

Could the events of Mosiah 11-17 have occurred on Shavuot. There are several evidences that point in this direction.

The Ten Commandments were first given on Shavuot and  the events of Mosiah 11-17 recall this event. Abinadi uses Exodus type terminology, referring to “bondage,” "deliver[ance]" and "burdens lashed upon their backs" (Mosiah 11:21, 23;12:2, 5; compare with Exodus 1:11). Furthermore, he repeats the ten Commandments (Mosiah 12:34-36; 13:12-24) and following this his "face shone with exceeding luster, just as Moses' face shined while at mount of Sinai, while speaking with YHWH." (Mosiah 13:5; compare Exodus 34:29-30).

The harvest festival theme of Shavuot is another important element which demonstrates the Shavuot connection.  Abinadi, in keeping with the harvest festival theme of the

holiday, cursed the crops of King Noah's people (Mosiah 12:6

Mosiah 11-17 also contains several parallels with the Shavuot liturgy, most particularly Psalm 50. For example:

Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence

(Ps. 50:3)

YHWH will come down in the sight of all the people

(Ex. 19:11)

God himself shall come down among the children of men

(Mosiah 15:1)

Psalm 50:13-14 indicates that God prefers thanksgiving to sacrifices while Mosiah 13:11 calls for God's commandments to be "written in your hearts."

Psalm 50:16-21 like Mosiah 11-17 is a strong rebuke to keep the Torah of God.

Both Psalm 50:16, 22 and Mosiah 11:23; 12:29 call us to keep the Torah not just proclaim it.

Two years earlier Abinadi had been exiled from the city (Mosiah 11:28-12:1). Certainly  Abinadi would have chosen an opportune time to return. A festival occasion would have given Abinadi a large audience, making it an optimum time to enter the city and give his

Message to a large number of people.

When all of these facts are considered it seems very likely that the festival of Shavuot serves as the backdrop for the events recorded Mosiah 11-17.

Moroni’s Directive Reexamined: Pondering the Book of Mormon

2 And I seal up these records, after I have spoken a few words by way of exhortation unto you.

3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

(Moroni 10:2-5)

However the original reading of the Book of Mormon as found in both the Printer’s Manuscript and the 1830 Edition has:

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, and he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

(Moroni 10:4-5 Printer’s Manuscript and 1830 Edition)

This word “and” which was removed starting with the 1837 edition, is retained in both the Restored Covenant Edition (from the ZRF) and in The Book of Mormon; the Earliest Text (Royal Skousen).

In Hebrew the word “and” can also indicate “then” (as indicated in a footnote to the Restored Covenant Edition text).  However this is not the case in English, so beginning in the 1837 edition the word “and” was removed to create an implied “then” understanding the text to mean:

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, [then] he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

However one can just as easily retain the “and” in verse 4, and understand the “and” at the beginning of verse 5 to mean “then” as follows:

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, and he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

5 [Then] by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

This gives us a radically different meaning.  If we understand the “and” in verse 4 to mean “then” there is an implied guaranteed answer.  However is we understand the “and” at the beginning of verse 5 to mean “then” there is no such implied guarantee.

In the original text, Moroni 10 does not guarantee that everyone who asks with a sincere heart will get a special revelation. 

In fact the directive from Moroni is not about a mystical process, but a rational one.  In verse 3 Moroni directs us to: “ponder it in your hearts”.  Lets look at this word “ponder”.

The 1828 edition of Webster’s dictionary defines “ponder” as follows:

1. To weigh in the mind; to consider and compare the circumstances or consequences of an event, or the importance of the reasons for or against a decision.

Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. Luke 2:19.

2. To view with deliberation; to examine.

Ponder the path of thy feet. Proverbs 4:26.

The Lord pondereth the hearts. Proverbs 21:2.

To ponder on, is sometimes used, but is not be to countenanced.

And the 1828 edition of Webster’s Dictionary defines “deliberation” as:

1. The act of deliberating; the act of weighing and examining the reasons for and against a choice or measure; consideration. We say, a measure has been taken with deliberation

2. Mutual discussion and examination of the reasons for and against a measure; as the deliberations of a legislative body or council.

This word is clearly describing a rational process, by which one considers the Book of Mormon with rational judgment.  The text goes on to say that if a person receives a mystical revelation, that person will know “by the power if the Holy Ghost”, but that the typical person would have to simply rely on rational judgment. 

Rethinking Easter

Something to think about:

"Easter as now celebrated has come into being as a compromise between pagan and apostate Christian views, and obviously it does not pretend to be the anniversary of the actual resurrection of Christ. Nonetheless the true saints gladly take it as appropriate occasion on which to turn their attentions to the infinite and eternal atonement of Christ as such was climaxed by his coming forth as the firstfruits of them that slept"
- Bruce R. McConkie; Mormon Doctrine; Article "Easter"

Yet D&C 84 says:

54 And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—
55 Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.
56 And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.
57 And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—
58 That they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom; otherwise there remaineth a scourge and judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion.
(D & C 84:54-58)

Alma and the Four Sons of the Passover Seder

The Passover Seder /ˈseɪdər/ (Hebrew: סֵדֶר [ˈsedeʁ] 'order, arrangement'; Yiddish: סדר‎ seyder) is a Jewish ritual feast that marks the beginning of the Jewish holiday of Passover.  One of the rituals of the seder is that of the account of the four types of sons.

The Four Sons

The Passover Haggadah speaks of "four sons"—one who is wise, one who is wicked, one who is simple, and one who does not know to ask. Each of these sons phrases his question about the seder in a different way. The Haggadah recommends answering each son according to his question, using one of the three verses in the Torah that refer to this exchange.

The wise son asks "What are the statutes, the testimonies, and the laws that God has commanded you to do?" (Deut. 6:20) One explanation for why this very detailed-oriented question is categorized as wise, is that the wise son is trying to learn how to carry out the seder, rather than asking for someone else's understanding of its meaning. He is answered fully: "You should reply to him with [all] the laws of pesach: one may not eat any dessert after the paschal sacrifice."

The wicked son, who asks, "What is this service to you?" (Ex. 12:26), is characterized by the Haggadah as isolating himself from the Jewish people, standing by objectively and watching their behavior rather than participating. Therefore, he is rebuked by the explanation that "It is because God acted for my sake when I left Egypt." (Ex. 13:8) (This implies that the Seder is not for the wicked son because the wicked son would not have deserved to be freed from Egyptian slavery.) Where the four sons are illustrated in the Haggadah, this son has frequently been depicted as carrying weapons or wearing stylish contemporary fashions.

The simple son, who asks, "What is this?" (Ex. 13:14) is answered with "With a strong hand the Almighty led us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage." (Ex. 13:14)

And the one who does not know to ask is told, "It is because of what the Almighty did for me when I left Egypt." (Ex. 13:8).

Alma’s Admonition to his Three Sons

This corresponds closely to Alma’s admonition to his three sons.  We read in Alma:

16 Therefore, he caused that his sons should be gathered together, that he might give unto them every one his charge, separately, concerning the things pertaining unto righteousness. And we have an account of his commandments, which he gave unto them according to his own record.

(Alma 35:16)

As we continue to read Alma’s admonitions, it appears evident that the occasion for which Alma “caused that his sons should be gathered together” was that of a Passover Seder. 

Alma’s admonition to Helaman (Alma 36-37) corresponds to the that of the wise son.  In fact the word “wisdom” appears eight times in Alma’s admonition to Helaman.  Alama begins his admonition to Helaman saying:

1 My son, give ear to my words; for I swear unto you, that inasmuch as ye shall keep the commandments of God ye shall prosper in the land.

2 I would that ye should do as I have done, in remembering the captivity of our fathers; for they were in bondage, and none could deliver them except it was the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and he surely did deliver them in their afflictions.

3 And now, O my son Helaman, behold, thou art in thy youth, and therefore, I beseech of thee that thou wilt hear my words and learn of me; for I do know that whosoever shall put their trust in God shall be supported in their trials, and their troubles, and their afflictions, and shall be lifted up at the last day.

(Alma 36:1-3)

Alma’s admonition to Corianton (39-42) corresponds to that of the wicked, indifferent son.  Alma opens this admonition saying:

1 And now, my son, I have somewhat more to say unto thee than what I said unto thy brother; for behold, have ye not observed the steadiness of thy brother, his faithfulness, and his diligence in keeping the commandments of God? Behold, has he not set a good example for thee?…

8 But behold, ye cannot hide your crimes from God; and except ye repent they will stand as a testimony against you at the last day.

(Alma 39:1,8)

Finally Alma’s admonition to Shiblon (Alma 38) corresponds to that of the simple son.  Alma tells Shiblon:

1 My son, give ear to my words, for I say unto you, even as I said unto Helaman, that inasmuch as ye shall keep the commandments of God ye shall prosper in the land; and inasmuch as ye will not keep the commandments of God ye shall be cut off from his presence….

5 And now my son, Shiblon, I would that ye should remember, that as much as ye shall put your trust in God even so much ye shall be delivered out of your trials, and your troubles, and your afflictions, and ye shall be lifted up at the last day.

(Alma 38:1,5)

Passover is a wonderful time for Book of Mormon believers to review Alma’s admonition to his three sons.  Those who hold a seder may want to incorporate this material into their seder as part of the account of the four types of sons.  And let us all choose to be like Heleman, the wise son. 

Non-Levitical Priests: The Book of Mormon Gets if Right After All

Book of Mormon critics have criticized the fact that Nephi consecrated his brothers Joseph and Jacob as priests:

And it came to pass that I Nephi, did consecrate Jacob and Joseph, that they

should be priests and teachers over the land of my people.

(2Nephi 5:26)

For I, Jacob, and my brother Joseph had been consecrated priests and teachers of  this people, by the hand of Nephi.

(Jacob 1:18)

Jacob and Joseph were both sons of Lehi (1 Nephi 18:7; 2 Nephi 2:2) and as we all know, Lehi was a Josephite (1 Nephi 15:12, 19:24; 2 Nephi 3:2-5; Jacob 2:5; Alma 10:3, 26:36). Thus Jacob and Joseph were both from the Tribe of Joseph and NOT from the Tribe  of Levi.

So how could Nephi claim that he and his people “did observe to keep the judgments, and the statutes, and the commandments of the Lord in all things according to the law of Moses” (2 Nephi 5:10) when in fact he was consecrating his own Josephite brothers who were not even Levites, much less sons of Aharon to serve as priests?

The truth is that there is nothing in the Torah that actually prohibits a non-levite from serving as a priest.  Rabbi Abraham ben Meir Ibn Ezra (Hebrew: אַבְרָהָם אִבְּן עֶזְרָא or ראב"ע‎‎‎, also known as Abenezra or Aben Ezra, 1089–1167) was one of the most distinguished Jewish biblical commentators and philosophers of the Middle Ages. His is one of the classic commentators included in the Miqrat Gedolot. He writes in his commentary on Deut. 19:6:

A Kingdom of Priests. In my opinion, “priest” in the Bible means “one who serves,” just as the verbal form is taken in 28:41 to mean “serve me as priests.” Jethro is the “priest of Midian” (18:1) because he served God, as did Melchizedek of Salem, the “priest of God Most High” (Gen. 14:18). The same is true when David’s sons are called “priests” in 2Sam. 8:18. There would be no point in telling us that they were “princes,” for we know that a king’s sons possess high rank; this verse informs us that they served God. So telling Israel that they will be “a kingdom of priests” means, “By means of you, My kingdom shall appear, when you are serving Me.” But others understand it to mean “There is no kingship other than serving Me.”

As cited by Rabbi Abraham ben Meir Ibn Ezra above, the actual Hebrew of 2Sam. 8:18 identifies David’s sons as “cohenim” (“priests”) where the KJV translates “chief rulers”.  Here the original Hebrew is clearly using the word “cohenim” to refer to non-Levites (David was of the House of Judah) as “priests”.   The Book of Mormon gets it right after all.

Will Sacrifices and Offerings Be Restored?

In my previous blogs I have shown that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon through the gift of the interpretation of languages, and that this involved Smith knowing the range of meanings of the words and phrases of the original Hebrew, but not necessarily knowing what was in the minds of the original authors.  Thus it was very possible for Smith to choose a word or phrase that was within the range of meaning of the original words and phrases but which did not express the intended meaning of the original author.

For this reason John Tvetness writes:

Some passages of the Book of Mormon can be better understood in Hebrew than in English because the Hebrew reflects word-play or a range of meaning which gives more sense to the passage.

(The Ensign; Oct. 1986 p.64)

In a recent blog, I showed that when the Book of Mormon speaks of the Torah (or its individual parts) as being “done away” that the intended meaning of the original authors was that the Torah would be “renewed” rather than “done away”.

One of the passages in question was a statement by Yeshua:

And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.

(3Nephi 9:19 (4:49 RLDS))

Here the intended meaning is that the “sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be renewed” rather than “done away” as Joseph Smith himself wrote:

“These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the Priesthood, will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, and the sons of Levi be purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their powers, ramifications, and blessings.”

(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 172–73 also Documented History of the Church 4:207-212 Oct. 5th, 1840)

So what of the phrase “And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood”?

I believe the Hebrew behind this phrase must have been:  לא יותר שפיכות דמים

Here the Hebrew word YOTER יותר (Strong’s 3148) can mean “more” or it can mean “greater” so that the passage can be understood “no more shedding of blood” but it could also be understood “no greater shedding of blood”.

There is confirmation for this reconstruction of the Hebrew in a passage of Alma:

Therefore, it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice, and then shall there be, or it is expedient there should be, a stop to the shedding of blood; then shall the law of Moses be fulfilled; yea, it shall be all fulfilled, every jot and tittle, and none shall have passed away.

(Alma 34:13 (16:213-214 RLDS))

Here we read a parallel phrase “there should be, a stop to the shedding of blood”.  In this passage the “Chronicles of the Nephites” 1988 translation of the Book of Mormon published by “Hebrew Translations, Inc.” translates the phrase in Hebrew as:

שלא תהיה יותר שפיכות דמים

I believe this Hebrew recaptures the original Hebrew in using the word YOTER so that the passage could have been understood “there shall be a stop to the shedding of blood” or more literally as [there shall be] “no more shedding of blood” (as in 3Nephi above) but was originally intended in both passages to mean “there shall be no greater shedding of blood.”

Now lets look at the phrase “a great and last sacrifice” the Hebrew word for “last” here (used in both the 1988 translation noted above and in the 1981 translation published by the LDS Church, is אחרון ACHRON (Strong’s 314) which can mean “last” but can also mean “to come, following, later.”

Clearly Yeshua was certainly not the final sacrifice. We see that Paul made offerings at the Temple long after Yeshua's death (Acts 18:18; 21:26; 24:17). We also see sacrifices and offerings being made during the Millennial Kingdom:  (Ezek. 40-48) also has such offerings made in it (40:38-43; 42:13; 43:18-27; 44:29-31; 45:1, 13-17; 45:18-46:24 etc.)

18 And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.

19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord GOD, a young bullock for a sin offering.

20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.

21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.

22 And on the second day thou shalt offer a kid of the goats without blemish for a sin offering; and they shall cleanse the altar, as they did cleanse it with the bullock.

23 When thou hast made an end of cleansing it, thou shalt offer a young bullock without blemish, and a ram out of the flock without blemish.

24 And thou shalt offer them before the LORD, and the priests shall cast salt upon them, and they shall offer them up for a burnt offering unto the LORD.

25 Seven days shalt thou prepare every day a goat for a sin offering: they shall also prepare a young bullock, and a ram out of the flock, without blemish.

26 Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves.

27 And when these days are expired, it shall be, that upon the eighth day, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt offerings upon the altar, and your peace offerings; and I will accept you, saith the Lord GOD.

(Ezekiel 43:18-27 KJV) (see 40:1-48:35 inclusive)

Now lets look at the phrase “for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.” (3Nephi 9:19a (4:49a RLDS))

In a recently blog I showed that in Hebrew it is not necessary to use an interrogative clause as we know it in English. In Hebrew questions often appear as statements made in a questioning manner. As Yale Proffessor of Semitic Languages Charles Cutler Torrey wrote:

It sometimes happens in the O.T. Heb. that an interrogative sentence is not provided with any interrogative word or particle. In such cases the context is supposed to leave no room for doubt, but there are some instances of resulting misunderstanding and mistranslation, more or less disturbing. The Grk. translator ordinarily reproduces his original exactly, word for word, without undertaking to interpret; but in such passages as Is. 1:18 and (more significant) 43:23a and 24a the decision between the two varieties of sentence carries much with it.

(Our Translated Gospels; Charles Cutlet Torrey; 1936; p. 55)

This passage from 3Nephi should also be understood not as a statement, but as a question:

“…for will I not accept your sacrifices and your burnt offerings?”

In another recent blog I showed that the phrase "done away" in the book of Mormon often stands for an original  Hebrew word which can also mean "renew" or "restore".

So these passages were intended to mean:

And you shall offer up unto me no greater shedding of blood; yes, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be renewed, for will I not accept your sacrifices and your burnt offerings?

(3Nephi 9:19a (4:49a RLDS))

Therefore, it is expedient that there should be a great and coming (or later) sacrifice, and then shall there be, or it is expedient there should be no greater shedding of blood; then shall the Torah of Moses be fulfilled; yes, it shall be all fulfilled, every jot and tittle, and none shall have passed away.

(Alma 34:13 (16:213-214 RLDS))

As Joseph Smith said:

“These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the Priesthood, will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, and the sons of Levi be purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their powers, ramifications, and blessings.”

(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 172–73 also Documented History of the Church 4:207-212 Oct. 5th, 1840)

Messiah Fulfilled the Torah

In several passages the Book of Mormon mentions that the Messiah “fulfilled” the law, for example when Yeshua addresses the Nephites he says:

4 Behold, I say unto you that the law is fulfilled that was given unto Moses.

5 Behold, I am he that gave the law, and I am he who covenanted with my people Israel; therefore, the law in me is fulfilled, for I have come to fulfil the law; therefore it hath an end.

6 Behold, I do not destroy the prophets, for as many as have not been fulfilled in me, verily I say unto you, shall all be fulfilled.

(3Nephi 15:4-6 (7:5-7 RLDS))

In my last article I covered the phrase “therefore it has an end’ showing that phrase does not refer to a “termination” of the Torah, bit to the idea that the Messiah is the “goal” of the Torah.  In this article I want to deal with the concept that Messiah “fulfilled” the Torah.

In trying to understand this passage, everything hinges on the meaning of the words "destroy" and "fulfill". What does Yeshua mean by "destroy the Law" and "fulfill the Law"?

In their groundbreaking book Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, David Bivin and Roy Blizzard jr. address this issue in reference to the parallel passage in Matthew 5:17.  They write:

"Destroy" and "fulfill" are technical terms used in rabbinic argumentation. When a rabbi felt that his colleague had misinterpreted a passage of Scripture, he would say, "You are destroying the Law!"  Needless to say, in most cases his colleague strongly disagreed. What was "destroying the Law" for one rabbi, was "fulfilling the Law" (correctly

interpreting Scripture) for another.

(Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus; David Bivin and Roy Blizzard, 1984 P. 154)

In reviewing this book by Bivin and Blizzard, Book of Mormon apologist Myra L. Treat wrote:

“In Understanding The Difficult Words of Jesus, Mr. Bivin and Dr. Blizzard examine the origin of the Synoptic Gospels…. The authors devote the book to providing persuasive evidence for a Hebrew origin of these books…. Many of the things Jesus said were actually Hebrew idioms.  This makes sense, because he was speaking to a Jewish audience and wanted to communicate in terms they could readily understand.  Because these Hebrew idioms have been translated for their word value and not their idiomatic value, their exact meaning has been lost.  The inaccurate interpretation of some of these passages has caused theological errors to be made…. For Book of Mormon believers, this book has additional importance…. This is exactly the case with the Book of Mormon.  Its authors were Hebrews… and because they were Hebrew, the idiomatic expressions of the Book of Mormon are Hebrew. “

(Recent Book of Mormon Developments Vol. 2; Articles from the Zarahemla Record; Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus; A Book Review; 1992; by Mya L. Treat pp. 47-48)

And in a follow up article, her husband and fellow Book of Mormon apologist Ray Treat wrote:

“God saves the best until last.  This especially includes the knowledge that the Book of Mormon is an ancient Hebrew book.  We now realize that God created the ancient Hebrew people, including their laws, customs, language, beliefs, etc. as a gigantic audio-visual aid to teach us about the gospel.  Non-Restoration Christians are also learning this.  Their increasing interest in the Hebrew nature of both the Old and New Testament is without a doubt a necessary prelude to their recognition of the Hebrew nature—and consequently, the divinity—of the Book of Mormon.

This explosion of new information about the Hebrew nature of the Book of Mormon is God’s call to action to all those who consider themselves Book of Mormon believers.”

(Recent Book of Mormon Developments Vol. 2; Articles from the Zarahemla Record; 1992; The Significance of Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus; By Raymond C. Treat pp. 49-50)

In this case Bivin and Blizzerd’s book sheds meaning on the Book of Mormon itself.  Joseph Smith himself reinforces this understanding.  Joseph Smith understood "fulfilled the Torah" to mean that Messiah "magnified" the Torah and made it "honorable" and not that he abolished it:

Christ Himself fulfilled all righteousness in becoming obedient to the law which he had given to Moses on the mount, and thereby magnified it and made it honorable, instead of destroying it.

(Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols., introduction and notes by B. H. Roberts [Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1932-1951], 5: 261.)

Michael Jones