Alma and the “one God”
controversy
The peculiarly worded
question—“Should we believe in one God?”—has a bite that is easily missed. To
appreciate what is going on here, we need to pay attention to Alma’s and Amulek’s
history with the phrase one God. This phrase had been at the very centre
of a high-stakes theological conflict that had embroiled Alma and Amulek during
their mission to the land of Ammonihah (see Alma chapters 10-14).
The “one God” controversy
grew out of Zeezrom’s attempt (before his conversion) to trap Alma and Amulek in
a theological contradiction. Zeezrom laid his snare with an apparently
innocuous question:
Zeezrom said: “Thou
sayest there is a true and living God?” And Amulek said: “Yea, there is a true
and living God.” Now Zeezrom said: “Is there more than one God?” And he
answered, “No.” (Alma 11;26-29)
As soon as Amulek
confessed a monotheistic belief in one God, Zeezrom sprang his trap. He asked
Amulek about the doctrine of the coming of Christ:
And Zeezrom said
again: “Who is he that shall come? It is the Son of God?” And [Amulek] said
unto him, “Yea.” . . . Now Zeezrom said unto the people: “See that ye remember
these things; for he said there is but one God; yet he saith that the Son of
God shall come.” (verses 32-33, 35)
This supposed
contradiction provided the basis for charging Amulek with lying (which was a
crime under Nephite law; see Alma 1:17).
The more part of [the
people of Ammonihah] were desirous that they might destroy Alma and Amulek; . .
. and they also said that Amulek had lied unto them; . . . And the people went
forth and witnessed against them—testifying that [Amulek] had . . . testified
that there was but one God, and that he should send his Son among the people.
(Alma 14:2, 5)
It is obvious to the
people of Ammonihah that you cannot consistently believe both that there is one
God only and that God has a Son. In laying the trap, Zeezrom perhaps reasoned
that Amulek’s contradiction would lead to an easy conviction for lying. After
all, if someone makes two contradictory claims, at least one of them must be
false. Thus, if a speaker knowingly asserts that a contradiction, that provides
prima facie evidence that the speaker is lying. Of course, Amulek was not
lying. For since the days of Nephi himself, the Nephite faithful had affirmed
that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are “one God” (see 2 Ne. 31:21; Alma
11:44). Perhaps this doctrine was so familiar that they scarcely noticed its
oxymoronic character. But it is not surprising that the people of Ammonihah saw
in it a contradiction, and it is interesting to note that neither Alma nor
Amulek make any effort to dispel the paradox. In any event, when the Zoramites
ask whether they should believe in the “one God,” that precise phrase seems to
be deliberately chosen to invoke the earlier controversy. By referring to Alma’s
doctrine in this way, the Zoramites highlight the difficulties they experience in
believing in one God who is three persons.
Once we recognize
that the “one God” controversy lies behind the Zoramites’ question, we can see
new depths in Alma’s response. When the Zoramites ask whether they should believe
in “one God,” Alma’s immediate response is to invoke the scriptural authority
of Zenos and Zenock, who both write about the Son of God. He completes the
sermon by drawing an analogy between Moses’s brazen serpent and the doctrine of
the coming of Christ. In the Book of Mormon tradition, a number of Israelites
refused to look to Moses’s brazen serpent. Why? Well, perhaps it seemed
incoherent to the Israelites that the God of the third commandment would now
give them a “graven image,” let alone tell them to look to it for healing. “The
reason [the Israelites] would not look,” Alma explains, “is because they did
not believe that it would heal them” (Alma 31:20). But—and this is Alma’s point—whether
the idea of the serpent made intellectual sense to them should have been inconsequential in
the face of the fact of their healing. Similarly, the doctrine of the coming of
Christ, the “one God” doctrine, may not make rational sense to the Zoramites.
But worries about the incoherence will fade in importance if faith in Christ
heals and redeems them. Alma’s proposed experiment is as simple as looking up
at the brazen serpent: trust the doctrine of the coming of Christ and see what
effects that has on your way of life. Alma’s “argument” in favor of the “one
God” doctrine is: “Look and live”! (verse 19). (Mark A. Wrathall, Alma 30-63:
A Brief Theological Introduction [Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University/Neal
A. Maxwell Institute, 2020], 75-77)
Further Reading
