Circle Squared

Chapter 1: "Omni-Impotent"

 

Chapter Summary:

Omni, Amaron, Chemish, Abinadom, and Amaleki, each in turn, keep the records--Mosiah discovers the people of Zarahemla, who came from Jerusalem in the days of Zedekiah--Mosiah is made king over them--The descendants of Mulek at Zarahemla had discovered Coriantumr, the last of the Jaredites--King Benjamin succeeds Mosiah--Men should offer their souls as an offering to Christ. About 323–130 B.C.

 

 

 

 

 

If you thought the last two books (Enos and Jarom) were short and skippable, this book contains the sparse mental musings of five authors. Five...

 

As I noted in the book of Enos, this is a transitional period for the Lamanites and Nephites. These first few generations in Lehi's Promised Land set the tone for the tragic Book of Mormon narrative, yet very little useful information is conveyed concerning the beginnings of the Nephites' downfall and destruction. How are we supposed to learn from this deliberately contrived cautionary tale if we don't know specifically what went wrong? Some holy book this is.

 

Like his father, Jarom, Omni claims that the only reason he should record anything in the gold plates is to preserve his genealogy. However, aside from pointing out who his father is, Omni does not mention genealogy at all. But he does include a vague admission that he is "a wicked man."

 

To me, this seems odd for a prophet, especially one charged with keeping a holy record. Then again, Omni does not offer any specific sins on his part, so, this comes across as an example of the all too common feigned humility of religious folk I discussed in the previous chapter.

 

After a few comments about the Nephites fighting the Lamanites, Omni passes the baton to his son, Amaron, who starts with a rather confusing introduction:

 

"4 And now I, Amaron, write the things whatsoever I write, which are few, in the book of my father."

 

I understand what Amaron is trying to say, as unnecessary as it is. I just don't understand why he would say it in such a convoluted way.

 

Amaron confirms Jarom's claim that god destroys the wicked and preserves the righteous, as he describes how the more wicked Nephites were killed in various battles against the Lamanites. This principle raises a few questions.

 

First: why would god punish the Nephites with such recompensory death and not the Lamanites? Sure, Lehi promised that the Lamanites would never be destroyed and that the Nephites would only be destroyed due to iniquity. But this was Lehi's promise. Why would god do this? Seriously, I don't get it.

 

I suppose an apologist might point to the promise to the second generation of Nephites that they would be held to a higher standard than the Lamanites because the Nephites had been taught the truth. But the Lamanites were also taught the truth in the first generation, so I don't see how this rationalization would solve anything.

 

The reason the second generation of Lamanites was considered less accountable than the Nephites was because the Lamanites' fathers did not teach them properly. Because of this, their sins would fall on the heads of their fathers. Would this not also apply to any Nephites who were likewise not taught properly?

 

Are we supposed to assume (because it is not explicitly mentioned) that all of the wicked Nephites were properly raised, yet they rebelled and were fully accountable? Wouldn't so many rebellious Nephites tip the scale in the other direction, as with the Lamanites, thereby absolving them of the bulk of their spiritual accountability? And wouldn't the proselytizing prophets described as keeping the Nephites in check simply perpetuate this assured cycle of destruction?

 

These are the kinds problems that arise from the nonsensical black and white thinking I have mentioned in the last few chapters. There is no nuance or grey area. Most of the Book of Mormon is described in absolutes and gross generalizations. Is it any wonder, then, that so many Mormons think in similarly judgmental terms? 

 

Second: Jarom wrote his record around 400 BCE, and Omni--an admittedly wicked Nephite--ended his record 82 years later. Omni lived a long life, especially for the old world. Why didn't god destroy Omni?

 

Third: if this is supposed to be analogous to our day, as many Mormons claim, why doesn't god destroy wicked people today? It seems to me that in this day and age, death and despair meet the wicked just as much as the so-called "righteous." Furthermore, the universality of bad (and good) things happening equally to all types of people is confirmed by several studies which have been conducted on the effectiveness of prayer. The only potentially beneficial effect of prayer (a slight boost to morale which can affect some medical treatments) seems to be more easily explained by the placebo effect than, say, god actually doing something.

 

Amaron passes the record to his brother, Chemish, who writes a single useless verse:

 

"9 Now I, Chemish, write what few things I write, in the same book with my brother; for behold, I saw the last which he wrote, that he wrote it with his own hand; and he wrote it in the day that he delivered them unto me. And after this manner we keep the records, for it is according to the commandments of our fathers. And I make an end."

 

So, Amaron was a procrastinator? Ok...

 

This whole chapter, with its fleeting nuggets of historical gibberish, strikes me as an attempt by Joseph Smith to legitimize the Book of Mormon by including some record keepers who are wordy, some who are brief, and some who are incoherent and useless. This is his idea of variety and distinguishing characteristics. It's too bad that the authors all use the same dry language (even the bible authors have distinct voices and writing styles), which is indicative of a single shoddy writer, rather than multiple writers of varying mediocrity.

 

Moving briskly along, Chemish gives the record to his son, Abinidom, who promptly contradicts his predecessors who mentioned that many people had many revelations (despite failing to record them):

 

"...and I know of no revelation save that which has been written, neither prophecy; wherefore, that which is sufficient is written. And I make an end."

 

Oh, if t'were the end, t'would be t'werrific.

 

Abinidom's son, Amaleki, takes the plates and writes as much as the previous three authors combined. I wonder why the books of Enos to Omni are divided in this way. Why didn't Amaleki get his own book? Or, to go the other direction, why were Enos and Jarom separated from the others? Why not lump them all together?

 

Enos and Jarom did not write much, but Omni, Amaron, Chemish, Abinidom and Amaleki all wrote significantly less. This is six or seven generations (Amaron and Chemish are brothers, so I don't know if I should count them as the same generation) where practically nothing useful is written in the plates.

 

This is made more odd by the fact that Amaleki describes the exodus of a group of righteous Nephites who wish to escape the growing wicked Nephite population. What happened?!?

 

Clearly there were some drastic cultural changes between Jarom's book (when the Nephites followed the Law of Moses) and when this schism occurs just a few generations later. Furthermore, this is the second great schism described in the Book of Mormon--clearly this is an important event. But we are given very limited information on how this schism came to be. How can this just be glossed over in this way? Yet, genealogical snippets and admissions of personal weakness make the cut. It doesn't make any sense!

 

According to Amaleki, god tells a man named Mosiah to take as many righteous people as he can into the wilderness, leaving behind all the wicked Nephites. Mosiah does this, despite god's previous threats that he would kill any wicked Nephites, which would have made things much more convenient for Mosiah. After wandering around a bit, his band of virtuous vagrants stumbles upon the land of Zarahemla. In this land, Mosiah discovers another group of Jews who also left Jerusalem. This second group managed to escape the clutches of the Babylonian empire as Jerusalem was being sacked (a few years after Lehi left the city), and they also traveled to America via boats when such intercontinental travel was unheard of.

 

As you may recall, Nephi received a vision wherein he "confirmed" that Jerusalem was destroyed, as Lehi predicted. Considering the emphasis placed on visions and dreams in the Book of Mormon, rendering them as valid as physical proof in the minds of believers, this second confirmation should be seen by many believers as redundant and unnecessary.

 

However, believers generally welcome such additional confirmation, as they see it as vindication (presumably because even staunch believers know deep down that visions and dreams are nowhere near as reliable as physical evidence). This, in turn, gives them hope that other things which they have accepted as true based on similarly flimsy incorporeal evidence will one day be verified through the sort of demonstrable evidence which can satisfy skeptics and lunatics alike.

 

This sort of reasoning is very common in Mormon culture. Even I, as a college student, found myself shoving my doubts aside as I recited the comforting mantra, "One day, god will reveal how it all works out." It is sad how easy mental entrapment can be--even on oneself.

 

The people Mosiah discovered in Zarahemla were especially pleased to find that Mosiah had with him the brass plates. You will recall that near the beginning of the Book of Mormon, Nephi killed Laban (by order of the voice in his head which he called "the spirit of god") so as to obtain these super important plates, and his people could retain their Jewish heritage and the Law of Moses.

 

To Mormons, this terrible story--which clearly condones acting on violent thoughts as long as you believe god is inspiring you to do so--is seen as a prime example of god "preparing the way." Why didn't god do the same for this other group of Jewish Native Americans? According to the story, they must have been without these records (worth killing for) for at least a few generations. Why the neglect?

 

From the perspective that Joseph Smith made it all up, the explanation is simple. This is a literary device designed to emphasize the importance of the brass plates and to further demonstrate why Nephi was justified in killing Laban in order to obtain them. These people, despite being excited to have the brass plates, had fallen victim to all of the negative things Nephi was warned about by the spirit should he not kill Laban, including falling away from the true religion, losing traditions, and corrupting their language:

 

"17 And at the time that Mosiah discovered them, they had become exceedingly numerous. Nevertheless, they had had many wars and serious contentions, and had fallen by the sword from time to time; and their language had become corrupted; and they had brought no records with them; and they denied the being of their Creator; and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah, could understand them."

 

See? Nephi had no choice! He had to chop off the head of the passed-out, drunken and defenseless Laban. Otherwise, they would forget their language, which would have been super inconvenient.

 

The whole concept is asinine. I am astounded by the level to which I believed this garbage.

 

In an unwittingly American way, Mosiah, who is a guest in the land of Zarahemla, forces the people he "discovered" to assimilate with his people and they are taught his language. Then they "appoint" Mosiah the king of both groups through a process which I can only assume was a vote. Wishful thinking, Joe?

 

Now the king over a people he just met, and everyone now speaking the same language, Mosiah is presented with "a large stone... with engravings on it; and he did interpret the engravings by the gift and power of God."

 

This is exactly what Joseph Smith claimed to do with the gold plates, which he allegedly translated into the Book of Mormon through power of god. See, guys? This sort of thing totally happened all the time. Why is it such a stretch that Joseph would be able to do it, too?

 

Clearly, this is a shamelessly circular attempt by Joseph to validate his own outlandish supernatural claims.

 

Curiously, the people of Zarahemla had no idea what the stone said, even though they found the engraved stone with the author--a destitute and tormented man named Coriantumr, who lived with them for "nine moons." This man was the last of his once-great civilization. Literally. Everyone else died in civil war, and Coriantumr was the last man standing.

 

The stone revealed the sorrowful tale of Coriantumr's people, who came to America shortly after god punished everyone on earth--as god so often does--for constructing the Tower of Babel. You remember this Old Testament story, right? The people want to get up to heaven to be closer to god, so they build a tall tower, which, for some reason, pisses off god, who retaliates by destroying the tower and confounding their language.

 

This story sounds like a folk tale explaining the origins of different languages at a time when linguistic studies were nonexistent. According to the Book of Mormon--and much to the chagrin and inconvenience of "intellectual" Mormons--this story literally happened. So, that's fun.

 

Before closing the chapter with a seriously disjointed tale of a group of misguided men returning to the land of the wicked Nephites and being massacred, Amaleki admonishes the readers "to come unto God, the Holy One of Israel, and believe in prophesying, and in revelations, and in the ministering of angels, and in the gift of speaking with tongues, and in the gift of interpreting languages, and in all things which are good." In short, be gullible and uncritical.

 

Amaleki mentions that he will give the plates to Mosiah's son, Benjamin, who apparently has been successful in driving out the Lamanites from Zarahemla. It seems that the plight of colonial frontiersmen against savage "Injuns" is centuries old. Or maybe Joseph is running out of original ideas. 

 

[next] [previous] [top]