PDF feed of Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship PDF feed of Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship

Abstract: An early Christian text called the Revelation of the Magi presents itself as a history of the Magi before and after the birth of Jesus Christ. This text offers important insights into how the early Christian world may have conceptualized how other nations outside of Israel similarly looked forward to the advent of the Messiah, how they worshiped God, and how they knew who their Savior would be. The Book of Mormon similarly presents itself as text written by early believers in Jesus Christ. It is centered primarily around two civilizations outside the land of Israel who knew who Jesus was, worshiped him, and prophesied about him. Both texts begin with similar premises, and each shares a remarkable level of consistency in matters of doctrine and narrative. Furthermore, the Revelation of the Magi contains citations from a book of Adam that have striking similarities to details revealed in other Restoration scripture regarding Adam and his children. While the Revelation of the Magi is not scripture, it is nonetheless a text that many modern readers will find beneficial in highlighting beliefs of early Christians.





In 2008, a significant early Christian text was translated into English for the first time.1 This text, called the Revelation of the Magi, is purportedly a first-person retelling of the Magi’s experiences as [Page 236]they worshiped God, waited for the advent of his Son, traveled to Bethlehem to meet the newborn Savior, and continued to worship him following his birth. Since the initial dissertation, Landau has published more accessible copies.2 (Citations herein of Landau’s text use the abbreviation Rev. Magi, followed by chapter and verse numbers.3)

This text is fascinating, and it has received more detailed attention since its publication in English. However, it is still relatively obscure compared to other prominent Christian apocryphal writings such as those found at Nag Hammadi or the so-called Infancy Gospels. While these texts are not scripture for members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or most Christians generally today), they are nonetheless fascinating and provide important windows into early Christian beliefs and attitudes. The Revelation of the Magi is a document that could be especially interesting to modern readers of the Bible, particularly Latter-day Saints.

The Nature of Christian Apocryphal Writings

To fully understand and appreciate the Revelation of the Magi, it is also important to understand the world in which it arose. While many Christians consider the biblical canon closed, this attitude largely arose well past what we consider “biblical times,” and many early Christians were composing texts they believed to be inspired and worthy of reading in churches. In fact, it was not until the second or third centuries that ...

Abstract: Grant Hardy has shown that Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni have distinctive personalities, rhetorical strategies, implied readers, and thematic concerns. Mormon lived within history and wrote as a historian. He focused on the particulars of time and place and person, on political and military matters. But, Hardy says, Mormon lacked audience awareness. I argue Mormon’s historiography was well adapted to the needs of his initial envisioned audience, the Alma family. Moroni, who lived most of his life outside of history, wrote intertextually, in dialog with voices speaking from the dust. And he wrote as a theologian especially attuned to the tragedy of human existence without God. Unlike his father, Moroni was a reluctant and, initially, untrained writer. His initial lack of confidence and competence and his growth as a writer and as a person are apparent in the five different endings for the Book of Mormon that he successively inscribed over the course of his life. Moroni’s ultimate model as he so effectively closed the large-plates record was Amaleki, last author of the small plates. This article critiques Hardy’s assessment of Mormon’s and extends his account of Moroni’s rhetorical effectiveness.





Human beings choose the world they live in. The choice is not wholly unconditioned, unconstrained. Many features of the chosen world—for example, many connections between acts and consequences—exist as brute facts. But the overarching mental map of the world is always chosen. It is an interpretation. One can choose to live in a world created by God and full of miracles. One can choose [Page 192]to live in a godless world in which everything is reduceable to inert matter in motion. And while these two worlds each have numerous inhabitants, there are many other worlds in which human beings may and do choose to live, many of them being subsets of these two overarching worlds. While all get to choose their world, none has a choice about choosing. God or the universe confronts all of us with a choice and respects our agency. For now, we live in whatever world we and our culture have co-created through interpretation.

The world we choose to live in determines, among many other things, how we read scripture. Those who have chosen to live in God’s world read a different Bible and Book of Mormon than those who have chosen to live in a godless world. Dan Vogel and Dan Peterson do not read the same Book of Mormon. For Vogel, the Book of Mormon is a purely naturalistic product of Joseph Smith’s nineteenth century. For Peterson, the text has both ancient and nineteenth century provenance, being composed anciently and translated in the nineteenth century. For Vogel, Joseph Smith was the sole, purely naturalistic, human author of the book. For Peterson, the book has multiple authors and, since most of those authors are prophets, God strongly influenced the book’s construction and content. While those living in these alternative worlds may sometimes agree, e.g., about the Mosiah-first composition/translation of the text we now have, for the most part, their interpretations are not just incompatible but incommensurable. It is, thus, noteworthy when a scholar identifies a way of reading the Book of Mormon that is equally valid for those who live in these incompatible and incommensurable worlds. In Understanding the Book of Mormon, Grant Hardy has accomplished that difficult and noteworthy task.1

Understanding the Book of Mormon was published by Oxford University Press and is meant to address readers in both worlds, both faithful Latter-day-Saint and secular non-LDS readers. Hardy makes the book relevant to both groups by bracketing the main issue that divides them, the question of the book’s historicity. Hardy is able to bracket this contentious issue ...

Abstract: In Words of Mormon 1:8, Mormon declares, “And my prayer to God is concerning my brethren, that they may once again come to the knowledge of God, yea, the redemption of Christ; that they may once again be a delightsome people.” The expression “that they may once again” plausibly reflects the Hebrew idiom wayyôsipû or wayyôsipû ʿôd. Mormon’s apparent double-use of the wayyôsipû (ʿôd) idiom in Words of Mormon 1:8 (or some Nephite scribal equivalent), like 2 Nephi 5:2–3, recalls language in the Joseph story (Genesis 37:5, 8). The original Lamanite covenant, as an extension of the Abrahamic covenant, involved the complete abandonment of fraternal hatred and the violent means through which they had given expression to it (see Alma 24:12–13; 15–18); Mormon declared that a similar commitment would again be necessary when the descendants of Lehi (“the remnant of this people who are spared,” Mormon 7:1) were restored to the covenant in the future (Mormon 7:4–5). Thus, Mormon’s prayer—in the tradition of the prayers of Nephi, Enos, and others—is that the descendants of the Lamanites (and Nephite dissenters) would, through iterative divine action, regain their covenant identity as the seed of Joseph and partakers of the Abrahamic covenant.





A previous study1 proposes that Nephi permuted biblical wordplay on the name Joseph from Genesis 37:5, 8 (“and they hated him yet the more [wayyôsipû ʿôd]”) as a means of drawing autobiographical parallels between himself and his ancestor Joseph (the patriarch) [Page 166]throughout his small plates record.2 Nephi’s use of this biblical wordplay culminates in the statement that marked a tipping point in his relationship with his brothers, paving the way for a final separation in mortality from them: “Behold, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cry much unto the Lord my God, because of the anger of my brethren. But behold, their anger did increase [yāsap] against me, insomuch that they did seek to take away my life” (2 Nephi 5:2).

The name Joseph (“may he [God] add”) derives from the verb yāsap, which means “to add” or “increase,”3 but can also have the more nuanced senses “to continue to do, carry on doing” something or “to do [something] again, more.”4 I have further proposed that Nephi used a wordplay on the name of Joseph in terms of yāsap when he juxtaposed quotations from Isaiah 11:11 and 29:14 in 2 Nephi 25:17, 21 (“And the Lord will set his hand again [yôsîp] the second time to restore his people from their lost and fallen state. Wherefore, he will proceed [yôsīp] to do a marvelous work and a wonder among the children of men . . . that the promise may be fulfilled unto Joseph”) and 2 Nephi 29:1 (“But behold, there shall be many—at that day when I shall proceed [yôsīp] to do a marvelous work among them, that I may remember my covenants which I have made unto the children of men, that I may set my hand again [*wĕʾōsîp yādî] the second time to recover my people”)...

Abstract: T. J. Uriona has offered two new theories about the meaning of Nephi’s term “skin of blackness” in 2 Nephi 5:21. He suggests that Nephi’s term may indicate impending death and/or it may be a literal reference to diseased or deathly skin. Both theories are based on a motif in an ancient Neo-Assyrian treaty that curses people to have skin as black as pitch and crude oil. I submit that these two theories are inconsistent with the larger context in the Book of Mormon.





In “Understanding the Lamanite Mark” published last year in Interpreter,1 I proposed that the dark mark on the skin that distinguished Lamanites from Nephites was a self-inflicted sacrilegious mark cut into the skin in defiance of the law of Moses. This profane ancient mark on the skin was permanent in nature, like a modern tattoo. (Of course, this doesn’t mean that all of today’s tattoos reflect rebellion against God. Today’s tattoos are adopted for many non-rebellious reasons.) Profane marks made by incision, simply called “marks” in the Bible, were specifically prohibited by the law of Moses (Leviticus 19:28). People who had covenanted with God to obey this law would only have adopted these marks in rebellion against him and his law. Those who continued to keep the law would have seen these marks as evidence of apostasy.

When the Lord says, “I will set a mark upon” Lamanites and others [Page 156](Alma 3:14–16), and when Nephi says that “the Lord did cause a skin of blackness to come upon” Lamanites (2 Nephi 5:21–22), their words don’t preclude a self-inflicted mark. The Lord sometimes says “I will” and “I will cause” to depict actions that he knows will be taken by men and women of their own free will (see, for example, Mosiah 12:5 and Helaman 15:16–17). Also, the passive voice can be used in phrases like “came upon” or “was set upon” (see Jacob 3:5 and Alma 3:6, 10) to describe a self-inflicted mark. Mormon demonstrates this when he says, “[T]hey [the Amlicites] also [like the Lamanites] had a mark set upon them; yea, they set the mark upon themselves” (Alma 3:13). Mormon also quotes the Lord, who says, “I will set a mark upon” Lamanites and others (Alma 3:14–16). Mormon explains that the Amlicites fulfilled these specific “words of God” as “they began to mark themselves” (Alma 3:18; see also Alma 3:13–16). Thus, Mormon clarifies that God “set a mark upon” the Amlicites as they marked themselves. Reason suggests that God may have “set a mark upon” the Lamanites as they marked themselves in a similar manner, which Mormon calls “the manner of the Lamanites” (Alma 3:4).

My paper explains in detail how this biblical meaning of the word mark, together with biblical meanings of other related words, the archaeological record, and relevant passages in the Book of Mormon (taking into account their primarily Early Modern English vocabulary and syntax) combine to support the view that the Lamanite mark was a self-imposed, permanent, profane mark on the skin.

Two New Theories

In this research note, I review two new theories about the Lamanite mark, both of which reflect proposals made by T. J. Uriona. In December 2023, BYU Studies published Uriona’s article, “‘Life and Death, Blessing and Cursing’: New Context for ‘Skin of Blackness’ in the Book of Mormon.”2 Uriona proposes what he sees as new context for the curse that the Lord brought upon Laman and Lemuel. This proposal, while novel,

Review of Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Emer Harris & Dennison Lott Harris: Owner of the First Copy of the Book of Mormon, Witness of the “Last Charge” of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Eborn Books, 2023). 235 pages, 67 illustrations, appendix, references, $29.00 (paperback).

Abstract: Jeffrey Bradshaw has, in a single well-researched volume, provided a gift to those interested in the lives of early Church members. In Emer Harris & Dennison Lott Harris, Bradshaw brings out of obscurity the remarkable life of one of Martin Harris’s brothers and illustrates the contribution of that life to the initial decades of the Restoration.





Whether you’re a descendant of Emer Harris and his son Dennison or a Church historian, Emer Harris & Dennison Lott Harris: Owner of the First Copy of the Book of Mormon, Witness of the “Last Charge” of Joseph Smith is a must-have reference book for your library.

As the title states, the book is divided into two sections—the life of Emer Harris and the witness of his youthful son Dennison. The first section is a biographical sketch that gives readers more details about Emer’s life than any other book on the market. Bradshaw has brought Emer Harris out of obscurity in an accessible and scholarly manner. He has pulled together a readable story by carefully combing source materials.

Bradshaw’s gift to masterfully create a chronological biography of Emer Harris is commendable. Without diluting the problems Emer faced, readers will learn of his hardships such as divorce, death of [Page 152]a spouse, remarriages, and poverty. More importantly, readers will discover a man who had a dogged determination to stay with his faith when it appeared there was little outward advantage to do so. The author describes Emer’s family as impoverished, in peril for their religious stance, and physically worn down. Yet none of these tribulations or others stopped Emer from following a prophet of God. He lived what Latter-day Saints call a consecrated life of devotion to the Lord. To this reviewer, this is best illustrated by his acceptance of a call to serve in the Cotton Mission in Southern Utah at age 81. Five years later, he was released at age 86. His statement, “determined to be for God & none else & with his assistance to do his will” captures the essence and purpose of his life.1

Readers will discover in his biography that Emer received the first bound copy of the Book of Mormon. It was said that his brother Martin Harris, one of the Three Witnesses of the Book of Mormon, picked up the book and presented it to him. After his conversion, Emer served an adventurous yet successful mission with Martin. Readers learn that following the mission, Emer’s woodworking skill was needed to make window sashes for the Kirtland Temple, to build the circular staircase in the Nauvoo Temple, and so much more.

What is essential information in the biography is that when his brothers Martin and Preserved Harris backed away from their religious commitments, Emer clung to his faith. Recognizing his unwavering stance, he was told in a patriarchal blessing, “[B]ecause of the integrity of thy heart, thou hast not fainted in times of dissension & persecution, when every evil thing [h]as spoken against the church of the living God, thou has endured in faith, & the Lord is well [p]leased with thee . . . because thou art alone as it were in thy father’s house; thy posterity shall be greatly blessed.”a id="footnote2anc" href="#footnote2sym" title="2. Wording and punctuation of Emer’s patriarchal blessing taken from a copy of the blessing in Bradshaw’s p...

Abstract: Moroni1’s letter in Alma 60 is not simply an angry and intemperate screed against the government; it also responds to arguments about just tactics (what modern readers would call ethics) taking place among Nephite leaders at this time. Moroni1’s letter argues for his preferred strategies of active defense and ambush, while interpreting defeat as a failure of leaders. His rhetorical strategy is particularly noteworthy for associating his Nephite opponents’ hopeful trust in the Lord with the passive resistance of the king-men, and shifting blame for defeat away from his strategies and onto his political opponents. Overall, Moroni1’s arguments exemplify sophistication and debate within Nephite thought.





[Editor’s Note: This paper is adapted from chapters 4–6 of Morgan Deane, To Stop a Slaughter: The Book of Mormon and the Just War Tradition (self-published, Venice Press, forthcoming, 2024).]





Many scholars view Moroni1’s behavior, particularly his letter to Pahoran in Alma 60, as angry and counterproductive. Grant Hardy said he was “hot blooded,” exemplifying an “aggressive posture,” a “quick temper,” a “blunt manner,” and “hasty suspicions.”1 Book of Mormon Central described Moroni1 as “angrily” writing his letter.2 Even in defending Moroni1, Duane Boyce doesn’t suggest there are [Page 136]alternative interpretations for the aggressive tone of the letter. He offers some mitigating reasons for the anger by stating that Moroni1 was constantly surrounded by danger from “beginning to end” and was misunderstood and unfairly judged by modern readers who haven’t seen constant warfare.3

There is another way to interpret Moroni1’s letter, one that moves beyond his anger at the government for its perceived malfeasance to include the larger cultural context in which he wrote. Captain Moroni1’s letter makes two arguments that reflect issues and debates during this period of Nephite history: (1) the previous Nephite practice of waiting on the Lord to deliver the people from imminent threats was dangerously passive; and (2) it was the sins of his Nephite rivals that resulted in battlefield defeat, not the sins of his soldiers who carried out his controversial strategy. A third issue may be at play as well, though it is not explicitly raised in Moroni1’s letter: the argument that ambushes are not inherently sinful. The issue of justified ambushes, as this paper argues, is an expression of the active versus passive debate prominent within the letter.

Waiting On the Lord: A Historically Passive Approach

The Book of Mormon contains many sections where readers can examine or deduce Nephite thought and strategy:



* The Lord’s reasoning that it is better that one man should perish than an entire nation dwindle in unbelief (1 Nephi 4:13) can be viewed as an authoritative and evocative example of military necessity and utilitarianism.

* Consistent with Augustine’s reasoning when he wrote that “it is a higher glory still to stay war itself with a word, than to slay men with the sword,”a id="footnote4anc" href="#footnote4sym" title="4. Augustine, “Letter 229,” NewAdvent.org, newadvent.org/fathers/1102229.htm.