O That I Were an Angel4.26.16By: C Robb Smith
Thanks to Royal Skousen and his Critical Text Project, we are learning new things about the Book of Mormon that cause us to re-examine some of our long-standing beliefs about it. One important contribution of his project is to clarify that the chapter breaks in the 1830 first editionreflect divisionsactually indicated by the Prophet Joseph Smithas he dictated the translation[1]. Those chapter breaksreveal how theoriginal authorsintended to separate their material and,originally, there was no break between chapters twenty-eight andtwenty-nine of the book of Alma. Chapter twenty-eight endsin Mormon’s voice as he reviews the preceding material with some ‘thus we see’statements, then chapter twenty-nine begins with the words ‘O that I were an angel’,wordslong attributed to Alma. Without that addedchapter break however, when read straight through, it seems likeMormon’s voice that continues onto say those words. So why have we ascribed the words to Alma? The reason why is because of textual evidence found in the words themselves that seems to indicate him, even thoughnowhere does Mormonhimself specifyhe is quoting Alma’s words. My thesis is that the ‘angelic words’ of Alma 29 are actually Mormon’s. In this essay I will show that the same textual evidence thatseems to indicate Alma, when seen in a new light and combined with a new context, actually indicates Mormon. I will also show that when seen as Mormon’s words their meaning changes in interesting ways and they have additional relevance and significance.
There are four reasons the textis seen to indicate Alma. First,the ‘angelic words’arewritten in the present tense as if Alma were talking about contemporary events, not like Mormon would talk about historical events.Second, they are full of Alma-like languageand sentiment, topics he has talked about and phrases he has used in other places. Third, the following words in particular,which follow the conclusion to the story of the sons of Mosiah and are a part of the‘angelic words’ soliloquy,sound so much like Alma talking about his friends that it is hard to see them any other way.
And behold, when I see many of my brethren truly penitent
and coming to the Lord their God,
then is my soul filled with joy;
then do I remember what the Lord has done for me,
yea, even that he hath heard my prayer…
Yea, and that same God hath called me by a holy calling
to preach the word unto this people
and hath given me much success, in the which my joy is full.
But I do not joy in my own success alone,
but my joy is more full because of the success of my brethren
who have been up to the land of Nephi.(Alma 29:10, 13-14)
And finally, based on what Mormon later writes about himself and the conditions ofhis day, it does not appear that he could have had ‘much success’ preaching. For all these reason,it has beenconcluded that the ‘angelic words’donot fitMormon,butthat they do fit Almarather nicely and therefore must be aquotation from himincluded by Mormon without an introduction or headnote. Those who notice this assume perhaps that Mormondid not always label his quotations, that in some instances he thought the shift in tense or person was sufficient to let his readers know he wasquoting.At least in thisone instance. Orperhaps heaccidentally left out theattributing line,a possible example of theunintentional fault Moroni warns us about,[2] but not really thatsignificant.Either way, the ‘angelic words’ are now firmly understood as Alma’s and have been for a hundred years.[3]
John Tvedtnes[4],Brant Gardner[5]and Grant Hardy[6], all recognized authorities on the Book of Mormon,have recently considering this issue and agree with the established contextual interpretation: the words are Alma’s.Thereasoningand underlying assumptions that led to this conclusion will be examinedas I defend my thesis.
Is an Unlabeled Quotation Significant?
To begin, I will attempt to persuade that it issignificant that Mormon didnotlabel these wordsa quotation from Alma?I will show that Mormon was a careful editor and that if this were an unlabeled quotation from Alma it would be the one and only time Mormon quotes someone without labeling it properly. While reformatting the Book of Mormon text for his Readers Edition,Hardy foundmore than a hundred editorial insertions and several extended comment sections that caused him to conclude “Mormon was a deliberate and conscientious editor.”[7] I performed my own word analysisusing LDS Viewsoftware and examined everyuseof a first-personsubjective pronounin the portion abridged by Mormon (Mosiah to 4th Nephi). I found that every occurrenceof the pronoun “I” or “We” is either ina clearly labeled quotation or in one of Mormon’s editorial insertions. These pronouns are used 4,325 times in the Book of Mormon. 2,243of thoseare found in the abridged bookswith2,095 of those inclearly labeled quotations and the remaining 148 ineditorial insertions. Thosefirst-person editorial comments that contain subjective pronouns may be classified as follows in three broad categories. The (x) indicates how many times a first person pronoun is used.
- Mormon clarifying or explaining what he is or will be doing:(39x)
…have I written in this book… I will show unto you… as I said unto you… I shall give an account…
we will return again… I mean those which were… this is all that I have written… as Isaid… now Ireturn to the account… we have named…of whom we have been speaking… we shall say no more concerning… we shall see… I do not mean… but I mean… from which I have taken…whichI have written… Etc.[8]
- Mormon reiterating or emphasizing something in his material:(29x)
I would that ye should see… now we see that… I would that ye should understand…thus we see… we know that… we have no reason to doubt… thus we can plainly discern… this we know… I say unto you…as we must needs suppose… I would that ye should know… I would have you to remember… Etc.[9]
- Mormon inserting extended editorial comments. (79x) The question of whether the first one should be included is the reason for this essay. If a pronoun was used here it was not included in the number (x) above.
- O that I were an angel and could have the desire of my heart… Alma 28:8-29:17 (33x).For 25 verses Mormon reviews his material and speaks in a very personal way as he comments on it.
These comments immediately follow: And thus ended the fifteenth year.
- And thus we can behold how false and also the unsteadiness of the hearts of the children of men… Helaman 12:1-26 (6x). For 26 verses Mormon reviews his material and comments on it.
These comments immediatelyfollow: And thus ended the eighty and fifth year.
- And there had many things transpired which in the eyes of some would be great and marvelous…
3 Nephi 5:8-26 (16x).For 18 verses Mormon talks about himself and his record.
These comments immediately follow: And thus had twenty-five years passed away.
- And now, whoso readeth, let him understand… 3 Nephi 10:14-19 (5x). For 5 verses Mormon comments on the prophecies fulfilled at Christ’s death and previews his visit to America.
- And now there cannot be written in this book even an hundredth part… 3 Nephi 26:6-13 (7x).
For 7 verses Mormon talks about his record.
- And now, whether they were mortal or immortal… I know not. But this much I know… 3 Nephi 28:17 - 30:2 (13x). For 34 verses Mormon talks about the Three Nephites and again about his record and then closes 3rd Nephi with a warning he was commanded by Jesus to write.
Examiningeach usage of the pronoun“I” or “We” shows thatMormon was consistent and careful as he introduced and labeled his quotations.It also showed that heinserted first-person comments and opinions frequently as he abridged to clarify or emphasize his material. In fact, there are many other instances when Mormon inserted editorial comments into his abridged material but since they do not use a first-person subjective pronoun they were not included in the above summary.A close reading looking for instances of ambiguity demonstrates how methodical he was.I was not able to identify any ambiguous instances regarding the use of a first person subjective pronoun. This study also shows thatthe ‘angelic words’ fit perfectly into Mormon’s pattern of extended editorial commenting, where he talks at length about himself, his record or the material he has included. In addition, after several examinations specifically looking for other instances of a possibleunattributed quotation, I failed to find any. Wayne Larsen and Alvin Rencher, while conducting awordprint analysis study, came to the same conclusion: “For example, from the context of Alma 29 it is clear that Alma is writing, yet Mormon does not identify this as a quotation. This is the only instance we found of this nature.”[10]
If the‘angelic words’ wereAlma’s, then it would appear tobe the only time Mormonquotes someonewithout identifying it as a quotation. Whether done intentionally or unintentionally, it would be a significant anomaly.If they are Mormon’s words however,then even though thisanomaly would disappear,would another appear? How often does Mormon use the present tense toeditorializeand comment onmaterial that he has just abridged using the pasttense?This question is also answered while examining the use of these pronouns. Every time he inserts an editorial comment, he does so using the present tense. Althoughthis data does not provethe words are Mormon’s,anomalies are not impossibilities, at the very least it should make us re-examine closely why wehave lookedbeyond him as their default author and ascribed the words to Alma. This being the one and onlyinstance of a possible unattributedquotationis significant.
Mormon Abridging
A review of the materialin the book of Alma leading up to the words in question,using Mormon’s original chapter breaks,reveals that he organized his material to fulfill specific literary intentions which must be understood in order to perceive a new context for the ‘angelic words’ as well as see the Alma-like language in a new light.In his 1stchapter(our current shorter chapters 1-3), MormonnarratesAlma’s dealings with Nehor and Amlici and the conflict they introduced. This chapter ends with Mormon reviewingitsmainlesson,the law of the harvest, in editorial comments using the present tense right after abridging using the past tense.
Now all these things were done, yea, all these wars and contentions
were commenced and ended in the fifth year of the reign of the judges.
And in one year were thousands and tens of thousands of souls sent to the eternal world,
that they might reap their rewards, according to their works,
whether they were good, or whether they were bad,
to reap eternal happiness, or eternal misery,
according to the spirit which they listed to obey,
whether it be a good spirit, or a bad one.
For every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey,
and this, according to the words of the spirit of prophecy;
therefore, let it be according to the truth.
And thus endeth the fifth year of the reign of the judges. (Alma 3:27)
In his 2nd chapter (our 4th, subsequent current chapterswill simply be in parenthesis) Mormon narrates how in the sixth yearthe people, being afflicted because of the judgements of God sent upon them,were awakened to a remembrance of their dutyand began to establish the church more fullyandmany were baptized in the waters of Sidon.In the seventh year there were about three thousand five hundred souls that united themselves to the church of God and were baptized.But then in the eighth year the church began to wax proud and began to fail in its progress. In the ninth year,Alma seeing the great wickedness in the church and seeing all the inequality began to be very sorrowful so he delivered up the judgement seat toreclaim his people by bearing down in pure testimony against them. The next several chapters are introduced with:
The words which Alma, the High Priest according to the holy order of God,
delivered to the people in their cities and villages throughout the land.(Introduction to Alma 5)
The next chapter, Mormon’s 3rd (5) contains Alma’s sermon in Zarahemla and begins with:
Now, it came to pass, that Alma began to deliver the word of God unto the people,
first in the land of Zarahemla, and from thence throughout all the land.
And these are the words which he spake to the peoplein the church,
which was established in the city of Zarahemla,
according to his own record, saying…(Alma 5:1-2)
Mormon resumes narrating his account inthe4thchapter (6) and tells how Alma established the order of the church in the city of Zarahemla.He ends this chapter with:
And Alma went and began to declare the word of God
unto the church which was established in the valley of Gideon,
according to the revelation of the truth of the word which had been spoken by his fathers,
and according to the spirit of prophecy which was in him,
according to the testimony of Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
who should come to redeem his people from their sins,
and the holy order by which he was called.
And thus it is written. Amen.(Alma 6:8)
In the last line Mormon refers to hissource material which raises the question: How closely did he follow it? In my chapter summaries above I said that Mormon narrated the storyeven thoughthis is not technically correct. The Book of Mormon is an abridgment taken from the plates of Nephi.[11]Abridge means to shorten without losing the sense,which is what Mormon does tomaterial originally narrated by Alma whilealso addingoriginal commentary.[12]In my abridgmentof Mormon chaptersabove, I quoted some portions, which I identified, butI also copied words and phrases directly from the original text into my summaries.However, I rearranged and added and deleted words and phrasesas I abridged. I tried to be faithful to the original, to give a true sense of its contents, but theabridged words as found in my summaries above fulfill my purposes and are mine, even though I copied many of them word for word. By today’s standards this might be frowned upon and seem unoriginal or maybe even plagiaristic, but since Mormon clearly tells us what he is doing, abridging, and tells us the source of his material, Alma’s record, surely this standard would not apply to him. The wordsabove that I specifically labeled as quotation are easily identifiable, but is it possible to tell which of my abridged words are original and which are copied? What if my source wasunavailable? We will examine thesequestionsfurther as we go since they relate directly to ascribing the ‘angelic words.’Mormon introduces the next chapter, his 5th (7), which contains Alma’s sermon in Gideon, with:
The words of Alma which he delivered to the people in Gideon,
according to his own record…(Introduction to Alma 7)
Inhis 6th chapter (8)Mormon resumes abridging and relates how Alma established the order of the church in Gideon, how he preached successfully in Melek before being rejectedin Ammonihah, how anangel appeared commanding him to return where he then metAmulek. Mormon ends this chapter quoting the Lord’s command to Alma and Amulek to preach in Ammonihah and previews the story he is about to tell in the next several chapters.The 7thchapter (9), begins thatstorywith:
The words of Alma, and also the words of Amulek,
which were declared unto the people who were in the land of Ammonihah.
And also, they are cast into prison
and delivered by the miraculous power of God which was in them,
according to the record of Alma.(Introduction Alma 9)
Inthis chapter Mormon quotes Alma narratinghis own story,the one and only time he does so, and it is unclear whether the last verse of this chapter continuesAlma narrating or resumes Mormon abridging.
And it came to pass that Amulek went and stood forth and began to preach unto them also.
And now, the words of Amulek are not all written,
nevertheless, a part of his words are written in this book.(Alma 9:34)
Is the book that only contains a part of Amulek’s words the book of Alma found on the Plates of Nephi or the Book of Mormon? The same ambiguity applies to the first verse of the next chapter, the 8th (10-11), which introduces Amulek’s preaching in Ammonihah. Whose words are these?
Now, these are the words which Amulek preached
unto the people who were in the land of Ammonihah,saying…(Introduction Alma 10)
Is it Alma narrating or Mormon abridging? Two similar instances (Alma 11:46; 13:31) are Mormon abridging and this one fits thesame patternperfectly butit does not become clearuntil the twelfth verse when Mormonrefers to Almaagain in the third person.This illustrates howsorting out what isoriginal in the abridged is not always obvious. A possible explanation of why Mormon quoted Alma narrating his own story is given by Hardy as he explains other odditiesfound elsewhere in the text: “There are expressions such as at this day (Alma 25:9) and down to the present time (Alma 18:38; 23:5) that might best be understood as Mormon following his source very closely.”[13]The question becomes: how closely does Mormon follow his source? How many of the words in the abridged material are original and how many are copied? That last chapter, where he quoted Alma narrating his own story,gives us a glimpse of what that source material was like. Based on that chapter, it appears that Mormon’s abridged words, at least in these chapters,might be mostly copiedwith just the personchanged from first to third. If so, should we consider the words in that abridged material Alma’s or Mormon’s?