Speaking Up for Scripture

What I wish to say today requires a bit of background, so I’m going to ask you to bear with me for a few minutes at the start.

My aim is to ask what the Book of Mormon might teach us about speaking up for scripture. I want to let the prophet Jacob—whose short book appears early in the Book of Mormon—be our primary instructor. But I don’t think we’re ready to hear what he has to teach us until we first become familiar with why Nephi may have asked Jacob to contribute to the small plates in the first place.

So I’m going to spend a few minutes on Nephi’s project and then move on to Jacob.

Nephi’s Project on the Small Plates

We’re all almost certainly familiar with Nephi’s project, but I doubt any of us is familiar with it as well as we could be. We sometimes talk as if reading First and Second Nephi were like reading Nephi’s private journal. But the text itself tells us Nephi didn’t write these books until decades after the events they record. It also indicates that he spent a long time working on his two books—maybe a decade or more.

All of that should prompt us to ask: what took Nephi so long to write what, in modern print, is just a little over a hundred pages?

He already knew:

• the history he needed to record,
• the doctrine he wished to teach,
• the sources (especially scripture) he planned to quote.

So what took so much time?

I think the answer lies in the word arrange. What apparently took Nephi so long was deciding exactly how to organize the materials he felt constrained to include on the small plates.

I imagine him going through many drafts—probably on more perishable materials—as he decided:

• how to tell each story,
• how to present each doctrine,
• how to shape and quote each source,
• and how to arrange all those parts into a coherent, convincing record.

There’s some evidence for this. First Nephi has a remarkably integral structure, tightly organized to foreground certain themes. Nephi divided First Nephi into seven original chapters (visible in earlier editions of the Book of Mormon). Those seven chapters fall into two larger parts, each explicitly named by Nephi.

In the first part, which Nephi calls an abridgment of his father’s record, we get:

• the story of how Lehi came into possession of a key prophetic source—the brass plates, featuring especially Isaiah, and
• Lehi’s dream of a life-giving tree.

In the second part, which Nephi calls the record of his own reign and ministry, we watch Nephi systematically unfold the meaning of those same two sources:

• He receives and then re-experiences his father’s dream and explains its significance to his brothers.
• He quotes liberally from Isaiah on the brass plates and then explains Isaiah’s prophecies to his brothers as well.

Sandwiched between those two ministerial interventions is the fraught story of how the family travels to a new world, with Nephi emerging as the colony’s ruler-to-be.

We could get into much more detail about how intricate all this is, but hopefully that’s enough to see just how tidy and intentional the structure of First Nephi is.

And if that picture is clear, then you’re ready to see that something about Second Nephi feels a bit out of joint by comparison.

A Hypothesis About Second Nephi

Nephi makes clear that the first few chapters of Second Nephi introduce a problem: the division of Lehi’s family into two warring nations. Only those early chapters are historical narrative, and they lead to the split between the Nephites and the Lamanites, the latter being “cut off from the presence of the Lord.” Other passages in the Book of Mormon confirm how central those chapters are in setting up that division.

Nephi also makes clear that much of the rest of Second Nephi is devoted to three prophetic witnesses—Jacob, Isaiah, and then Nephi—who each explain how God will reconcile the wandering Lamanites to the Lord they once knew. Nephi tells us straightforwardly that these three voices are meant to function as three witnesses.

Finally, it’s obvious that the last chapter of Second Nephi is a farewell of sorts. So at a high level the structure looks simple:

• A problem: the division of the family into Nephites and Lamanites.
• A three-part solution: Jacob, Isaiah, Nephi.
• A conclusion: Nephi’s farewell.

So far so good.

But when we look at Nephi’s original chapter divisions (there were 15 original chapters in Second Nephi, not the 33 we have now), things get less tidy.

• Jacob’s witness comes in three original chapters—two from one day of preaching, and one from another day.
• Isaiah’s witness also comes in three original chapters—two focused on Israel’s redemption and one focused on the Gentiles’ punishment.
• Nephi’s own culminating witness appears, at first glance, in three original chapters: two about how God will fulfill His covenants with Israel, and a final one about the doctrine of Christ.

So Jacob, Isaiah, and Nephi each get a neat two-plus-one, three-chapter structure, and Nephi’s culminating testimony of the doctrine of Christ ends with a resounding “amen” at the end of what we now call 2 Nephi 31. That would make a very clean conclusion.

But then:

• There’s an extra chapter after that (2 Nephi 32), which looks like a supplement to the doctrine of Christ.
• Then a final farewell chapter (2 Nephi 33), which is longer and more intense than we might expect.
• And earlier, in the first section, there is a psalm-like chapter (Nephi’s Psalm in 2 Nephi 4) that interrupts the flow of the narrative.

So the second book feels structurally “lumpier” than the first.

It may be that Nephi fully intended all these irregularities and that they come directly by inspiration. That’s entirely possible.

But given the tightness of First Nephi, it’s also reasonable to explore another possibility:

What if Nephi originally produced a very tightly structured Second Nephi, and only later felt that something more needed to be added?

What if there was, in effect, an “earlier edition” of Second Nephi without:

• Nephi’s Psalm,
• the supplement to the doctrine of Christ,
• and the extended farewell,

and then a “later edition” where those were added?

If we imagine removing those three supplements, the result is a remarkably tidy Second Nephi:

• A three-chapter introduction (Lehi’s final words and the division of the people).
• Three chapters from Jacob, in a two-plus-one pattern.
• Three chapters of Isaiah, in a two-plus-one pattern.
• Three chapters from Nephi himself, in a two-plus-one pattern, ending with the doctrine of Christ.

A nine-chapter core book with a beautifully ordered shape.

Now, to be clear: this is a hypothesis. But it’s the kind of hypothesis biblical scholars often use as they study how texts came together. Here, it gives us a useful lens for understanding the small plates.

If the hypothesis is right, it suggests that:

• Nephi may not initially have intended for anyone after him to write on the small plates at all.
• In 1 Nephi 19, he commands that others continue the large plates after his death, but he only says that the small plates should be handed down “from one prophet to another” until the Lord commands otherwise.
• It may be that only later—after he had structured and “finished” his two books—Nephi received additional commandments to supplement his work and invite others to add theirs.

This could explain why Jacob opens his own little book with an extended explanation of how Nephi instructed him concerning the small plates. It sounds like Nephi has had to adjust an earlier plan.

On this reading, Nephi:

1. Thought his record was finished.
2. Later felt inspired to add clarifying supplements of his own.
3. Then felt inspired to invite Jacob to contribute his own book as well.

Again, we can’t prove this, but we can use it as a lens because it helps us see Jacob’s book in a very illuminating way.

Nephi’s Two Anchors: Christ and the Covenant

Nephi’s record is ultimately built around two prophetic ideas. He introduces them as the two things his father Lehi “spake much” about:

1. The covenant story of Israel.
2. The doctrine of Christ.

He then structures his record around these two things:

• He dedicates half of his visionary experience in 1 Nephi 11–14 to the story of Christ and half to the story of Israel’s scattering and gathering.
• In 2 Nephi, his final prophecy devotes two original chapters to the covenant story and a third to the doctrine of Christ.

The two themes are:

1. The Covenant: God will fulfill His promises to Israel by preserving a remnant of Lehi’s descendants into the last days and bringing them to a knowledge of their Redeemer through a record that will come from the Gentiles.
2. Christ: Full redemption, for Israel and the Gentiles alike, comes only as people follow their Lord and Savior into the waters of baptism, assume His name, and live His doctrine.

These are the two anchors of Nephi’s record. They’re also:

• the two purposes Moroni states on the title page of the Book of Mormon,
• the two key themes Mormon says he discovered in the small plates,
• and the two emphases Christ Himself highlights when He visits the Nephites.

The Book of Mormon is astonishingly consistent on these points.

How Jacob’s Book Supplements Nephi’s

Now we can look at the book of Jacob.

If you look closely, Jacob’s short book falls naturally into three parts:

1. Jacob 1–3: a sermon addressed to the Nephites in the temple.
2. Jacob 4–6: the parable of the olive trees and Jacob’s commentary on it.
3. Jacob 7: the story of Sherem’s confrontation with Jacob.

The second and third parts map directly onto Nephi’s two anchor themes:

• Jacob 4–6 (Zenos’s olive tree parable) is about Israel’s scattered and gathered covenant story.
• Jacob 7 (Sherem) is about the doctrine of Christ and the law of Moses.

So Jacob consciously steps in to support Nephi on exactly the two major themes of Nephi’s record.

But he supports Nephi in different ways in each case.

Clarifying and Simplifying the Covenant

In Jacob 4–6, Jacob quotes the lengthy parable of the olive trees from the prophet Zenos and then comments on it.

Why?

Nephi has already quoted large blocks of Isaiah—chapter after chapter—full of foreign imagery, ancient geography, and separate oracles. It’s all true and powerful, but it can be overwhelming. One can easily miss the big picture Nephi sees in Isaiah’s writings.

Jacob seems to step in here to simplify the covenant story. Zenos’s parable is still long and complex, but it is:

• a single story,
• with recurring images (the vineyard, the trees, the master, the servants),
• and a clear narrative arc.

Compared to Isaiah, it’s much easier to grasp the overall structure of God’s dealings with Israel. Jacob says he is trying to “unfold this mystery” for his readers.

So in Jacob 4–6, Jacob clarifies and simplifies Nephi’s covenant teaching.

Defending the Doctrine of Christ

In Jacob 7, however, Jacob does something different. He doesn’t try to simplify or expand the doctrine of Christ. Nephi’s exposition in 2 Nephi 31 is already beautifully plain.

Instead, Jacob defends the doctrine when it comes under attack.

Sherem challenges Jacob directly on the doctrine of Christ, arguing that Jacob and others:

• pervert the right way of God,
• do not keep the law of Moses,
• and that the law itself is “the right way.”

Sherem’s language deliberately echoes Nephi’s words—but reverses them. Nephi has taught that the right way is to believe in Christ, and that denying Him means denying both the prophets and the law itself. Sherem insists the opposite.

Jacob doesn’t respond by offering more doctrinal explanation. He responds:

• by bearing witness to the revelation he has received about Christ,
• and by calling attention to the power of God manifested in Sherem’s own experience.

So in Jacob 7, Jacob’s role is to defend the doctrine of Christ, not to restate or simplify it.

Put simply:

• The covenant story needed simplification.
• The doctrine of Christ needed defense.

Jacob discerned different needs and responded differently.

Jacob 1–3: Social Ills as an Obstacle to Scripture

That leaves the first part of Jacob’s book: Jacob 1–3.

In these chapters, Jacob goes up to the temple to preach because, although the people are still outwardly obedient, some of them have begun to feel that God’s commandments are too limiting. Certain desires are settling into their hearts, and they are starting to “labor in sin.”

Jacob addresses three emerging patterns of pride among the Nephites:

1. Wealth and Class
   The rich begin to despise the poor. The people “think of [their] brethren as [less] than [themselves].” They are no longer “familiar with all and free with [their] substance.”
2. Gender and Sexual Exploitation
   The Nephite men cause “sorrow, and even great mourning” among the “fair daughters” of the people. Their behavior leaves women wounded; Jacob says their sobbings ascend to God and “many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.”
3. Racism and Hatred of the Lamanites
   The Nephites begin to “hate the Lamanites because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins,” even though Jacob says the Lamanites are, in some ways, more righteous than the Nephites.

Jacob is absolutely clear:

• God does not justify them in despising the poor.
• God does not justify them in wounding women.
• God does not justify their reviling against the Lamanites because of the darkness of their skin.

He commands them to stop, and to remember their own “filthiness” instead.

President Ezra Taft Benson famously taught that pride is the great stumbling block of the Nephites, and we can see that here in three forms:

• Class pride: contempt for the poor and trust in wealth.
• Gender pride: dismissal of women’s suffering and the pursuit of perverse privileges.
• Racial pride: assumptions about racial superiority that are totally ungrounded.

Now, why include this sermon on the small plates? Why not keep it on the large plates, where most of the history went?

One answer is simply: because these were the live issues of Jacob’s day. But that doesn’t fully explain why they needed to be carved into the small plates—a record that Nephi and Jacob both know is precious and limited and aimed at a future audience.

Here’s where Nephi’s earlier words help.

In 2 Nephi 26:33, Nephi teaches that God:

“inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female.”

Notice the trio:

• Black and white → race.
• Bond and free → economic status.
• Male and female → gender.

Nephi, before Jacob ever writes, has already identified these three distinctions as ones that humans misuse to create hierarchy and justify mistreatment—distinctions that God does not use the way we do.

Jacob’s sermon in Jacob 1–3 amplifies Nephi’s brief but powerful teaching. Where Nephi gives a concise doctrinal statement, Jacob unfolds a pastoral, prophetic call to repentance around the same three social sins.

So across the three parts of his book, Jacob:

• Amplifies Nephi’s teaching on social equality (Jacob 1–3).
• Simplifies Nephi’s teaching on the covenant (Jacob 4–6).
• Defends Nephi’s teaching on the doctrine of Christ (Jacob 7).

And notice the order: Jacob doesn’t talk about covenants and Christ until after he has addressed social pride. The structure suggests that:

Some things have to be set in order—especially how we treat each other—before we can receive the covenant story and the doctrine of Christ without hypocrisy.

That doesn’t mean the gospel is reducible to social issues. Jacob is clear that Christ and the covenant are about much more than that. But pride in these areas can block us from hearing or accepting the deeper invitations of Christ and the covenant.

From Jacob to Our Day

It’s not hard to see that the three forms of pride Jacob addressed—class, gender, race—remain central challenges today. In fact, they run through Nephite history all the way to the end, when the Lord calls them “a fallen people” and warns the latter-day Saints not to become like them.

So Jacob’s choice to carve this sermon onto the small plates isn’t just a historical accident. It’s deeply relevant to future readers—like us.

It’s also striking that if you look at President Russell M. Nelson’s ministry, you see the same three themes surfacing again and again:

1. A clear, repeated condemnation of racism and prejudice.
2. A sustained emphasis on the gathering of Israel and the covenants God made with Abraham’s seed.
3. An unmistakable focus on Jesus Christ and His atoning work.

For example, President Nelson has taught:

“God does not love one race more than another. His doctrine on this matter is clear. He invites all to come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female. I assure you that your standing before God is not determined by the color of your skin. Favor or disfavor with God is dependent upon your devotion to God and His commandments and not the color of your skin… Today I call upon our members everywhere to lead out in abandoning attitudes and actions of prejudice.”

He has also said to the youth of the Church:

“The gathering of Israel is the most important thing taking place on earth today. Nothing else compares in magnitude. Nothing else compares in importance. Nothing else compares in majesty.”

And he has taught that true disciples of Jesus Christ are peacemakers whose discipleship is visible in how compassionately they treat others.

In other words, President Nelson appears to be reading and working with the same core themes as Nephi and Jacob:

• amplifying the call to overcome social pride,
• clarifying and inviting us into the covenantal gathering of Israel,
• and centering everything on Jesus Christ.

He stands in the same stream of prophetic concern.

What Jacob Teaches Us About Speaking Up for Scripture

Let’s return now to the question we started with:

What does the Book of Jacob teach us about speaking up for scripture in our own time?

If we accept the hypothesis that Nephi:

• felt his record was finished,
• then later felt inspired to supplement it and to invite Jacob to help,

then Jacob’s little book can be seen as a threefold supplement:

1. Amplify what Nephi has said where it needs to be louder and more concrete (social ills: Jacob 1–3).
2. Simplify what Nephi has said where it is true but complex and intimidating (the covenant story: Jacob 4–6).
3. Defend what Nephi has said where it is true and plain but under attack (the doctrine of Christ: Jacob 7).

Jacob doesn’t try to:

• invent new doctrine, or
• replace Nephi’s message,

so much as he tries to remove obstacles that would keep people from receiving Nephi’s message with joy.

To do that, Jacob had to:

• be deeply immersed in Nephi’s writings,
• be acutely aware of what was happening in his culture,
• and be earnestly seeking a divine errand.

Only with all three could he discern when to amplify, when to simplify, and when to defend.

We, today, are prone to get those three out of order:

• We amplify when we should simplify or defend.
• We simplify when we should amplify or defend.
• We defend when we should amplify or simplify.

Jacob’s example suggests a pattern:

• Start with a deep, careful reading of scripture itself.
• Pay honest attention to the specific social and spiritual obstacles of your time and place.
• Seek God’s guidance about what form your witness should take:
  • amplification,
  • simplification,
  • or defense.

Scripture is a wonder. If we read it carefully and consistently, as honestly as we can about what it emphasizes, it calls us beyond our private obsessions and idiosyncratic concerns. But because human beings are easily absorbed in those private concerns, when we do see clearly what scripture is saying, we ought to speak up for it.

From Jacob’s day to President Nelson’s, prophets have been doing just that. It would be an honor to join them in that work.

I bear witness, by the same Holy Spirit who confirmed the doctrine of Christ to Jacob in his confrontation with Sherem, that the scriptures—with their consistent emphasis on Christ and the covenant, and their insistence that we learn to live rightly so we can come to Christ and receive the promises—are true.

If Christ is the Word, as John teaches, then the scriptures are a real embodiment of our Savior’s voice to us. I believe that, and I stake my life’s work on it.

In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.