In the 1837
edition of the Book of Mormon, a number of changes were made to the text; some
were minor, such as changes to spelling or correction of typos (e.g., “nobler”
being changed to “robber”); but a few were more interesting, and their
significance continues to be debated to this day that were made in 1 Nephi 11
(text in bold represents addition made by the 1837 ed.):
And he said unto me, Behold, the virgin whom thou
seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of flesh. (1 Nephi
11:18)
And the angel said unto me, Behold, the Lamb of God,
yea, even the Son of the Eternal Father! (1 Nephi 11:21)
The
argument made by critics is that Joseph Smith’s “original” theology was either
that of Modalism or Trinitarianism, and only later did his theology finally
develop fully, as seen in the Sermon in the Grove (AKA Discourse on the
Plurality of the Gods) and similar works. To be sure, Latter-day Saints do
believe in the development of doctrine; indeed, any system that holds to
continuing revelation and an open canon has to hold to such a view, and it is
part-and-parcel of “Mormon” theology (D&C 128:18). Notwithstanding, these
changes do not evidence either Trinitarianism or Modalism when one
examines the entire chapter in context.
Before I
delve further into this particular issue, I would recommend Brant Gardner’s
work on these, and similar verses, in the Book of Mormon, showing that the Book
of Mormon reflects the pre-exilic theology of the Israelites ("Monotheism, Messiah, and Mormon's Book"; a revised version appeared as an excurses in
vol. 1 of his 6-vol commentary on the Book of Mormon, Second Witness:
Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon).
Firstly, 1
Nephi 11 cannot be said to teach Modalism as the Father and the Son (and the
Holy Ghost) are differentiated from one another, not just in terms of titles,
but in terms of personality, too:
And when I had spoken these words, the Spirit
cried with a loud voice, saying: Hosanna to the Lord, the most high God,
for he is Go over all the earth, yea, even above all. And blessed art thou,
Nephi, because thou believest in the Son of the most high God: wherefore,
thou shalt behold the things which thou has desired. And behold this thing
shall be given unto thee for a sign that after thou hast behold the tree which
bore the fruit which thy father tasted, thou shalt also behold a man descending
out of heaven, and him shall ye witness; and after ye have witnessed him ye
shall bear record that it is the Son of God. (1 Nephi 11:5-6; notice how
Jesus is referred to as the “Son of God”—this was original to the 1830 ed.;
also, this verse answers the question of who the “Spirit” is in Nephi’s vision—the
Holy Spirit [Bruce McConkie held that it was the premortal Jesus] as well as
showing the personality of the Spirit).
And after he had said these words, he said unto me:
Look! And I looked, and I behold the Son of God going forth among the
children of men; and I saw many fall down at his feet and worship him. . . . And
I looked and behold the Redeemer of the world, of whom my father had spoken;
and I also behold the prophet who should prepare the way before him. And the
Lamb of God went forth and was baptised of him; and after he was baptised,
I behold the heavens open, and the Holy Ghost come down of heaven and abide
upon him in the form of a dove. . . . And he spake unto me again, saying:
Look! And I looked and I behold the Lamb of God going forth among the
children of men. And I beheld the multitudes of people who were sick, and who
were afflicted with all manner of diseases, and with devils and unclean spirits
and the angel spake and showed all these things unto me. And they were healed
by the power of the Lamb of God, and the devils and the unclean spirits
were cast out. And it came to pass that the angel spake unto me again, saying,
Look! And I looked and beheld the Lamb of God, that he was taken by the
people; yea, the Son of the everlasting God was judged of the world; and
I saw and bear record. (1 Nephi 11:24, 27, 31-32).
The above
two texts show that, even within the context of 1 Nephi 11, the Book of Mormon
does not teach that the Father, Son, and Spirit are the same person; indeed,
they are differentiated from one another (some may charge that Mosiah 15:1-4
teaches Modalism, but this fails, too).
Furthermore,
it should be noted that the above texts also refute the charge of
Trinitarianism. Yes, Trinitarian theology allows, albeit in an ambiguous way,
the Father, Son, and Spirit to be treated as distinct persons (even the concept
of “person” is debated within Trinitarian circles). However, while one
differentiate the persons from one another (the Father is not the Son; Son not
the Spirit; Spirit not the Father), one cannot differentiate “God” from any of
the persons. However, this is what also happens in the above texts, and many
more, in the Book of Mormon. Moreover, such is part-and-parcel of many creedal
statements and texts evidencing “Christological exegesis” in the New Testament
(e.g. John 17:3; 1 Tim 2:5; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Heb 10:12-13; the latter two
pericopes being expansions of Psa 110:1 [109:1, LXX] where Yahweh is
differentiated from a second lord, adoni, with Jesus being understood as
this second Lord; cf. Mark 12:35-37]).
One may
argue that Joseph Smith was a “confused Trinitarian,” as James White has done
in the past, but that is just a desperate attempt to accept the (distorted, as
we have seen) evidence from texts such as 1 Nephi 11 and Mosiah 15 and ignore
the overwhelming evidence from the Book of Mormon itself in other key
pericopes; only by engaging, not just in eisegesis, but special pleading, can
one approach the theology of the Book of Mormon.
Some may
ask about the phrase, “the Lamb of God” and if it is anachronistic (cf. John
1:29); however, Isaiah, in the fourth servant hymn, spoke of the suffering
servant as a “lamb [being led] to the slaughter” (Isa 53:7). For other ancient
evidence, see John W. Welch, “’The Lamb of God’ in Pre-Christian Texts.”
