No Kings Upon the Land

(Please note that this is a series of posts. Start with the introduction or find other posts in the series. It will be worth your time to review all of the posts to get a full understanding of what I’m trying to say.)

A question that hasn’t been pondered enough is this: How can the Lord condemn David and Solomon’s actions as abominable if there was no law they violated? There must be more that we don’t understand—something missing from the biblical narrative.

“Where there is no law given, there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment, there is no condemnation.”¹

“How could a man repent except he should sin? How could he sin if there was no law? How could there be a law save there was a punishment?”²

Yet the Lord declares, “Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.”³

It seems that an abomination, in this sense, refers to something that has been twisted or corrupted. Often, an abomination arises when religious justification is used to excuse wrongdoing. The Lord’s labeling of their actions as an abomination strongly suggests condemnation, especially since Jacob informs the Nephites that they’ve come under condemnation for following David and Solomon’s practice: “I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old…”⁴ and, “ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.”⁵

The argument that David and Solomon didn’t have the commandment given to Lehi is a fair counterpoint, but it assumes that Jacob 2:27 (“For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife;”) introduces a new law rather than reinforcing an older, existing one.

 

The Fathers

Recently, a great deal of attention has been given to the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon and Jacob 3:5. The first printing used the phrase: “For they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our fathers—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.”

This suggests that the commandment was originally given to the fathers—not just to our father Lehi. The term fathers could refer to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or it could extend further back to the earliest patriarchs, including Adam, Noah, down to Melchizedek.

However, I am not yet persuaded that this is the case, as it refers to a commandment for which we have no direct record—at least, not yet. Another challenge is that the earliest surviving manuscript closest to the translation process, the Printer’s Manuscript, uses the singular father instead of fathers.⁶ This raises the question: how did the change occur?

We know that Joseph Smith made textual clarifications throughout his lifetime, but it remains unclear whether he personally made this change or if he even noticed it before his death. A recent podcast shed light on this issue by reviewing Joseph’s personal 1830 copy of the Book of Mormon. On the page containing this verse, Joseph had written a brief but pointed note: “One Wife.” This indicates that he specifically grasped the principle of monogamy from this passage—even in the version that used fathers.

If a commandment had been given by the fathers, then David and Solomon would have been violating a commandment that originated much earlier than Moses—perhaps one that had been in place from the beginning. However, at this time, we lack substantial biblical evidence to confirm this viewpoint. Yet with Joseph’s own personal note in his personal copy of the Book of Mormon, it leaves the possibility that this is the case.

 

David & Solomon

Jacob appears to allude to Deuteronomy 17 when he mentions “the second king,” “many wives,” and “much gold and silver” in Jacob 1:15–16. Notably, these two verses were not separated until Orson Pratt’s versification change in the 1870s, they should be read together.⁷

The iniquity the Nephites began to indulge in seems directly tied to their misunderstanding of previous kings—David and Solomon. They failed to interpret the scriptures correctly regarding kingship.⁸ This same error crept into the early restoration, as Hyrum Smith later warned: “There were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things, as Solomon and David having many wives and concubines—but it’s an abomination in the sight of God.”⁹

David and Solomon are often remembered for their high points—their victories, wisdom, and accomplishments—but a closer reading of their full narratives reveals that their reigns were marred by sin, pride, and devastating consequences for Israel.

David’s downfall is one of the slowest, saddest train wrecks in scripture. 2 Samuel 11–20 records the unraveling of his life after his sin with Bathsheba—leading to betrayal, murder, the death of his child, and an unending cycle of family tragedy. The latter part of his reign is defined by strife, rebellion, and death, most notably with the uprising of Absalom.

Then later, in 1 Kings 11, Solomon’s direct violation of God’s command regarding multiple wives leads to the division of the kingdom. His heart turns away from the Lord, and because of his choices, the once-united monarchy fractures, leading to centuries of conflict between Israel and Judah.

These kings were not models of righteousness to be emulated—they serve as warnings. Their failures highlight the dangers of power, unchecked desire, and the justification of sin under the guise of divine approval.

 

The Temple Scroll and Deuteronomy 17: A Lost Tradition?

When Jacob in the Book of Mormon condemns the Nephites for following David and Solomon’s example, he appears to reference Deuteronomy 17, assuming we, as his audience, will understand the connection. However, we don’t know everything he said in his sermon. Jacob himself acknowledges this: “And now I, Jacob, spake many more things unto the people of Nephi, warning them against fornication and lasciviousness, and every kind of sin, telling them the awful consequences of them.”¹⁰

This leaves open the strong possibility that he directly cited Deuteronomy 17, including the command that the king was to have only one wife, a principle we will explore further below. The big question is: Does Deuteronomy 17 in Jacob’s time match our version found in the KJV, which comes from the Masoretic Text?

Recent discoveries in the Dead Sea Scrolls reveal two ancient documents that may shed light on an older tradition of Deuteronomy 17, The Damascus Document, and The Temple Scroll.¹¹ Both are associated with the Essene community, a sect known for preserving ancient traditions and challenging mainstream Jewish interpretations.

 

Polygamy and the Temple Scroll

One of the most striking findings in the Temple Scroll is its radically different interpretation of Deuteronomy 17’s restrictions on kingship. As one scholar notes:

“In the Statutes of the King, the Temple Scroll considers restrictions on the king’s marriages. Rabbinic Judaism interpreted Deuteronomy 17:11 to restrict the king to 18 wives. This was based in part on the fact that King David had 18 wives.”
 
In contrast, the Temple Scroll provides:
 
“[The King] shall not take another wife, for she [his first wife] alone shall be with him all the days of her life. But should she die, he may take unto himself another wife.”
 
Here we have a clear-cut ruling against bigamy and divorce, the earliest such ruling in any extant Jewish writing. This may well have been a forerunner of Christian doctrine on these subjects.”¹²

 

Deuteronomy 17 Temple Scroll Translation

(11Q19 LVII–LVIII)
“You shall set over yourself a king whom I shall choose. From among your brothers, you shall set over yourself a king; you shall not set a foreign man who is not your brother over yourself. But he is not to increase the cavalry or make the people go back to Egypt on account of war in order to increase the cavalry, or the silver and gold. Blank I told you, ‘You shall not go back again on this path.’ He is not to have many wives or let his heart go astray after them. He is not to have much silver and gold; not much. Blank When he sits upon the throne of his kingdom, they shall write for him this law according to the book which is in front of the priests.”
 
“This is the law […]: the priests. On the day when they proclaim him king, the children of Israel [shall assemble?], from those more than twenty years old up to those of sixty years, according to their banners. And he shall appoint {they shall appoint} at their head chiefs of a thousand, chiefs of a hundred, chiefs of fifty, and chiefs of ten in all their cities. From them he shall select a thousand, a thousand from each tribe, to be with him: twelve thousand men of war who will not leave him on his own, so that he will not be seized by the hands of the nations. All those selected, which he selects, shall be men of truth, venerating God, enemies of bribery, skilled men in war; and they shall always be with him day and night and they shall guard him from every act of sin and from the foreign nations so that he does not fall into their hands. He will have twelve princes of his people with him and twelve priests and twelve Levites who shall sit next to him for judgment and for the law. He shall not divert his heart from them or do anything in all his councils without relying on them. Blank He shall not take a wife from among all the daughters of the nations, but instead take for himself a wife from his father’s house, from his father’s family. He shall take no other wife apart from her because only she will be with him all the days of her life. If she dies, he shall take for himself another from his father’s house, from his family. He shall not pervert justice, or accept a bribe to pervert correct judgment. He shall not crave the field, the vineyard, the wealth, the house, or any valuable thing in Israel or purloin.”¹³

 

According to Their Banners

Notice how on the day when they proclaim the king, they are to assemble the men “according to their banners,” these are to “be men of truth,” and are to “always be with him day and night and they shall guard him from every act of sin.” It seems the Nephites may have done that very thing immediately after Nephi dies:

And it came to pass that Nephi died. Now the people which were not Lamanites were Nephites; nevertheless, they were called Nephites, Jacobites, Josephites, Zoramites, Lamanites, Lemuelites, and Ishmaelites. But I, Jacob, shall not hereafter distinguish them by these names, but I shall call them Lamanites that seek to destroy the people of Nephi, and those who are friendly to Nephi I shall call Nephites, or the people of Nephi, according to the reigns of the kings.

Perhaps Jacob mentions this because they were gathered together to proclaim their new king and they had assembled themselves “according to their banners,” and the “Nephites, Jacobites, Josephites, Zoramites, and Ishmaelites” were “friendly to Nephi.” Remember the name Nephi in this instance is referring to the current king, “And whoso should reign in his stead were called by the people, second Nephi, third Nephi, and so forth, according to the reigns of the kings”¹⁴

 

The Law of the King Was to Be Read to Him

A crucial aspect of Deuteronomy 17 is that the law—including the restriction on multiple wives—was meant to be read aloud to the king:

“This is the law” to be read, which includes the statement of one wife. That is significant. It suggests that the king was always supposed to be reminded of this standard, yet later interpretations shifted away from this requirement. If Jacob used Deuteronomy 17 as part of his sermon, he would have included the portion that makes clear the king is to have one wife—further reinforcing the Nephite prohibition of polygamy.

This raises an important question: Did the Temple Scroll reflect an older Mosaic tradition that had been lost? Or was it a polemic against the Hasmonean rulers, who were known for violating Deuteronomic laws on kingship? If an older monogamous tradition existed, this would make David and Solomon’s actions even more egregious, providing further justification for the Lord’s words in Jacob 2:24: “Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.”

Some might argue that David and Solomon cannot be held accountable if the law was unknown to them, since the “book of the law” was not rediscovered until Josiah’s reign (2 Kings 22–23). However, the text describes the law as something lost, not newly created, and earlier scriptures suggest that covenant principles were already known. Moreover, Solomon’s condemnation in 1 Kings 11 shows that the Lord held him accountable for violating known commandments. Whether through written law or divine instruction, David and Solomon departed from the standards God had revealed—and the existence of older traditions, like those reflected in the Temple Scroll, only strengthens the case that monogamy was always the expectation.

The Nephite law on marriage, given to Lehi and his descendants, appears to align much more closely with the Temple Scroll than with Rabbinic interpretations of Deuteronomy 17: “For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife;”¹⁵

Compare this with the Temple Scroll:

“[The King] shall not take another wife, for she [his first wife] alone shall be with him all the days of her life. But should she die, he may take unto himself another wife.”

This suggests that the Book of Mormon’s stance may represent an older, original Deuteronomic law—one that was later corrupted or reinterpreted by Rabbinic Judaism to justify polygamy.

The Temple Scroll predates the Masoretic Text by approximately 1,000 years. If we are weighing textual evidence, we must consider: Which tradition is older? Which is more faithful to the original law of Moses? Why would the Temple Scroll introduce a monogamy requirement unless it had a strong basis in tradition?

The Book of Mormon’s condemnation of polygamy, combined with the Temple Scroll’s clear ruling against it, may suggest that monogamy—not polygamy—was the original divine standard for kings and common people alike. When the Lord declares that David and Solomon’s “many wives and concubines” were an abomination, we should be clear about what is being condemned. It was not merely David’s adultery or Solomon’s foreign wives—it was specifically their practice of multiplying wives and concubines.

This raises the possibility that an original commandment of monogamy was given to “the fathers”, long before later interpretations allowed polygamy. Additionally, the original law regarding kingship may have explicitly restricted rulers to one wife, a principle preserved in the Temple Scroll and possibly reflected in Jacob’s teachings in the Book of Mormon.¹⁶

Ultimately, while historical texts offer valuable context, the Book of Mormon remains the one record we can trust with full confidence. Through it, we learn that the Lord viewed David and Solomon’s actions as abominable—and it stands to reason that He has never looked with favor upon any king or people who practiced plural marriage.

 

The New King

Why don’t we learn this second king’s name? Why does Jacob leave him unnamed? He had to be Nephi’s son or grandson, since “the kingdom had been conferred upon none but those who were descendants of Nephi.”¹⁷ Could it be that Jacob deliberately omitted his name to emphasize the pattern rather than the person?

Jacob may have deliberately chosen not to name the second king because he wanted to highlight the broader issue—how kingship can lead to corruption—rather than focusing on a single individual.

By leaving the king unnamed, Jacob shifts the reader’s attention away from one man’s personal failings and instead underscores a recurring pattern in history: rulers justifying wickedness by appealing to precedent (David and Solomon), accumulating wives and wealth, and leading their people into pride and iniquity.

This approach aligns with Jacob’s prophetic warning—he is not merely condemning one king, but warning future generations against repeating the same mistake. It also mirrors Deuteronomy 17, which was a general warning about the dangers of kingship rather than a rebuke of any single ruler.

Alternatively, the omission of the king’s name might also suggest that the Nephites already knew exactly who Jacob was referring to, making it unnecessary to state outright. But by keeping the focus on the actions rather than the person, Jacob makes his warning timeless and applicable beyond just this one king’s reign.

While we can’t say with certainty that the second king introduced the error, it is clear that the mischief entered after Nephi’s death and that the Nephites’ misunderstanding of scripture was directly tied to their cultural view of kingship.

Jacob’s wording strongly suggests that this corruption developed under royal influence: “under the reign of the second king, [the people] began to grow hard in their hearts and indulge themselves in wicked practices.” The reference to David and Solomon implies that they were using past kings as justification for accumulating wives and wealth, mirroring the very behaviors condemned in Deuteronomy 17.

Lehi left Jerusalem during the reign of the last king of the Kingdom of Judah.¹⁸ At that time, Zedekiah was on the throne, and according to Jeremiah, he too was a polygamist: “So they shall bring out all thy wives and thy children to the Chaldeans: and thou shalt not escape out of their hand, but shalt be taken by the hand of the king of Babylon: and thou shalt cause this city to be burned with fire.”¹⁹

Ishmael and Lehi’s families had only ever known one system of governance—the rule of kings. It’s no surprise, then, that upon arriving in the promised land, they sought to establish a familiar structure: “And it came to pass that they would that I should be their king.”²⁰ Yet Nephi was reluctant: “But I, Nephi, was desirous that they should have no king; nevertheless, I did for them according to that which was in my power.”²¹

Historically, kingship in Judah was directly tied to the Davidic line. After Solomon’s death, the ten northern tribes rejected Davidic rule, refusing to accept Solomon’s son, Rehoboam, as their king. Instead, they appointed Jeroboam, establishing the northern Kingdom of Israel.

Meanwhile, the southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin remained loyal to the House of David, and their kingdom—Judah—continued under Davidic kings. With the exception of Athaliah, every monarch of Judah is believed to have been a direct descendant of David.

It would be an interesting study to examine what cultural influences Lehi’s ancestors may have brought from the Northern Kingdom while living in the Southern Kingdom for the 120 or so years prior to their departure. We know they preserved writings from Northern prophets like Zenos and Zenock—figures who may have also descended from Joseph of Egypt.²² As Nephi taught, “Yea, the prophet Zenos did testify of these things, and also Zenock spake concerning these things, because they testified particularly concerning us, who are the remnant of their seed.”²³

When Lehi obtained the plates of brass, he confirmed his ancestry, tracing it back to Joseph of Egypt: “And it came to pass that my father, Lehi, also found upon the plates of brass a genealogy of his fathers; wherefore he knew that he was a descendant of Joseph; yea, even that Joseph who was the son of Jacob, who was sold into Egypt.”²⁴

It is possible that Lehi’s ancestors had lost their written record of this lineage when they fled the Assyrian invasion (circa 727 BC) and sought refuge in the Southern Kingdom. While Lehi may have already been aware of his descent from Joseph through family oral tradition, the plates of brass provided official confirmation.

 

Judges and Kings

Israel was originally governed by judges for about 450 years before demanding a king, despite the Lord’s preference for a different system: “And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet.”²⁵

When they insisted on having a king, the Lord made it clear that this choice was a rejection of His rule: “And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.”²⁶

Similarly, the Nephites also desired a king, but as mentioned, Nephi was reluctant to take on that role. It’s interesting to see how the Nephite civilization nearly inverts Israel’s pattern of governance. Israel was ruled by judges for about 450 years before transitioning to kings.²⁷ In contrast, the Nephites began with kings for just over 450 years before switching to a system of judges.²⁸

The Nephites also inverted the geographic arrangement of their lands compared to biblical Israel. “Now the land south was called Lehi [Joseph], and the land north was called Mulek [Judah], which was after the son of Zedekiah; for the Lord did bring Mulek into the land north, and Lehi into the land south.”²⁹

In biblical lands, Judah was in the south and Joseph’s descendants (Ephraim and Manasseh) were in the north. Yet in the Book of Mormon, this is reversed: Mulek, the heir to the throne in Jerusalem and the only surviving son of Zedekiah, was brought to the land north.³⁰ As a direct descendant of David, he was the rightful heir to the throne. Meanwhile, Lehi, a descendant of Joseph, was led to the land south.

It was under Mosiah I that the remaining righteous Nephites discovered the land of Zarahemla and united with the people of Mulek—descendants of the royal line of David through Zedekiah’s son, who had escaped Jerusalem’s destruction.³¹

Why wouldn’t they recognize and reinstate the rightful heir to the throne when the two groups merged? Perhaps it is because this land was given by covenant to Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3:5; Genesis 49:22,26) and Lehi (2 Nephi 1:5), rather than being governed by Judahite covenants or laws. This suggests that kingship under the House of David may not have held divine authority in this new land. Instead, they all assimilate with the Nephites and accept Mosiah I as king. “And now all the people of Zarahemla were numbered with the Nephites, and this because the kingdom had been conferred upon none but those who were descendants of Nephi.”³²

One other intriguing detail about Mulek is the meaning of his name. According to Hugh Nibley, Mulek means “little king” in Arabic.³³ However, the Printer’s Manuscript does not use Mulek, but instead Muloch.³⁴ This raises an unsettling question: was Zedekiah naming his son as a sacrificial offering?

The name Moloch (Moloch/Molech) appears in the Bible as the deity associated with child sacrifice (Leviticus 18:21, 2 Kings 23:10, Jeremiah 32:35). Could Zedekiah have intended to pass his son through the fire to Moloch before his escape? If so, this would add another layer of meaning to Mulek’s survival and journey to the promised land, not only as an escape from destruction but as a deliverance from being a literal human sacrifice, akin to Abraham.³⁵ This would further highlight the wickedness and idolatry of those in Jerusalem and reinforce the Lord’s judgment upon the city.³⁶

As I’ve quoted before,

Synopsis Sohar, p. 132, n. 18, we have the following words; “From Abraham to Solomon were fifteen generations; and then the moon was at the full. From Solomon to Zedekiah were other fifteen generations; the moon was then in the wane, and Zedekiah’s eyes were put out.” That is, the regal state came to its zenith of light and glory in the time of Solomon; but decreased gradually, till it became nearly extinct in the days of Zedekiah. See Schoetgen.³⁷

 

King Benjamin

Under King Benjamin, all the tribal groups were united through a new covenant, which seems to foreshadow the future reunification of Ephraim and Judah in Ezekiel 37:15–17. While this prophecy is commonly interpreted amongst Mormon’s as the coming together of the Book of Mormon and the Bible, traditional Jewish and Christian readings understand it as the reunification of the two ancient nations. “The envy of Ephraim also shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.”³⁸

Under King Benjamin, the people entered into a covenant to take upon themselves the name of Christ. He declared: “And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.”³⁹ This closely parallels Abinadi’s teachings about the seed of Christ—that through “faith on his name,” believing a message delivered by a holy prophet, individuals can become heirs to the kingdom of God.⁴⁰

Joseph was trying to teach this message over and over, even in his Bible Translation he adds this to the words of John the Baptist, “Why is it that ye receive not the preaching of him whom God hath sent? If ye receive not this in your hearts, ye receive not me; and if ye receive not me, ye receive not him of whom I am sent to bear record; and for your sins ye have no cloak.”⁴¹

We must receive his messengers when they are sent into this world, and as Joseph said, “The world always mistook false prophets for true ones, and those that were sent of God they considered to be false prophets; and hence they killed, stoned, punished and imprisoned the true prophets, and they had to hide themselves ‘in deserts and dens, and caves of the earth’; and although the most honorable men of the earth, they banished them from their society as vagabonds; whilst they cherished, honored, and supported knaves, vagabonds, hypocrites, impostors, and the basest of men”⁴² It’s not gong to be obvious, these messengers will most likely be cast out and their names will be had for good and evil.

Joseph also taught that “the throne and kingdom of David is to be taken from him and given to another by the name of David in the last days, raised up out of his lineage.”⁴³ It appears that what we see with King Benjamin may mirror a future event in our day, when Ephraim and Judah will be united as a people.

 

King Mosiah II

After King Benjamin died, his son Mosiah II took the throne. Through a series of significant events, he ultimately unified all of the Nephite records. Under his reign, the plates of brass, the Nephite plates (plates of Lehi,⁴⁴ plates of Nephi,⁴⁵ plates of Jacob⁴⁶), the record of Zeniff,⁴⁷ and the record of the Jaredites were all gathered and preserved in one place.⁴⁸

Ammon knew the plates they found were important to them, “Doubtless a great mystery is contained within these plates.”⁴⁹ It was King Limhi’s people who found them and he asked Ammon, “Knowest thou of any one that can translate? For I am desirous that these records should be translated into our language; for, perhaps, they will give us a knowledge of a remnant of the people who have been destroyed, from whence these records came; or, perhaps, they will give us a knowledge of this very people who have been destroyed; and I am desirous to know the cause of their destruction.”⁵⁰

It is through King Mosiah II that we learn about the gift of seership, as explained by Ammon to king Limhi: “Now Ammon said unto him: I can assuredly tell thee, O king, of a man that can translate the records; for he has wherewith that he can look, and translate all records that are of ancient date; and it is a gift from God. And the things are called interpreters, and no man can look in them except he be commanded, lest he should look for that he ought not and he should perish. And whosoever is commanded to look in them, the same is called seer. And behold, the king of the people who are in the land of Zarahemla is the man that is commanded to do these things, and who has this high gift from God.”⁵¹

Through the gift of seership and the wisdom of King Mosiah II, we see a major shift among the Nephite people, away from kings. A recurring theme in the scriptures is that God, as the ultimate Seer, watches over His people and unfolds His purposes according to His divine foresight:

“Behold, the eye of the Lord is upon them that fear him, upon them that hope in his mercy.”⁵²

“The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.”⁵³

“For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people…”⁵⁴

As King Mosiah II studied the sacred records in his possession, he gained a broader understanding of how kingship had led to corruption and destruction among past civilizations. These records likely shaped his decision to abolish the monarchy and establish a system of judges. Now, consider the records Mosiah II had and how each one may have influenced this pivotal change.⁵⁵

 

Lehi, the Plates of Brass, and Jerusalem

It is interesting to see that all kings in the scriptures are judged by how they stand in the sight of God. Their success or failure is not measured by political power, military might, or economic prosperity, but by whether they did what was “right in the sight of the Lord.” Jacob recognizes this reality when he delivers his sermon “under the glance of the piercing eye of the Almighty God.” He warns his people: “O that he would show you that he can pierce you, and with one glance of his eye he can smite you to the dust!”⁵⁶

Lehi had a unique perspective on this truth. Not only did he witness firsthand the wickedness of Judah’s rulers, but he also had access to the plates of brass, which preserved God’s judgments on past kings. The Lord Himself declared: “I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem.”⁵⁷ Lehi would have known from both experience and scripture how the Lord viewed the kings of his homeland.

The plates of brass likely contained detailed records about Israel’s kings, including their failures. David and Solomon, though remembered as powerful rulers, were not exempt from divine judgment:

“And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, and went not fully after the LORD, as did David his father.”⁵⁸

However, Joseph Smith’s Inspired Version (JST) clarifies this passage, altering the meaning to:

“And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, as David, his father, and went not fully after the Lord.”⁵⁹

This revision places David and Solomon in the same category, reinforcing the idea that neither of them should be viewed as models of righteousness. We can only wonder what the plates of brass said about David & Solomon. Perhaps Joseph was restoring what was lost, and what the plates of brass contained.

 

King Zedekiah: The Last King of Judah

Lehi lived under the reign of King Zedekiah, the last ruler of Judah before Jerusalem fell to Babylon. Like many before him, he followed in the pattern of disobedience: “Zedekiah was twenty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah. And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done.”⁶⁰

This historical backdrop shaped Lehi’s prophetic mission. He saw corruption at the highest levels, and through divine revelation and the records on the plates of brass, he understood the pattern of wicked kings leading their people to destruction.

Lehi was ultimately commanded to flee from Jerusalem, and shortly thereafter, the city was destroyed.⁶¹ The people of Judah suffered the consequences of departing from the Lord and His commandments. Among these, it appears that the abomination of polygamy was one of them. Lehi specifically lamented the suffering of the daughters of Jerusalem, who were taken into captivity—evidence that their treatment was among the injustices that brought judgment upon the city.⁶²

 

Biblical Kings and Polygamy

King Saul (1050–1010 BCE) – 1 Samuel 14:50, & 2 Samuel 3:7 (possible)
King David (1010–970 BCE) – 2 Samuel 5:13, & 1 Chronicles 3:1–9
King Solomon (970–931 BCE) – 1 Kings 11:1–3
King Rehoboam (931–913 BCE) – 2 Chronicles 11:21
King Abijah (Abijam) (913–910 BCE) – 2 Chronicles 13:21
King Jeroboam I (931–910 BCE) – 1 Kings 14:7–10 (implied)
King Omri (885–874 BCE) – 1 Kings 16:24 (implied)
King Ahab (874–853 BCE) – 1 Kings 20:7
King Jehoram (853–841 BCE) – 2 Chronicles 21:17
King Jeroboam II (793–753 BCE) – 2 Kings 14:23–24 (implied)
King Jehoiachin (597 BCE) – 2 Kings 24:15
King Zedekiah (597–586 BCE) – Jeremiah 38:23

Monogamy vs. Polygamy – Examples from the Scriptures

 

Mosiah I and the Nephite Kings

(plates of Lehi,⁶³ plates of Nephi – 1 Nephi 9:2, plates of Jacob – Jacob 3:14)

From the plates of Nephi, the plates of Jacob, and Lehi’s Record, we gain insight into the early Nephite monarchy and the challenges they faced. Under the rule of the second Nephite king, corruption began to spread among the people: “And now it came to pass that the people of Nephi, under the reign of the second king, … desiring many wives and concubines…”⁶⁴

Again, Jacob, recognizing the divine accountability of kingship, delivered a piercing rebuke: “… under the glance of the piercing eye of the Almighty God.”⁶⁵ “O that he would show you that he can pierce you, and with one glance of his eye he can smite you to the dust!”⁶⁶

The Nephites had fallen into grave sin, even surpassing the Lamanites in iniquity: “Ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done. Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren.”⁶⁷

Jacob prophesied that unless the people repented, they would lose their inheritance, and the righteous would be led away: “And the time speedily cometh, that except ye repent they shall possess the land of your inheritance, and the Lord God will lead away the righteous out from among you.”⁶⁸ This prophecy was fulfilled as the Lord led Mosiah I and the righteous Nephites away from the land of Nephi.⁶⁹

The Nephites’ firstdownfall came swiftly, and “the more wicked part of the Nephites were destroyed.”⁷⁰ Amid this turmoil, the Lord warned Mosiah I, like Lehi to flee from the land of Nephi and seek refuge elsewhere: “Behold, I will speak unto you somewhat concerning Mosiah, who was made king over the land of Zarahemla; for behold, he being warned of the Lord that he should flee out of the land of Nephi.”⁷¹ With Mosiah I’s departure, the Nephites entered a new era—one that would reshape their civilization and governance.

 

King Noah and the Corruption of the Nephites

(Records of Zeniff & Account of Alma – Mosiah 25)

Through the records of Zeniff and the account of Alma, we learn about the moral and spiritual collapse under King Noah—a king whose reign mirrored the sins of “those at Jerusalem,” and possibly the second Nephite king from Jacob’s time.

Noah’s reign was marked by disobedience, excess, and moral corruption: “For behold, he did not keep the commandments of God, but he did walk after the desires of his own heart. And he had many wives and concubines. And he did cause his people to commit sin, and do that which was abominable in the sight of the Lord. Yea, and they did commit whoredoms and all manner of wickedness.”⁷²

His influence extended beyond himself—his priests followed in his footsteps: “…and also his priests, and their wives and their concubines…”⁷³

Even Alma the Elder, before his conversion, may have been entangled in Noah’s sins. In his later words, he acknowledges his own past transgressions: “But remember the iniquity of king Noah and his priests; and I myself was caught in a snare, and did many things which were abominable in the sight of the Lord, which caused me sore repentance;”⁷⁴

This presents a sad irony—those who returned to the land of their first inheritance found themselves falling into the very same sins that had plagued the Nephites in Jacob’s time. Instead of learning from history, they repeated it, justifying their wickedness through the same misguided traditions.

 

Lessons from the Jaredite Kings

(From the Plates of Ether – Mosiah 28–29)

The final historical record King Mosiah II translated was the Plates of Ether, which preserved the rise and fall of the Jaredite civilization. Among the many cautionary tales contained within, the reign of King Riplakish stands out as a familiar pattern of corruption, oppression, and immorality: “And it came to pass that Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines, and did lay that upon men’s shoulders which was grievous to be borne; yea, he did tax them with heavy taxes; and with the taxes he did build many spacious buildings.”⁷⁵

Once King Mosiah II finished translating these records, it took time before they could be fully read and understood by the people. However, when the account was finally shared, their response was both sorrowful and enlightening: “Now this account did cause the people of Mosiah to mourn exceedingly, yea, they were filled with sorrow; nevertheless it gave them much knowledge, in the which they did rejoice.”⁷⁶

The Jaredite records reinforced the recurring dangers of unchecked kingship—polygamy, heavy taxation, oppression, and the inevitable downfall that followed. These lessons played a key role in Mosiah’s decision to abolish kingship altogether, replacing it with a system of judges (Mosiah 29).

 

Judges: The End of Kingship

(After Translating the Plates of Ether – Mosiah 29)

After King Mosiah II gathered and translated the records of the Jaredites, he made a radical decision—he abolished the Nephite monarchy and established a system of judges. This change was not made lightly; Mosiah had four key historical witnesses before him:

• The Kingdom of Israel – Once united, it split in two, leading to eventual destruction.
• The First Nephite Kingdom – His grandfather, Mosiah I, fled after witnessing its downfall (Omni 1).
• King Noah’s Regime – His tyranny led to captivity and destruction.
• The Jaredites – Their entire civilization was wiped out due to corruption.

With these examples in mind, Mosiah declared: “For behold, how much iniquity doth one wicked king cause to be committed, yea, and what great destruction! Yea, remember king Noah, his wickedness and his abominations, and also the wickedness and abominations of his people. Behold what great destruction did come upon them; and also because of their iniquities they were brought into bondage.”⁷⁷

Seeing the pattern of destruction tied to wicked kings, Mosiah knew the risk was too great. He proposed a government based on judges, ensuring wise men would judge the people according to God’s commandments: “Therefore I will be your king the remainder of my days; nevertheless, let us appoint judges, to judge this people according to our law; and we will newly arrange the affairs of this people, for we will appoint wise men to be judges, that will judge this people according to the commandments of God.”⁷⁸

 

The Problem with Kingship

While Alma acknowledged that an ideal king could be beneficial, he also warned that a wicked king leads to bondage and destruction: “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.”⁷⁹

However, history proved that righteous kings were rare: “The sins of many people have been caused by the iniquities of their kings.”⁸⁰ A king’s wickedness spreads through corruption, perverting the ways of righteousness: “… and thus an unrighteous king doth pervert the ways of all righteousness.”⁸¹ Worst of all, overthrowing a wicked king required bloodshed: “And behold, now I say unto you, ye cannot dethrone an iniquitous king save it be through much contention, and the shedding of much blood.”⁸² Thus, Mosiah’s decision to abolish kingship wasn’t just about avoiding potential problems—it was about breaking a destructive cycle.

Joseph Smith seemed to recognize the same pattern that led Mosiah II to reject monarchical rule. He warned that power and authority almost inevitably leads to unrighteous dominion: “Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.”⁸³

The natural tendency of men in power is to seek control, to gratify their ambition, and to abuse their authority. “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.”⁸⁴ This is why Mosiah saw kingship as a dangerous institution—because it gave men the ability to govern without the accountability required by righteousness.

The Lord Himself rejected this model of rule. Though He is our King, He came as a servant: “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.”⁸⁵

Mosiah’s rejection of kingship was not merely a political reform—it was an acknowledgment that true righteous leadership must mirror Christ’s model of servanthood. Joseph Smith reinforced this principle by teaching that the only legitimate way to wield power is through humility, persuasion, and love: “No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned.”⁸⁶

Rather than commanding loyalty through dominion, the Lord’s true servants lead through charity, virtue, and pure knowledge. This is the model of kingship that Christ exemplified, it’s what Mosiah’s father king Benjamin exemplified, and it is the model that Mosiah sought to implement by abolishing the throne and replacing it with a system of judges accountable to the people and to God.

Limhi/Alma	Mosiah I	Lehi	Ether
King Noah	Nephite Kings	Israel Kings	Jaredite Kings
Record of Zeniff Mosiah 25:5 Account of Alma Mosiah 25:6	Plates of Nephi Mosiah 1:1–6 Plates of Jacob Jacob 3:14	Plates of Brass 1 Nephi 5:10–16 Mosiah 1:1–6	Plates of Ether Ether 1:1–5
Polygamist King Mosiah 11:1–4 Polygamist Priests Mosiah 12:29	Polygamist Kings? Jacob 2:23–24 Jacob 2:34	Polygamist Kings (Kingdom of Judah/Israel) Citations: 2 Samuel 5:13 (David takes more wives), 1 Kings 11:3 (Solomon’s many wives)	Polygamist King Citations: Ether 10:5–8 (Jaredite king practices polygamy)
Destruction, Alma Flees, Limhi Bondage Citations: Mosiah 19:8–20 (King Noah’s destruction), Mosiah 22:1–13 (Limhi’s escape), Mosiah 18:34–35 (Alma flees to Zarahemla)	Destruction, Righteous Led Away Citations: Omni 1:12–14 (Nephites led to Zarahemla), Mosiah 1:18 (Mosiah I unites the people)	Destruction, Righteous Led Away Citations: 2 Kings 17:6–18 (destruction of Israel), 2 Kings 25:1–21 (destruction of Judah), 1 Nephi 1:4 (Lehi’s family flees)	Destruction, Coriantumr Citations: Ether 15:31–34 (Coriantumr survives final destruction)

 

The Impact of the Jaredite Records

It took time for the Plates of Ether to be translated, but once they were read, the reaction of the Nephites was profound: “Now this account did cause the people of Mosiah to mourn exceedingly, yea, they were filled with sorrow; nevertheless it gave them much knowledge, in the which they did rejoice.”⁸⁷ The Jaredite records confirmed what history had already demonstrated—kingship led to destruction. This realization prompted Mosiah to act decisively, leading to the establishment of judges and marking a turning point in Nephite history.

 

Latter-Day Saints

All of these kingdoms—Israel, the Nephites, and the Jaredites—share a common pattern of corruption and downfall. A central part of this pattern is the abomination of polygamy, which repeatedly emerges as a key factor in their decline.

From David and Solomon to the Nephite kings and Jaredite rulers, the scriptures consistently portray polygamy as a twisting of God’s commandments that leads to oppression, moral decay, and destruction. The Nephites were explicitly warned: “For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.”⁸⁸

If the Book of Mormon is correct, and this pattern holds true, then the Latter-day Saints—who introduced polygamy as a central practice in the 19th century—may have followed the same path of past fallen civilizations. If history and scripture are any indication, that does not bode well for their future.

The Book of Mormon repeatedly warns that a people who sow filthiness will reap destruction. In Mosiah 7, we see this principle clearly stated: “For behold, the Lord hath said: I will not succor my people in the day of their transgression; but I will hedge up their ways that they prosper not; and their doings shall be as a stumbling block before them. And again, he saith: If my people shall sow filthiness they shall reap the chaff thereof in the whirlwind; and the effect thereof is poison. And again he saith: If my people shall sow filthiness they shall reap the east wind, which bringeth immediate destruction.”⁸⁹

This prophecy was fulfilled in Alma’s account—after they embraced polygamy and murdered a prophet, their society collapsed. If the Latter-day Saints have followed the same pattern, introducing polygamy and rejecting the true prophetic warnings, then they too may soon reap the east wind.

The Lord has already issued a chilling warning about judgment beginning with those who claim to know Him but have defiled His house: “Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord. And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord; First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.”⁹⁰

The pattern is undeniable—from ancient Israel to the Nephites, to the Jaredites. Each civilization that justified wicked kings, polygamy, and the murder of prophets faced swift destruction. If the Latter-day Saints have repeated this cycle, the warnings in scripture suggest that judgment will begin with them.

 

Brigham Young

Why is it that we can look back at the Kingdom of Israel and so easily point out their failures to live up to God’s word, yet when we look at the Nephites, we often ignore their repeated violations of God’s commands and the curses that followed? Worse still, we tend to reflect on our own history as if we have consistently kept God’s commandments and been blessed for choosing His will—when in reality, we have clearly broken the covenants and commandments tied to this land.

Notice the pattern:

• The Nephites under the second king fell into pride, polygamy, and the pursuit of gold and silver.
• King Noah, the second king after returning to the land of their first inheritance, led his people into abomination and bondage.
• And then, Brigham Young, second after Joseph, declared himself King, and introduced polygamy publicly in 1852.

Some may point out that Joseph Smith was also anointed as a king in the Council of Fifty, but Joseph’s teachings and actions aligned much more closely with the Lord’s vision of righteous leadership—serving rather than ruling, as Christ taught: “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them… but ye shall not be so.”⁹²

An insightful paper from Sunstone titled Brigham Young’s Telestial Kingdom (Audio Link, Paper Link) documents this development: “The King of that Kingdom that was set up on the earth was the head of the Church. Brigham Young proclaimed himself King here in Salt Lake Valley before there was a house built, in 1847.”⁹³

While attending the Journal of Mormon Polygamy conference, it was clear to those on both sides of the issue, that Brigham Young’s polygamy was demonstrably different than what is believed about Joseph’s supposed polygamy. It’s also notable that Young’s vision of kingship appears to be directly opposed the teachings of the Book of Mormon.

The Lord warned clearly: “But behold, this land, said God, shall be a land of thine inheritance, and the Gentiles shall be blessed upon the land. And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles.”⁹⁴

Rather than kings, the Lord intended this land to be a land of liberty—and history repeatedly shows that whenever kingship is introduced, whether among the Nephites or the Latter-day Gentiles, it leads to bondage, destruction, and loss of covenant blessings.

 

Patterns of Land and Covenant

It’s worth noting the patterns from history—they inform us about our own situation and what may unfold in the future.

The Nephites started out in the “land of their first inheritance”—the place where Lehi’s family first landed in the promised land: “And it came to pass that after we had sailed for the space of many days we did arrive at the promised land; and we went forth upon the land, and did pitch our tents; and we did call it the promised land.”⁹⁵

They began to prosper there by planting the seeds they brought from Jerusalem and multiplying in the land.⁹⁶ However, due to hostility and threats from their enemies (the Lamanites), they were forced to flee and lost that land. They moved inland into what they called the land of Nephi: “And the people who were now called Lamanites were wroth with me because they had hardened their hearts against the Lord their God… wherefore, I, Nephi, did take my family, and all those who would go with me… and we did journey in the wilderness for many days. And after we had journeyed for many days we did pitch our tents. And my people would that we should call the name of the place Nephi…”⁹⁷

From this second location, they were given an opportunity to be blessed and protected if they kept the commandments: “And if it so be that they shall serve him according to the commandments which he hath given, it shall be a land of liberty unto them…”⁹⁸

However, the people began to fall into iniquity during the time of Jacob’s ministry: “Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them…”⁹⁹

Jacob’s sermon at the temple served as a pivot point for the Nephites’ future: “But, wo, wo, unto you that are not pure in heart, that are filthy this day before God; for except ye shall repent the land is cursed for your sakes…”¹⁰⁰

Because they failed to repent, the wicked were destroyed, and the righteous were led out from the land of Nephi to a third location—Zarahemla: “Behold, it came to pass that three hundred and twenty years had passed away, and the more wicked part of the Nephites were destroyed… Behold, I will speak unto you somewhat concerning Mosiah… for behold, he being warned of the Lord that he should flee out of the land of Nephi…”¹⁰¹

This same pattern is reflected in the history of Mormonism: The early Saints were established in Kirtland, where the Kirtland Temple was built and accepted by the Lord: “I have accepted this house, and my name shall be here; and I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house.”¹⁰²

However, due to internal dissent and external persecution, the Saints were forced to leave. They were given a second land in Nauvoo. The Lord again extended promises of blessings if they would be obedient: “And ye shall build a house to the name of the Lord your God… if you labor with all your might, I will consecrate that spot that it shall be made holy.”¹⁰³

But they introduced secret iniquity, mirroring the abominations warned about in the Book of Mormon. Because of this, they were warned they would lose their blessings: “But if they will not hearken to my voice, nor unto the voice of these men whom I have appointed, they shall not be blessed, because they pollute mine holy grounds, and mine holy ordinances, and charters, and my holy words which I give unto them.”¹⁰⁴ “…if you do not these things at the end of the appointment, ye shall be rejected as a church, with your dead, saith the Lord your God.”¹⁰⁵

They lost their leaders, their temple, and their land, just as the Nephites had before them. As the Lord warned: “For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.”¹⁰⁶

Thus, like the Nephites who were driven from the land of their first inheritance, and the land of Nephi, the Saints lost Kirtland and Nauvoo. The Saints were literally driven from the United States, cast out into the wilderness. During the years they practiced the abomination of polygamy, they were refused statehood and denied the protections offered by the nation the Lord had raised up for the restoration of the Gospel.

The Lord established the Constitution to assist in the gathering of Zion and the restoration of His work (D&C 101:77–80), yet few today recognize how the early Saints lost the opportunity for Zion by their disobedience. In an ironic parallel to Adam and Eve, they were cast out of the garden—driven from their sacred lands into a telestial, dreary desert world.

Today, the Saints reside “three degrees” removed from their original sacred spaces. The pattern has clearly repeated in some form, and it is up to us to recognize it: we must repent and return to the Lord if we hope to see His promises fulfilled.

Discovering the truth is not easy—it requires humility, effort, and a willingness to let go of comfortable assumptions. As Joseph Smith taught: “Thy mind, O man! if thou wilt lead a soul unto salvation, must stretch as high as the utmost heavens, and search into and contemplate the darkest abyss, and the broad expanse of eternity—thou must commune with God. How much more dignified and noble are the thoughts of God, than the vain imaginations of the human heart! The things of God are of deep import; and time, and experience, and careful and ponderous and solemn thoughts can only find them out.”¹⁰⁷

We must search the scriptures diligently to find answers, and we must ask God sincerely to be guided by His Spirit. As Nephi warned: “For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray, ye would know that ye must pray; for the evil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray.” ¹⁰⁸

And he adds this clear warning: “Wherefore, now after I have spoken these words, if ye cannot understand them it will be because ye ask not, neither do ye knock; wherefore, ye are not brought into the light, but must perish in the dark.”¹⁰⁹

The responsibility is ours: make the effort, do the work, ask God, and let the truth lead you.

May we be among those who seek, ask, and find the truth before it is everlastingly too late.

1. 2 Nephi 9:25
2. Alma 42:17–18
3. Jacob 2:24
4. Jacob 2:26
5. Jacob 2:34
6. Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon, p.99

   see also, Book of Mormon, 1830, p. 128

7. See the chapter, verse, and punctuation changes that have been made to Jacob 2 in the Book of Mormon: Chapter and Verse
8. I’ve written about that here: Wresting the Scriptures
9. I’ve written about Hyrum’s statement here: Alternate Universe
10. Jacob 3:12
11. “They shall not take two wives in their lifetime. But the priests shall not take a woman from the daughters of Israel, but only a virgin from the daughters of the priests, so that they do not profane their seed with the daughters of the people.” (CD 4:20–5:1)

    The Damascus Document is one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, written for a sectarian community often associated with the Essenes. It outlines the group’s covenant obligations, rules for daily living, and expectations for purity. The document was intended to guide a righteous remnant who believed they were living in the last days and had been called out from a corrupt Israel.

12. The Temple Scroll—The Longest and Most Recently Discovered Dead Sea Scroll
13. Martínez, Florentino García. The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994, pp. 173–174.
14. Jacob 1:11
15. Jacob 2:27
16. see, Jacob 1:15–16
17. Mosiah 25:13
18. 1 Nephi 1:4
19. Jeremiah 38:23
20. 2 Nephi 5:18
21. 2 Nephi 5:18
22. “In the Book of Mormon, Zenos is generally referred to as “​the prophet.” When we think of “​the prophet,” we think of Moses, or we think of Isaiah. When the Book of Mormon is referring to “​the prophet”—as an unidentified “the prophet”—it’s Zenos. The Book of Mormon preserves something over 3000 words—(I cut and pasted, one time, all the words that you could attribute to Zenos into one MS Word document; my recollection is about 3400 words. I don’t know what happened to the document. I don’t have it anymore)—but 3400 words of Zenos makes him one of the most quoted authorities in the entire Old Testament record. Lehi’s party departed from Jerusalem before the Babylonian captivity, in possession of a brass-plates-version of the Old Testament, in which you find Zenos talking plainly, openly, and blatantly about the coming of a Messiah.” – Third Root
23. 3 Nephi 10:16
24. 1 Nephi 5:14
25. Acts 13:20
26. 1 Samuel 8:7
27. Acts 13:20
28. Mosiah 29
29. Helaman 6:10
30. “And they slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, and put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him with fetters of brass, and carried him to Babylon.” – 2 Kings 25:7, Mulek would have been the only surviving son, thus the last chance of preserving the heir to the throne.
31. Omni 1:12–19
32. Mosiah 25:13
33. Hugh Nibley first made the suggestion that MULEK derived from the Arabic diminutive mulik, “little king” (Hugh Nibley, “Two Shots in the Dark,” in Book of Mormon Authorship: New Light on Ancient Origins, ed. Noel B. Reynolds (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1982), 119.)
34. Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon
35. Abraham 1:15
36. see, Abraham 1:20
37. Adam Clarke Commentary, Matthew 1:17

    I’ve written more about Israel waxing and waning in light here: Jacob’s Prophecy

38. 1 Nephi 21:13; Isaiah 11:13
39. Mosiah 5:7
40. Mosiah 15:10–11, “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?” (or one sent to tell them?) So then faith comes by hearing the word of God.” – Lectures on Faith 1:1

    see also, Raise up Seed – Heirs of the Kingdom

41. Joseph Smith Translation, Matthew 3:34

    Joseph also used this expression here, “if you do not accuse each other God will not accuse you. If you have no accuser you will enter heaven; and if you will follow the Revelations and instructions which God gives you through me, I will take you into heaven as my back load. If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you. If you will throw a cloak of charity over my sins, I will over yours— for charity covereth a multitude of sins.” – Joseph Smith History

42. “Try the Spirits” [Editorial], Times and Seasons, Apr. 1, 1842, 744
43. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 339
44. “the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon.” – Preface, Book of Mormon, 1830
45. 1 Nephi 9:2
46. Jacob 3:14
47. Mosiah 25:5
48. Mosiah 28:11,17
49. Mosiah 8:19
50. Mosiah 8:12
51. Mosiah 8:13–14
52. Psalm 33:18
53. Proverbs 15:3
54. Jacob 2:31
55. Connor Boyack made me consider this in his video “A Prophet From Outside the Hierarchy?”
56. Jacob 2:15
57. Jacob 2:31
58. 1 Kings 11:6
59. JST 1 Kings 11:6
60. 2 Kings 24:18–19
61. 2 Nephi 1:3–4
62. Lehi’s words equate polygamy with captivity or slavery in Jacob: Jacob 2:31,33
63. “the Book of Lehi, which was an account abridged from the plates of Lehi, by the hand of Mormon.” – Preface, Book of Mormon, 1830
64. Jacob 1:15
65. Jacob 2:10
66. Jacob 2:15
67. Jacob 2:34–35
68. Jacob 3:4
69. I’ve written about that here: Jacob’s Prophecy
70. Omni 1:5
71. Omni 1:12
72. Mosiah 11:2
73. Mosiah 11:4
74. Mosiah 23:9
75. Ether 10:5
76. Mosiah 28:18
77. Mosiah 29:17–18
78. Mosiah 29:11
79. Mosiah 23:8
80. Mosiah 29:31
81. Mosiah 29:23
82. Mosiah 29:21
83. D&C 121:34–36

    37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

    38 Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.

    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.

    40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

84. D&C 121:39
85. Luke 22:25–27
86. D&C 121:41
87. Mosiah 28:18
88. Jacob 2:31
89. Mosiah 7:29–31
90. D&C 112:24–26
91. I’ve written about Hyrum’s statement here: Alternate Universe
92. Luke 22:25–26
93. footnote from the paper, Brigham Young’s Telestial Kingdom: (See Klaus J. Hansen, Quest for Empire: The Political Kingdom of God and The Council of Fifty in Mormon History, University of Nebraska Press, 1967, p. 200, footnote 74.) Read or listen to the paper: Audio Link, Paper Link
94. 2 Nephi 10:10–11
95. 1 Nephi 18:23
96. 1 Nephi 18:24–25
97. 2 Nephi 5:6–8
98. 2 Nephi 1:7
99. Jacob 2:35
100. Jacob 3:3
101. Omni 1:5,12

     Remember, destruction doesn’t mean annihilation in the Book of Mormon: see, Destroy From this definition, the picture is more clear how the pattern fits.

102. D&C 110:7
103. D&C 124:44–45
104. D&C 124:45
105. D&C 124:32
106. D&C 124:28
107. Joseph Smith, Letter from Liberty Jail, 25 March 1839, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 137
108. 2 Nephi 32:8
109. 2 Nephi 32:4