Watch the video presentation on YouTube at: Mosiah 29-Alma 4 Video
To purchase slides or handouts, go to: Teaching with Power Etsy Shop
LESSON #1 BALANCING GOVERNMENT
OBJECT
For an object to this lesson, I suggest that you display a set of balances at the front of the classroom, if you have something like that available. You know like the kind they would use in the past to measure wheat or precious metals. I personally have purchased a small plastic set of balances that I use often in my lessons when I wish to illustrate the concept of balancing principles. The gospel is full of these balancing truths and this lesson features an example of one of them. If you’re interested in purchasing a set of balances like the one I have, I’ll include a link in the video description below.
ICEBREAKER
We’re going to start with a little matching activity. How well do you know different types of government? There have been many tried over the millennia and there continue to be various forms throughout the world. So I’m going to give you a list, and then you tell me which description matches that form of government. Here we go:
D Dictatorship
C Theocracy
A Monarchy
E Democracy
F Totalitarian
B Anarchy
A. Rule by a King or Queen that has absolute power. That power is passed along through family.
B. A situation in which there is no government ruling.
C. Rule by leaders who lead based on a set of religious beliefs or principles.
D. Rule by a single leader who has not been elected and may use force to keep control.
E. Rule by representatives chosen by the majority of the people, usually for a set period of time.
F. Rule be a single political party. People are forced to do what the government tells them.
So how did you do on that quiz? Well, this week we are going to get a little political. Which I know can be a bit risky. What is that they say? Never discuss politics or religion in polite company. Well today, we’re going to do both. We’re going to break that cardinal rule. So please, I pray that you’ll be gracious with me and try to listen with an open mind. Government plays a major role in our lives and as such, you would imagine the Lord might have something to say about the subject. And he does. The Book of Mormon contains some wonderful teaching on what makes for good government as does the Doctrine and Covenants. What’s nice is that it’s fairly non-partisan. I’ve found that there are principles in the scriptures that political conservatives will most likely find challenging, and principles that political liberals will find challenging. And I promise that I’m not going to attempt to paint the teachings here according to my own political leanings OR try to mask the principles either in an effort to be politically correct. I’ll just do my best to present what I feel the scriptures are teaching.
BACKGROUND
Some background here. Mosiah 29 begins with King Mosiah facing a bit of a political problem. He’s aging and knowing he won’t be around to lead his people forever starts to consider the question of who will be the next king. Now typically, in a monarchy, who becomes the next king? One of the king’s sons, usually the oldest. But Mosiah has a problem. None of his four sons want to be the next king. They've decided to build up a different kingdom instead, the kingdom of God. And so last week we heard of their plan to go out and preach the gospel to the Lamanites. So what’s a king to do? Who do you turn the Kingship over to? And whoever you choose, you’re probably not going to make everybody happy. As I’m sure you’re aware, not everybody always agrees on how things should be run, and who should run them. So Mosiah’s solution is to completely overhaul their political system from a monarchy to a more representative form of government. A government made up of judges.
THE BEST FORM OF GOVERNMENT
So in Mosiah 29 we’re going to get a chance to look for and identify principles of good government. Which leads to our first question. What is the best form of government according to these Book of Mormon prophets? The answer may surprise you. Look for it in Mosiah 29:13 and you can also check out Alma’s view on the subject back in Mosiah 23:8 when his people attempted to make him a king.
So there we learn:
13 Therefore, if it were possible that you could have just men to be your kings, who would establish the laws of God, and judge this people according to his commandments, yea, if ye could have men for your kings who would do even as my father Benjamin did for this people—I say unto you, if this could always be the case then it would be expedient that ye should always have kings to rule over you.
And then Mosiah 23:8
8 Nevertheless, if it were possible that ye could always have just men to be your kings it would be well for you to have a king.
So what’s the best form of government then? Righteous kings. And why do you think that is? Why would that be the preferred system of government. My thoughts? If you have a righteous man, whose judgment is according to God’s will, who isn’t power hungry, who has the best interest of the people at heart instead of himself, how amazing would that be! How quickly would things get done. Righteous decisions could be made and implemented at once. It’s a very efficient form of government. In fact, when Christ returns to earth, what will the government be during the millennium? A monarchy, with Christ as our King. The King of Kings, and the government shall be upon his shoulder, like Isaiah taught. And, you know, the majority of the people in Zarahemla have good evidence of the virtue of this system. They’ve been fortunate enough to have had three great kings in a row. Mosiah 1, Benjamin and then Mosiah 2. HOWEVER, there is a very important caveat with that statement of the virtues of monarchy. Notice that in both instances you have the word IF before they come to that conclusion. IF you could always have just men to be your kings, that would be the best form of government anywhere. That’s a very big IF.
Because, what are some of the major problems with having a king? What are the mishaps of monarchy?
Search Mosiah 29:16-18, 21-24 for that answer.
The problems? All men are not just. There is no way to guarantee that you will have a righteous king. And, "how much iniquity doth one wicked king cause to be committed”, all it takes is one rotten apple to mess everything up. And there is a contingent of the people in Zarahemla that know about this problem all too well, from personal experience—the problems that one bad king can bring upon his people. That would be Limhi and Alma’s people who had witnessed the great evils that King Noah’s leadership had caused. Also, in 21-24 we get another reason. It’s very hard to get rid of a wicked king. The only way to do it is with much bloodshed. So as effective as monarchy can be, it’s just not worth the risks, because when it goes bad, it really goes bad and quick, and it’s very, very difficult to overcome and recover from it, even just one bad king.
So, what’s the next best thing apparently? What kind of a government does King Mosiah recommend and establish? A democracy (or, when I use that term, I mean ) a representative form of government. Apparently that that’s the next best thing when you can’t guarantee righteous kings.
I like what Winston Churchill once said. “Democracy is the worst form of government . . . except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” Winston Churchill (House of Commons, 11 November 1947). And yes, I know, democracy isn’t perfect, is it. It’s just better than anything else. It’s horribly inefficient. Just think of how hard it is to get anything done or for decisions to be made. In fact, the Nephites are going to face some challenges to this new government right off the bat when men like Nehor and Amlici show up on the scene. But, apparently, it’s the best alternative we have. But why? What’s makes it superior to all others that have been tried.
One reason why? 7-8
7 And now if there should be another appointed in his stead, behold I fear there would rise contentions among you. And who knoweth but what my son, to whom the kingdom doth belong, should turn to be angry and draw away a part of this people after him, which would cause wars and contentions among you, which would be the cause of shedding much blood and perverting the way of the Lord, yea, and destroy the souls of many people.
8 Now I say unto you let us be wise and consider these things, for we have no right to destroy my son, neither should we have any right to destroy another if he should be appointed in his stead.
Do you get what he’s saying there? If we give my son all that power, who knows if he’ll stay righteous or not. Perhaps it’ll go to his head and cause contentions. Power destroys, and we have no right to destroy my son or anybody else we might put in his place. Giving somebody that much power can destroy them. You’ve all heard the old adage, “All power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. A good example of this is Saul in the Old Testament who started out so humble, and righteous, but power corrupted him. You’re probably also familiar with D&C 121:39
39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
So you don’t have to have a lot of authority for it to corrupt you. You don’t even have to have authority; you just need to think that you do.
Therefore, a good government will always limit the power that goes to the individual. Not only for the governed’s sake, but for the sake of the person who has been given the power to govern. There is compassion in limiting the amount of power somebody can receive. It needs to be shared. So that will introduce us to the first of five principles of good government taught here in Mosiah 29 that I’d like to cover with you.
So, Principle #1 of good government. Good government limits the power given to any one individual.
PRINCIPLES OF GOOD GOVERNMENT
And that will start us out on our quest to define some principles of Good Government. Now let’s see if you can discover the other 4. I’ll give you some verses to study and you see what you can find. What conclusions would you come to by examining these verses.
29:11
29:25-27
29:28-29
29:30-34
Principle #2 It would make sense that good governments would have good judges and good laws too. So we should elect good judges, or leaders that will judge according to the law. But what makes a good law?
29:11 The judges will judge the people according to the law, but later he adds a synonymous phrase, according to the commandments of God. So that would lead me to conclude that the closer the laws of the land match the commandments of God, the better those laws will be, and the more happy and peaceful we’ll be as a society. Now we’re not trying to associate Church and State too closely together here, but we’re trying to establish a principle by which we can determine if a certain law is going to ultimately promote the common good. Good laws will be righteous laws. So we have to ask ourselves if the laws of the land make it easier or harder for a person to live the laws of God. There should be a pretty good match between the two. So if there are laws that protect people’s lives and property and happiness, and help them to be a moral and a just people, then those would be good laws. But laws that excuse sin or make it easier for people to commit sin, I would argue, are bad laws. For example, sometimes there are laws that make it easier for businesses or individuals to cheat or take advantage of others Sometimes there are laws that allow pornographic, ultra-violent, or explicit material to be protected by free speech laws. I sometimes wonder about those laws.
So principle #2 is Good governments will appoint wise leaders that enact laws that complement the commandments of God
Principle #3 Next principle in verses 25-26. If it’s not good for any one individual to have the power, then who IS given the power in a good government? I mean you have to give it to somebody right. What phrase in these verses shows where the ultimate power comes from. Yes, there are judges, but who appoints them. The voice of the people. The people are given the ultimate power in choosing who leads them. And that is determined by the majority. But why the majority? There’s a principle in there. It is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right, but more common for the lesser part to desire what’s not right. That’s why it is unwise to give too much power to one man, as in monarchies, or even a small group of people, like an oligarchy. Because it’s common for the minority to not want what is right. That truth makes me wary, at times, of special interest groups, whether they’re right wing or left wing, because it’s common for a small group of people to get so caught up in their cause, that they might do wrong in espousing or defending it. So if we ever find ourselves in the minority on any certain issue, that doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re wrong, but it should give us reason enough to take pause and really examine what it is we are supporting.
Now is majority rule fool proof? No it’s not. Take a look at the next verse.
27 And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.
So, it is possible that the majority could end up getting it wrong. But when the majority of the people desire that which is not right, that’s a pretty good indicator that your society is losing its way and moving closer to a state the scriptures call “the fulness of iniquity” and therefore destruction. We have many examples of that very thing happening in the scriptures.
So I would say that principle #3 is that : Good government operates by the voice of the majority of the people.
Principle #4
What do verses 28-29 teach us?
28 And now if ye have judges, and they do not judge you according to the law which has been given, ye can cause that they may be judged of a higher judge.
29 If your higher judges do not judge righteous judgments, ye shall cause that a small number of your lower judges should be gathered together, and they shall judge your higher judges, according to the voice of the people.
What governmental principle does that sound like? Checks and balances right. Don’t let any one particular group of your elected officials have too much power. Put checks in place in case that small group gets out of line. This is a major facet of American government. I suppose you could also argue that the existence of differing political parties helps to keep checks and balances on things too. Although it’s true, at the same time, they can be very maddening and overly partisan politics can keep important things from getting done.
So principle #4 Good Government employs checks and balances of power.
Principle #5
I see in these next verses a thought-provoking balance. Balance is an eternal principle and government is no different. Let’s imagine a set of scales. On one side we are going to place something that I think we can all agree on is a major role of government. To provide the people with what? Look for the answer in vs. 32.
To create a system that protects the liberty, rights, and privileges of all people. That is the role of good government. Government that seeks to deny people their liberties, their rights, and their privileges is bad government. And I believe we could all come up with examples from the last century of bad governments that have done just that. And, sadly, I could give you examples in my own nation’s history where, although I feel that, in general, our government is a good government, entire segments of the population have tragically been denied their liberties, rights, and privileges.
But, there is another principle to consider here. There is more to making a nation work than just liberties, rights, and privileges. Those need to be balanced with something on the other side as well. So let’s make a little diagram and put liberties, rights, and privileges on one side. But what lies on the other side of that balance. Mosiah will make an interesting point about being a king. Let’s pick it up in vs 30-31.
30 And I command you to do these things in the fear of the Lord; and I command you to do these things, and that ye have no king; that if these people commit sins and iniquities they shall be answered upon their own heads.
31 For behold I say unto you, the sins of many people have been caused by the iniquities of their kings; therefore their iniquities are answered upon the heads of their kings.
So with all that power that is given to kings, there’s something else that goes with it. Accountability for the actions of his people. He continues in 33 . . .
33 And many more things did king Mosiah write unto them, unfolding unto them all the trials and troubles of a righteous king, yea, all the travails of soul for their people, and also all the murmurings of the people to their king; and he explained it all unto them.
Huh, fascinating. King Mosiah is basically saying that heavy is the head that wears the crown. If a society goes bad, the King may have to answer for the sins of all those people. With great power, comes great responsibility. God apparently holds leaders accountable for how they lead their constituents. King Noah would is an example of this. Remember how it was described, "he did cause his people to commit sin". (Mosiah 11:2) King Mosiah says, that it’s not right that any one man should have that much power, or that much liability either.
His conclusion:
34 And he told them that these things ought not to be; but that the burden should come upon all the people, that every man might bear his part.
So what are we going to put on the other side of this balance? Yes, government should protect our rights and privileges, and when it fails to do so, it is right and appropriate to confront it. But what’s our part? What do we call “every man bearing his part?” Responsibility. And since the power is going to lie with the people, therefore, so should much of the accountability. Can you see how that balance works?
Now, quick exercise, look at vs. 38 and tell me which phrases fit on which side of the scale?
38 Therefore they relinquished their desires for a king, and became exceedingly anxious that every man should have an equal chance throughout all the land;
Which side am I going to put “equal chance” on? Liberties, Rights, and Privileges, right. And then,
yea, and “every man expressed a willingness to answer for his own sins.” Where do I put that? On the responsibility side.
You can see this balance in Doctrine and Covenants 101: 77-78 as well:
77 According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles; (RIGHTS)
78 That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment. (RESPONSIBILITIES)
And then this interesting note here:
79 Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another.
So why is slavery wrong? I think that most of us would say because it denies people their rights. And that’s true, and a major reason for why it’s sooo wrong. But there’s another reason. God also doesn’t like slavery because it denies people their accountability and responsibility. He says, “I can’t judge people fairly for their actions if they had no choice in the matter.” So slavery is wrong on both accounts, on both sides of that balance.
Back to Mosiah’s people, then. The king says, “If we're going to give you rights and privileges, then you’ve also got to be willing to do your part and answer for your own sins.”
In another section of the Doctrine and Covenants that is quite political in nature, we have a warning about this balance. Doctrine and Covenants 98:6-7
6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.
In this balance, if you give either side more or less, than that cometh of evil, it’s going to cause your nation grief. If I were to attach the word more or less to one side or another, our balances get out of order. We need to keep things in balance. Now, in your nation, if it is out of balance, which side do the scales tip towards? Now that’s going to be an opinion, but it’s a compelling question to consider. I know in my nation, the United States, that for much of its history, there has been a gross imbalance on the rights and liberties side for entire segments of the population. And I’m not convinced that those issues have completely been remedied, although great strides have been made. On the other hand, it also seems that there are people and groups that decry the rights and privileges side of an issue in an effort to not be accountable for their actions, or to use them as a license for sin. And they cry out, “We want our rights! Don’t step on our liberties! Give us our privileges”! How often have you seen people yelling, “give us more responsibility! Expect more of us! Hold us accountable. You’re just not going to see that. No it’s all about rights. Whether it’s abortion, drug legality, gambling laws, explicit material in the media and so on. And that’s not to say that there aren’t justifiable issues and circumstance where rights and privileges need to be called for, demanded, and unrighteous dominion opposed. The religious persecution of the early Church, women’s suffrage, and the Civil Rights movement, for example. But we also have to consider the other side of the coin when it comes to our personal role in government. What about our responsibility to choose good leaders. Our responsibility to support our elected leaders. Our responsibility to follow and obey good laws. Our responsibility to work hard. Our responsibility to be willing to serve and fight for our liberty, or at the very least, support those who do. We have a responsibility to be good citizens. There is a statement attributed to Joseph Smith, though granted, its authenticity is debated, where he is reported to have said that one day the Constitution would hang by a thread. If he did that make that statement, perhaps this is what he was referring to, that the scales of good government would skew out of balance, tipping so far to one side or the other, that the welfare of our nation could be in jeopardy. The next chapters at the very beginning of Alma seem to suggest this. The new government faces some real challenges as entire groups of people rebel against a good government, and become prideful, and cause major problems for the Nephite nation. But, throughout it all, you have descriptions of good people doing good things despite the issues. So, we may not be able to control our fellowman, we may not be able to control our government, but we can control us. Even in the worst of political circumstances, whatever country we might be in, no matter how good or bad our leaders are, we can still be good people and live according to our morals. WE can see that in Alma 1-4.
So principle #5 is Good government encourages a balance between Rights and Responsibilities.
Now don’t misunderstand me. I love my nation, and all in all, even with its problems, I believe there is far more right about my country than there is wrong. I’m very grateful for the Constitution and the liberties, rights and privileges my government provides me. Still, I feel we would do well to remember this balance, and before we move on, I want you to consider a few questions:
TAKING IT TO HEART
What could I do to more fully bear my responsibilities as a citizen of my nation?
I’m not going to take the time to go into these scripture references, but if you really would like to study some scriptural ideas on what makes for good citizens, check out Doctrine and Covenants 98:6-11, and Doctrine and Covenants 134.
CONCLUSION
Well, I encourage you to seek that balance within yourself even if your government struggles with it. I hope that we can all be good citizens, especially as members of the Church of Jesus Christ. May the nations and communities we live in be grateful that we live within their borders. And I hope that we will always keep in mind the purpose for democratic principles and for our freedoms. I love something that Joseph Smith once said: "Be wise; let prudence dictate all your counsels; preserve peace with all men, if possible; stand by the Constitution of your country; observe its principles; and above all, show yourselves men (and women) of God, worthy citizens."
( Source: Messages of the First Presidency 1:74-75 )
And that will complete our study of the Book of Mosiah. Such a phenomenal book with so many great discourses, stories, and truths. I hope that your testimony has been enriched and fortified by it, like it has mine.
ALMA 1-4 GOOD CITIZENS
But now, we begin our journey through the largest book in the Book of Mormon, which surprisingly only covers 39 years of Nephite history and is named after Alma the Younger, the first chief judge elected by the people.
Now for these first four chapters of Alma, I’m just going to briefly cover some of the history and background of this time period and then we’ll highlight two messages from these chapters. One we’ll cover as a quick game, and the other we’ll spend a little more time and depth covering as I feel it’s a very relevant principle to our day.
So a summary. In chapter 1, the church faces a major challenge to its authority. We have an encounter with the 2nd Anti-Christ of the Book of Mormon. A man named Nehor who teaches the people that everybody is saved no matter what and that since his ideas were so great, that the people should support him with their money. So you’re going to find some valuable teachings on the danger of priestcraft in chapter 1. But, Nehor is confronted by Gideon who then Nehor turns on and kills. Now under the new system of government, Nehor is not guilty of committing a civil crime and is therefore free to espouse and assert his viewpoint on his beliefs. He has the right to do that. But once he kills Gideon, that’s a different matter. That is a civil crime and since he is now guilty of murder, he's executed. But still, his influence has already spread its poison, and there is a contingent of the people that are lifted up in pride and continue to make problems for the people of the Church.
In Alma 2 and 3, we have a major challenge to the government this time. A man named Amlici wants to be king and get rid of this pesky system of judges that thwart his desire for total power. So, the Nephites do the democratic thing and take a vote, and the majority of the people say no, we don’t want a king. Remember the principle taught in Mosiah 29 that it’s not common for the majority to choose the wrong thing. But Amlici won’t have it, neither will his followers and they break off and initiate a civil war. In that war, the Amlicites are beaten back, but they join forces with the Lamanites and an even bigger war ensues. But with God on their side, even though they are horribly outnumbered, the Nephites win, and Alma even kills Amlici in a sword fight, some really exciting stuff. Then Alma 4 describes how a greater rift between the righteous and the wicked begins to form in Nephite society, prompting Alma to give up the judgment seat and devote himself wholly to the preaching of the word, “bearing down in pure testimony against them”.
Citizenship in the Church and Citizenship in the Country.
In our first lesson this week we talked about the balance between rights and responsibilities. These first chapters in Alma can teach us some things that good citizens can do to maintain peace and stability in their communities. To cover a lot of these principles and actions in a short amount of time, you could do a fill-in-the blank challenge. Give your students the chapter or verses you wish them to look for the answers in and challenge them to be the first person to call out the word that goes in the blank. If I’m teaching youth, I’ll typically throw out a small piece of candy each time to the person that first identifies it. While I’m going through these phrases, I encourage my students to mark them in their scriptures under the label, “Becoming Good Citizens”. So here we go.
They were not ______ in their own eyes PROUD (Alma 1:20)
They did ________ the word of God, one with another, without money and without price IMPART (Alma 1:20)
There should not any man, belonging to the church, arise and ___________ those that did not belong to the church. PERSECUTE (Alma 1:21)
Stand ________ in the faith FAST (Alma 1:25)
They were ____________ and immovable in keeping the commandments of God STEADFAST (Alma 1:25)
And thus they were all ___________ EQUAL (Alma 1:26)
And they did all ___________, every man according to his strength LABOR (Alma 1:26)
And they did ___________ of their substance, every man according to that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and the afflicted. IMPART (Alma 1:27)
They did not set their hearts upon ___________ RICHES (Alma 1:30)
They were awaked to a remembrance of their ________ DUTY (Alma 4:3)
While others were _____________ themselves ABASING (Alma 4:13)
__________ the word of God unto them PREACH (Alma 4:19)
Bearing down in pure __________ TESTIMONY (Alma 4:19)
They ought not to __________ with their hands LABOR (Alma 1:3)
Thou hast ________ the blood of a righteous man SHED (Alma 1:13)
There were many who loved the ________ things of the world VAIN (Alma 1:16)
They went forth preaching _________ doctrines FALSE (Alma 1:16)
Yea, they did persecute them and ________ them with all manner of words AFFLICT (Alma 1:20)
Began to _________ warmly with their adversaries CONTEND (Alma 1:22)
LESSON #2 DISTINGUISHED
ICEBREAKER
But I’d like to focus on this Amlici episode for a minute. I feel there is a really powerful principle taught here especially vital for the youth to understand. And it all revolves around one particular word.
And to introduce you to that word, I’d like to do a brief activity with you. Look at these pictures. Which one of the dog’s shadows is the perfect match? And you’ll probably want to pause this for a minute so you can take a closer look. Which is it?
And the answer is E. It’s not A because the nose is turned up in the shadow. It’s not B because there’s no collar. It’s not C, because the tongue isn’t long enough. It’s not D because there is not space between the front legs, and it’s not F because the tail is too long.
Kind of tough one huh? Well what about this one? Which picture is different? Now take your time, I know how difficult these can be.
And the answer to this one is C. And can you see why? See, this cow is standing up on two legs, right, and he has yellow horns. All right, all silliness aside. There’s a point I’m trying to make here.
The more different the outward appearance is, the easier it is to tell it apart. The more extreme the difference, the easier to differentiate it from other things.
The more subtle the difference, the harder. Extreme, easy, subtle, hard. Keep that in mind during this lesson.
And one more question here, I want you to look up the following verses and find the word that best matches this activity. It’s the same word in every verse and the focal point of our lesson.
Alma 2:11, Alma 3:4, Alma 3:8.
And the word is DISTINGUISHED. To distinguish something is to set it apart, to make it different, to cause it to stand out. We are going to look at two different groups of people in the Book of Mormon who sought to distinguish themselves and how. If you wish, you might consider using this comparison chart to help your students see the contrast. These groups are great foils to each other. Challenge your students to fill this out as you study together.
The first group we’re going to examine is that faction of the Nephites that supported the desires of Amlici, or the man that wanted to be the king. They wanted to distinguish themselves. And they do it in two ways.
In what two ways did the Amlicites distinguish themselves in 2:11 and 3:4?
First, 2:11
11 Now the people of Amlici were distinguished by the name of Amlici, being called Amlicites; and the remainder were called Nephites, or the people of God.
So first, they distinguish themselves by taking on a new or different name. They didn’t want to be called Nephites, or the people of God. They didn’t want to reflect the name Nephi. So they take on Amlici’s name. That’s who they want to be associated with and who they wish to support and serve.
And then they do something else to distinguish themselves. How do they do it in Alma 3:4?
4 And the Amlicites were distinguished from the Nephites, for they had marked themselves with red in their foreheads after the manner of the Lamanites; nevertheless they had not shorn their heads like unto the Lamanites.
They mark themselves with red on their forehead. They change their appearance to send a message to anyone who looks at them. And what was that message? Look in Alma 3:18:
18 Now the Amlicites knew not that they were fulfilling the words of God when they began to mark themselves in their foreheads; nevertheless they had come out in open rebellion against God; therefore it was expedient that the curse should fall upon them.
It symbolized rebellion. So if you were to walk down the streets of Zarahemla and you saw somebody pass by with a red mark on their forehead, what would you assume about that person? Ah, that's an Amlicite. This person is rebelling against our government and our religion, they don’t wish to be associated with the people of God or Nephites. They want to distinguish themselves and be separate.
Now there’s another group of people in the Book of Mormon that wanted to distinguish themselves as well. And I understand that this story does not occur in this week’s Come Follow Me chapters. But the comparison is so good and even uses the same word and language to describe their efforts. They also distinguished themselves. And they also do it in two different ways. See if you can find those two ways in Alma 23:16-17, and Alma 27:27.
16 And now it came to pass that the king and those who were converted were desirous that they might have a name, that thereby they might be distinguished from their brethren; therefore the king consulted with Aaron and many of their priests, concerning the name that they should take upon them, that they might be distinguished.
17 And it came to pass that they called their names Anti-Nephi-Lehies; and they were called by this name and were no more called Lamanites.
So this is the group of Lamanites that had been converted by Ammon the missionary. And they decide that they need to change something. To change their names, since they are new people. They wish to throw off the name Lamanite and all the connotations of rebellion that went with it, and call themselves Anti-Nephi-Lehies. Which I know is a confusing name because it sounds like they’re against Nephi and Lehi. That’s the way we use the term Anti. But perhaps anti meant something different in the Nephite language, or maybe the idea is that they are choosing to stop facing or reflecting the values and traditions of Laman and the Lamanites, but rather to face and reflect the values and traditions of Nephi and Lehi. That’s who they wanted to be associated with. So they take that name upon themselves.
You could also cross reference this idea with Mosiah 1:11 where King Benjamin uses the word distinguished.
11 And moreover, I shall give this people a name, that thereby they may be distinguished above all the people which the Lord God hath brought out of the land of Jerusalem; and this I do because they have been a diligent people in keeping the commandments of the Lord.
They too took on a name. And what was the name that they took upon themselves? Later in Mosiah, they take upon themselves the name of Christ. That’s who they wanted to be associated with , that’s who THEY wished to support and serve.
Well the Anti-Nephi-Lehies distinguish themselves in another way as well. How do they do it in Alma 27:27?
27 And they were among the people of Nephi, and also numbered among the people who were of the church of God. And they were also distinguished for their zeal towards God, and also towards men; for they were perfectly honest and upright in all things; and they were firm in the faith of Christ, even unto the end.
So whereas the Amlicites decided to distinguish themselves with an outer mark, how did the Anti-Nephi-Lehies do it differently? These are all inner things or qualities of the soul. They were distinguished by their character.
So a quick review here. The Amlicites first distinguished themselves by changing their name. The meaning was to reflect their commitment to the values of Amlici. The second way was with a red mark. Meaning rebellion. Where was their focus? Outward or inward? The outward appearance. How long did it take to distinguish yourself as an Amlicite? Not long. Dip my fingers in red paint, wipe it across my forehead, and boom, I’m an Amlicite. How much effort does that take? Not much. Quick and easy. And what was the result of these actions? Look in Alma 3:19. Cursed, and condemnation. But what about the Anti-Nephi-Lehies. They also changed their name. And they did it to reflect their commitment to the values of Nephi and Lehi. Their second way of distinguishing themselves was through their zeal, their honesty, their faith, or in other words, their character. Meaning devotion, to God and Christ. Where was their focus. On the inner beauty, the inward appearance. How long does it take to distinguish yourself in that way? A long time. Maybe even a lifetime to really distinguish yourselves by your character. How much effort? A great deal, and many sacrifices. But what was their result in Alma 27:30. We’re told that they were highly favored of the Lord.
So really, there is no problem with distinguishing yourself or separating yourself. It’s the way we do it that becomes the issue.
Well let’s liken the scriptures here. Do people distinguish themselves in the same kinds of ways nowadays?
How about the Amlicite way? What are some ways a person might seek to distinguish themselves by name or appearance? Perhaps we give ourselves names and labels: I’m progressive. I’m an intellectual, I’m spiritual but not religious, I’m an ex-Mormon, I’m anti-religion. Or we show our allegiance to a specific group. I’m from a certain gang, or a certain social status, or even music preferences can dictate identities and appearance. And what are some of the outward appearance marks we may choose to adopt? Sometimes clothing styles can communicate rebellion against society or religion. Hairstyles, jewelry, piercings, the language we use, the places we spend time in, these can all become outward marks of distinguishment. And of course, a caution here, just because somebody has a certain hairstyle or a tattoo or a piercing, doesn’t automatically equal bad or rebellious. We should reserve our judgment and treat all well and be welcoming to all. What I’m hoping we will all do here is look at ourselves, judge ourselves and determine the nature of our own actions rather than pointing the finger at others. Are there things that we are doing that are efforts to distinguish ourselves the Amlicite way. And why do we do these kinds of things? More than likely, it’s because we want to stand out in a certain way. And like we demonstrated earlier, the more extreme our appearance, the more we stand out. We are trying to communicate something when we do these things. Usually it means that I’m trying to communicate rebellion. Rebellion against the church, my parents, society in general, or my culture. And really, it doesn’t take much effort or time to do it, does it. It doesn’t take a whole lot of effort or time to adjust our outward appearance, or the language we use, or the places we go.
Rather, I believe that God would have us distinguish ourselves like Anti-Nephi-Lehies. Through our character, through things that are more on the inside, things that require time and effort to develop.
TRUTH
Seek to set yourself apart by your character and not by outward marks of rebellion.
LIKEN THE SCRIPTURES
Can you think of anybody you know who you feel distinguishes themselves like an Anti-Nephi-Lehi? How do they do it?
TAKING IT TO HEART
Ask yourself, “Which of the two ways do I seek to distinguish myself. Like an Amlicite, or an Anti-Nephi-Lehi?”
What Anti-Nephi-Lehi quality do admire in someone you know?
What could you do this week to begin developing that quality in yourself?
CONCLUSION
So my friends, especially my young friends, if you want to be distinguished, distinguish yourself by your character. Be an Anti-Nephi-Lehi, not an Amlicite. And if you want to be distinguished by a name, let it be the name of the prophets, or better yet, the name of Christ. I can promise you that if you do, you too will be highly favored of the Lord.
