Question - What is that thou hast testified? (Alma 21:1-14)
Nestled between the popular stories of Ammon ministering among the people of King Lamoni and Aaron ministering to King Lamoni’s father is the oft overlooked account of the early “preaching of Aaron, and Muloki, and their brethren, to the Lamanites.” Within these few verses we find profound and valuable precepts that can draw us closer to God, if we abide by them.
When the sons of Mosiah arrived in the land of the Lamanites they “separated themselves in the borders of the land of the Lamanites.” Of those sons, “Aaron took his journey towards the land which was called by the Lamanites, Jerusalem” where the Lamanites, Amalekites, and Amulonites “had built a great city.” While the Lamanites at this time and place were described as “sufficiently hardened,” the Amalekites and Amulonites, who were once Nephites, were described as “still harder.” It is among these hard hearted souls that Aaron and his companions entered the land and began to “preach to them in their synagogues,” which were built “after the order of the Nehors” (Alma 21:1-4).
There are two important descriptors of the people in these introductory verses that provide important context and deserve some attention before we move on:
“sufficiently hardened”
“the order of Nehor”
Let’s look at each of these in turn.
Sufficiently Hardened
Sufficiently hardened is an expression unique to the Book of Mormon of all scripture. Sufficiently is defined as “enough to meet the needs of a situation or a proposed end.” In this case, the object of this adverb is “hardened.” Being hardened in the context of the Book of Mormon typically indicates a resistance to the things of the Spirit. As a result, this hardness extends to messages from God directly or through authorized messengers. Therefore, to be sufficiently hardened is to be hardened enough that the result of being hardened is realized—resisting the influence of the Spirit and/or messages or messengers from God. In the Book of Mormon this hardening is typically referred to as “hard heartedness” (see http://www.themostcorrectbook.org/2021/02/question-why-is-it-that-ye-can-be-so.html for more on hard heartedness in the Book of Mormon).
It is important to note that hard heartedness is a condition of choice, not a disease we catch unawares. We can be influenced by being around the hard hearted. However, in the end, hard heartedness is a choice. We have all seen examples of people who have experienced very similar, and sometimes traumatic, events in their lives, but choose to react very differently. Some are sweetened and softened by an experience while others are embittered and hardened by the same experience.
When we choose to resist the Spirit inspired messengers or messages, and thereby become more and more hardened, we experience less and less of the fruits of the Spirit. These fruits include love of God and fellow women and men, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance, etc (see Galatians 5:22-23). Unless we choose to reverse hard heartedness whenever we see it within us, becoming more and more hardened can eventually result in our individual, and even societal, destruction—both spiritual and temporal. There are plenty of examples in the scriptures illustrating this principle.
All too often our hardness is the result of neglect. Our choice to neglect the life of the soul is demonstrated in our not attending to the simple, daily habits that invite, encourage, and nurture faith in Christ and the companionship of the Spirit in our lives. When we are neglectful we choose to value other interests over that which would nourish our souls. Instead of searching the scriptures we search for the latest social media post. Instead of obeying God, we obey our own thirst for popularity, position, power, or possessions. Instead of serving others in need, including in our own homes and neighborhoods, we seek to serve ourselves with whatever personal pleasure we prefer. Instead of showing God a sign of reverence for his sabbath day, we turn the holy day into a holiday. Nourishing the things of the Spirit are simply not a priority.
Typically, the primary form of neglect is not seeking to plant, and then nourish, the word of God in our hearts. When the word is not planted in our hearts nor nourished as it grows, the more hard heartedness grows within us. Unless we choose to reverse this condition, the unnourished word of God and its fruits will eventually wither and die within. When such is the case, we ourselves can eventually remove the word and its fruits from within us. This is not because the seed of the word is not good, instead it is because our “ground is barren” (our soul is unnourished) (see Alma 32:37-40). In such a state we become entirely resistant to the Spirit and all that it leads us to desire, do, say, or think. Even more tragic, our hard heartedness can contribute to the hardening other’s hearts. In the case at hand, the harder Amalekites and Amulonites “did cause the Lamanites that they should harden their hearts, that they should wax strong in wickedness and their abominations” (Alma 21:3).
One last observation about the state of the hard hearted. When we succumb to becoming more and more hard hearted, we will often find comfortable companions who seek to provide counterfeit comfort in their companionship. Over time, these communities find a way to comfort themselves and resist any efforts by God and his messengers to disturb their ignorance of the things of the Spirit. In fact, when disturbed they can become quite violent toward God’s messengers and followers (see Alma 14 for an example). The antidote to becoming “sufficiently hardened” is to become “sufficiently humble” as taught earlier in the Book of Mormon by Alma when speaking to the people of Ammonihah (Alma 5:27).
The Order of Nehor
As we read in Alma 1:3-6, that Nehor had taught the people “that which he termed to be the word of God” by which he was “bearing down against the church; declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher ought to become popular; and [preachers] ought not to labor with their hands, but that they ought to be supported by the people.” He was advocating for a professional clergy, and not just any clergy. First and foremost, they should support him. And how did he attract the people to support him? Nehor “testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day,” and “that they need not fear nor tremble.” Instead, they should “lift up their heads and rejoice.” In summary, Nehor reasoned that “the Lord had created all men, and had also redeemed all men; and, in the end, all men should have eternal life.”
Such a message always attracts adherents who are eager to support such messengers. Nehor wanted to become popular and comfortable so he provided a popular and comfortable message. There was no need to repent, to change—they were already redeemed so they were good enough as they were? There was no need for concern (fear and trembling). Instead, everyone should rejoice (eat, drink, and be merry). With such low expectations of his adherents, unsurprisingly, Nehor gathered many into his belief system. In fact, there were “so many that they began to support him and give him money.” For those deceived by Nehor’s doctrine, what greater evidence of truth is there than popularity? After all, political or social might makes right—right? Whether in our neighborhood or nation, “truth” too often is defined by power, popularity, prestige, position, possessions…Thereby, truth becomes whatever the people want it to be. As a result, truth does not become a standard that makes clear the need for repentance, but a malleable mass of moralizing to fit the political preferences of the day.
For those adhering to the order of Nehor philosophy, “God is a socially conscious political being whose views invariably correspond to our own prejudices on every essential point of doctrine, he demands of us no more than our politics require. Besides, if God is finite, progressive, and Pure Love, we may as well skip church next Sunday and go to the movies. For if we have nothing to fear from this all-loving, all-forbearing, all-forgiving God, how would our worship of him constitute more than self-congratulation for our own moral standards? As an atheist, I like this God. It is good to see him every morning while I am shaving” (Eugene D. Genovese, “Pilgrim’s Progress,” The New Republic, 11 May 1992, p. 38).
The Exchange
With “sufficiently hardened” and “the order of Nehor” in mind, let’s focus on the exchange between Aaron and “an Amalekite” who seems to speak for the people of the city of Jerusalem. We begin with what the Amalekite said to Aaron in response to Aaron’s preaching. What follows is the exact text from Alma 21:5-6, just formatted in bullet form:
What is that thou hast testified?
Hast thou seen an angel?
Why do not angels appear unto us?
Behold are not this people as good as thy people?
Thou also sayest, except we repent we shall perish
How knowest thou the thought and intent of our hearts?
How knowest thou that we have cause to repent?
How knowest thou that we are not a righteous people?
Behold, we have built sanctuaries, and we do assemble ourselves together to worship God.
We do believe that God will save all men.
The bulleted formatting of the exact text serves to accentuate what appears to be the rapid fire nature of the Amalekite’s response to whatever Aaron had taught to that point. Let’s consider what was said, bullet by bullet:
What is that thou hast testified?
Hast thou seen an angel?
The first question starts with what might be viewed as modern street slang—“what is?” While the sentence is grammatically correct, it is odd. We might render it today as something like, “What truth have you spoken?” Or, “Do you know what you are talking about?” When coupled with the second question, these first two questions seem to directly question Aaron’s sanity and integrity—he was crazy or a liar, or both. The questions are likely not much more than rapid fire, thinly veiled, accusations instead of sincerely asked questions seeking answers and motivated by a desire to make critical changes in one’s life. The danger in waiting for an answer when making accusations against someone who claims to be a messenger from God is that answers to questions might result in the questioner having to either acknowledge her or his error and/or make some uncomfortable and unwelcome changes. In this case, it appears there was no pause for a response. The questions kept coming in what increasingly becomes an apparent effort to cast Aaron in an unfavorable light.
Why do not angels appear unto us?
Behold are not this people as good as thy people?
Now the intent seems to broaden to raise concerns among the people as to Aaron’s having a sense of superiority. Whether the questions are meant to be additive, or simply a smorgasbord of accusations is hard to say. At this point in the exchange we can only assume what triggered these questions from the Amalekite, but collectively the questions seem to be a reaction to what we might expect to be Aaron’s claims of authority from God. After all, stating one’s authority at the beginning of a message is a standard pattern of many other Book of Mormon prophet-messengers (see 1 Nephi 1:18; Words of Mormon 1:16-18; Mosiah 3:1-3; Mosiah 11:20; Alma 5:3 for examples).
The Amalekite’s next line, however, makes it abundantly clear what is behind these first four questions. The Amalekite, and the people, are likely bothered by much more than a possible claim of authority. The issue is the content of Aaron’s message that is described as:
“Thou also sayest, except we repent we shall perish.”
This is the first, and only, description the Amalekite gives of what Aaron had said to the people at this point. Unsurprisingly, Aaron is preaching repentance and what would follow if they (and we) don’t repent—they (and we) perish. Whether dramatic or subtle, immediate or eventual, when we reject the call to repent we are on dangerous ground. We are overtly claiming to know better than God’s messenger. In response to Aaron’s unwelcome call to repent the Amalekite’s questions became combative:
How knowest thou the thought and intent of our hearts?
How knowest thou that we have cause to repent?
How knowest thou that we are not a righteous people?
Essentially, the Amalekite said, “How do you know what is going on with us? What makes you think we need to repent? Maybe we really are righteous?” We have moved from questions of mocking to questions of anger. The Amalekite, and supposedly the people at large for whom he speaks, are beyond rolling their eyes at a “messenger from God”—they are angry with the message, and the messenger.
There is another aspect of the Amalekite’s questions to consider. The focus of the questions is on the head, not the heart. Throughout the Book of Mormon there is a consistent focus by the messengers from God that the issue of faith is more in the heart than the head. Whether it is Nephi dealing with his older brothers (1 Nephi 17:45-46), Jacob with the people at the temple (Jacob 2:5-7), Enos reaching out to his people (Enos 1:22-23), King Benjamin correcting his people (Words of Mormon 1:16-18 and Mosiah 2:9), Abinadi teaching King Noah and his priests (Mosiah 13:30-32, 15:26-27), Alma inviting the people to baptism (Mosiah 18:8-11), Alma encouraging his people in the face of Lamanites invaders (Mosiah 23:27-29), the rising generation who could not understand King Benjamin’s teachings (Mosiah 26:1-4), Alma the younger calling the people of Zarahemla to repentance (Alma 5), Mormon commenting on our unsteadiness in keeping God’s commandments (Helaman 12), or many others throughout the the Book of Mormon. Across all these accounts of God’s messengers addressing faith and rebellion the focus seems to be primarily on the heart, not the head. The Amalekite’s focus on what Aaron knows instead of a focus on the heart reveals his, and the people’s, hard heartedness.
Apparently before granting time for Aaron to answer these questions, the Amalekite makes three declarations to argue for their being righteous and not needing the repentance for which Aaron argues:
Behold, we have built sanctuaries, and
We do assemble ourselves together to worship God.
We do believe that God will save all men.
In essence, they were saying, “we show up on Sundays and do the worship thing, but in the end it really does not matter, because God is going to save everyone.” Maybe they were practicing the Zoramite rituals that Alma encountered (see Alma 31). Both the Zoramites and the people to whom Aaron was preaching clearly seem to be offshoots of Nehor, whose very public demise did not end the spreading of his doctrine and practices (see Alma 1:15-16).
Like many other prophet messengers in the Book of Mormon, they don’t seem to take the bait of letting their detractors set the parameters of the discussion. In this case, Aaron completely ignores the Amalekite’s questions and declarations and simply asks one question, “Believest thou that the Son of God shall come to redeem mankind from their sins?” (v 7). In asking this simple question Aaron points the people to Christ and all that accompanies an acknowledgment of Him. Aaron intended to help them answer their questions by focusing them on Christ. In response to Aaron’s questions the Amalekite said, “we do not believe:
“that thou knowest any such thing”
“in these foolish traditions”
“that thou knowest of things to come”
“that thy fathers and also that our fathers did know concerning the things which they spake, of that which is to come” (v 8)
The Amalekite response to Aaron’s simple question lays bare their belief system, and reveals their adherence to the order of Nehor. The Amalekite response is problematic for the nonbelievers. You cannot say in one breath, “that God will save all men” (v 6) and then say “you cannot know of things to come” (v 8). The last statement negates the claim that God will save all men. If there is foolishness to be disclosed it is in the self-contradictory claims of the rebellious.
Regardless, what is being done and said through the Amalekite response is pure Nehor doctrine. His is a subtle, yet significant, declaration of a completely different “plan of happiness” that essentially says, “we breathe, so we are saved.” Why? Because of God’s infinite love, patience, goodness...How could such a being ever do anything other than save all his children.” This one sentence, declaring “God will save all men,” summarizes succinctly a condition of which Nephi prophesied regarding what the rebellious will teach in the latter-days (2 Nephi 28:3-9).
A question naturally arises as one considers the Amalekite claim that “God will save all men.” What is so bad about believing God will save all his children? This is an important question to ponder. I offer the following three reasons for having concern about an “all are saved” doctrine. Such a doctrine minimizes, or altogether removes:
accountability for our choices in this life
our need to repent
our need for a Savior like Christ who saves us from our sins, not in our sins (Helaman 5:10)
This belief system concludes that there is no need for God to shape us into something different than what we find comfortable, exciting, or acceptable to us or our chosen crowd of fellow travelers with whom we feel the most comfortable.
In response, “Aaron began to open the scriptures unto them concerning the coming of Christ, and also concerning the resurrection of the dead, and that there could be no redemption for mankind save it were through the death and sufferings of Christ, and the atonement of his blood” (v 9). Again, Aaron appears to not beat around the bush, he was pointing the people to Christ directly from the scriptures, which they likely used in their synagogues. Unsurprisingly, the people became “angry with him, and began to mock him; and they would not hear the words which he spake” (v 10).
As a result, Aaron and his companions left the land of Jerusalem and went to other places in the land and the pattern repeats itself over and over until the well known pattern of mocking and anger turned to violence and “Aaron and a certain number of his brethren were taken and cast into prison” in which they “suffered many things” (see https://www.themostcorrectbook.org/2017/07/murmuring.html for a discussion of this pattern). Eventually “they were delivered by the hand of Lamoni and Ammon, and they were fed and clothed” (v 11-14).
In summary, it appears that when we choose to believe in the doctrine of Nehor we believe all are saved that it follows that there is no need for repentance, or at least less urgency, because God loves all his children and will therefore save all his children—whether or not we go to Church or try to do his will. Those who subscribe to such thinking seem to believe that all who believe otherwise are crazy, dishonest, arrogant, self-righteous, condescending prudes who do not really love others. Ironically, often those who adhere to Nehor’s doctrines turn on God’s messengers, denying them the common courtesy the rebellious expect for themselves. Furthermore, if believing messengers cannot be shamed or intimidated into submission then they are removed, confined, or even killed. Why? Because they do not support the doctrine that all are saved, and, therefore, people do not need to repent or believe in a Christ who saves the repentant.
What correct precepts are we to gain from all this to which we can adhere and thereby draw closer to God? I offer the following as a start:
As we have observed in other entries, the nature and delivery of questions we ask can reveal a great deal about our intent when we interact with God’s anointed, or any one else for that matter. When our questions are essentially accusations against God’s proclaimed messengers we reveal that we are not really interested in learning, we are more interested in justifying ourselves and likeminded others, or are trying to create or affirm doubt in others about God’s messenger. Therefore, the correct precept that will draw us closer to God is to ask questions “with real intent” (Moroni 10:3-5) that invite instruction from God and his messengers and commit to act upon the message. The answers to honest questions directed at prophets will often result in our needing to make changes in what we desire, think, do, or say.
Mocking, anger, and violence are symptoms of hard heartedness and are not found in the true disciple of Christ. We align ourselves with the rebellious when we resort to such methods for dealing with others, particularly those who God sends to declare His message with whom we may disagree. We are parking ourselves squarely in the great and spacious building with those who were seen “in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit” (1 Nephi 8:27). Therefore, the believer must develop the ability to not pay attention to mockers (1 Nephi 8:33).
We must be very careful about our beliefs in God’s plan and the need for and role of the Savior. Belief that all will be saved seems to be a common belief of those who question the need for a Savior, who minimize his role, and minimize individual accountability for choices and the resultant need for repentance. Furthermore, we can know those who possess the truth by their attitude toward Christ and his redemptive work. When we ignore or minimize the need for and reality of a Savior, or our need to repent, we are in great danger spiritually.
When I adhere to these precepts I find myself drawing closer to God. I invite you to develop your own list of precepts as you search Alma 21:1-14. I am confident that you will find precepts to which you can adhere and thereby draw closer to God.
