Skip to main content

Designation, Demonstration, and Confirmation: Nephi and the Three-Stage Process of Gaining Power in Israel

Nephi about to slay wicked King Laban, by Jody Livingston
While reading in Iain Provan, V. Philips Long, and Tremper Longman III, A Biblical History of Israel (Louisville, KY: Westminister/John Knox Press, 2003) last night, I came across some interesting remarks about the process by which Saul came to power. According to Long, et al. (Long is the primary author of the chapter on the early monarchy), “the process by which leaders in early Israel came to power seems to have entailed three stages: designation, demonstration, and confirmation” (p. 210). Long, et al. are drawing the work of Baruch Halpern here, which I have not read (though I have read other things by Halpern, and I find him to be a rather good scholar).

Long, et al. further explained, “First, an individual would be designated by some means for a particular role. Next, the new designee would be expected to demonstrate his status and his prowess by engaging in some feat of arms or military action. Finally, having thus distinguished himself and come to public attention, the designee would be confirmed in his leadership role” (p. 210). My understanding, based on Long, et al.’s discussion of this (pp. 210–214), is that the designation comes through divine means (anointed by the prophet, or chosen through a medium believed to reveal divine will, like casting lots), demonstration is, as pointed out in the quote, usually of militaristic nature, and confirmation comes through the people via public ceremony.

With all that in mind, I got to wondering about whether anything like this might show up in the Book of Mormon. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of anything like this Mormon’s abridgment (and wouldn’t necessarily expect it, since he lived in pre-Columbian America, and his ancestors had also for the last 1000 years). But it was pretty easy to come up with examples, in the proper order, for Nephi—who was probably schooled in Israelite scribal practices, and whose record has been seen as something of a royal apology (that is, a defense of his right to rule).

Designation

Nephi is designated a ruler by the Lord via revelation in 1 Nephi 2:22, and then again by an angel to his brothers in 1 Nephi 3:29. Interestingly, in between these two is the casting of lots, which selects not Nephi, but Laman (1 Nephi 3:11). I would suggest this could be read as a counter designation, which plays a specific and somewhat polemic role in the narrative.

Demonstration

I would propose at least 2 demonstrations in 1 Nephi. The first demonstration is when Nephi obtains the brass plates. The slaying of Laban has long been recognized as one of the most politically charged narratives in 1 Nephi. It plays a major role in Nephi’s argument for his right to rule. It is full of militaristic elements, from his speech in 1 Nephi 4:1–2 to his actual beheading of Laman and donning his armor, Nephi’s obtaining the plates easily qualifies as “a feat of arms.”

What is interesting here is that as part of the narrative you have the counter-designation of Laman in between, followed up with Laman’s failure to accomplish his charge. This is followed Nephi’s own failure, in which Laman then beating Nephi with a rod (1 Nephi 3:22–28). Laman’s beating Nephi with a rod (a symbol of authority/rule in the ancient Near East) could be seen as an attempted demonstration on Laman’s part, which is interrupted by the angel who redesignates Nephi.

The second demonstration comes in the broken bow narrative in 1 Nephi 16. The bow is another symbol of authority in ancient Near Eastern perspectives, and so Nephi’s fashioning bow (while his brothers bows have lost their spring’s), and then successfully killing prey and returning victoriously with food could be seen as another demonstration of Nephi’s right to rule (1 Nephi 16:18–32).

Both of these demonstrations are interesting because, I as I mentioned above, there seems to be some polemical implications in them. They are not just demonstrating that Nephi is fit to rule, but also that Laman is not—he fails to obtain the plates, his attempted demonstration of authority over Nephi is stopped by Nephi’s own divine redesignation, and his bow is defective and he fails to obtain food for the family.

Confirmation

This is vaguest of the three in Nephi’s record, but I believe it is there. It does not come until 2 Nephi 5:18, where Nephi is chosen as king by the people. Granted, Nephi himself expresses reluctance to accept, but Jacob 1:9–11 tells us that Nephi appointed a king as his successor, filled the functions of a king, and his name became a royal title. So it would seem that Nephi did, in fact, become a king for the people. Many scholars have even suggested that 2 Nephi 6–10 was a speech given at Nephi’s coronation, as it has many themes coronation themes in it.

Final Thoughts


It should go without saying that this is extremely preliminary. More reading on this three-stage process is needed, along with greater analysis of the Book of Mormon, particularly 1 and 2 Nephi. But I think this sketch sufficiently illustrates that there is some potential here and that such a framework might have some interesting interpretive possibilities for how we read 1 and 2 Nephi. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The 15 “Best Books” to Read BEFORE Having a Faith Crisis

Elder M. Russell Ballard recently stressed that it is important for Gospel educators to be well-informed on controversial topics, not only by studying the scriptures and Church materials, but also by reading “the best LDS scholarship available.” I personally think it is imperative in today’s world for every Latter-day Saint—not just Gospel educators—to make an effort to be informed on both controversial issues as well as knowing reliable faith-building information as well.
(Given that Elder Ballard’s CES address was published to general Church membership in the Ensign, I think it’s safe to say that Church leadership also feels this way.)
An important step in the process of getting informed is reading the 11 Gospel Topic essays and getting familiar with their contents. But what’s next? How can a person learn more about these and other topics? What are the “best books” (D&C 88:118) or “the best LDS scholarship available”?
Here are 15 suggestions.
1. Michael R. Ash, Shaken Faith S…

Responding to the New Video on Nahom as Archaeological Evidence for the Book of Mormon

Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:


As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…

New Paper on Isaiah in the Book of Mormon

Joseph M. Spencer, an adjunct professor at the BYU religion department, recently published a paper in the non-LDS peer review journal Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception, titled, “Isaiah 52 in the Book of Mormon: Note’s on Isaiah’s Reception History.” Spencer is a young scholar who is doing exciting stuff on the Book of Mormon from a theological perspective.
The paper is described as follows in the abstract: Despite increasing recognition of the importance of Mormonism to American religion, little attention has been given to the novel uses of Isaiah in foundational Mormon texts. This paper crosses two lines of inquiry: the study of American religion, with an eye to the role played in it by Mormonism, and the study of Isaiah’s reception history. It looks at the use of Isa 52:7–10 in the Book of Mormon, arguing that the volume exhibits four irreducibly distinct approaches to the interpretation of Isaiah, the interrelations among which are explicitly meant to speak to nineteent…