In the Beginning: An Opening Witness of the Messiah in Genesis

"Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning."

John 8:25 (emphasis added)

It's fitting that in the beginning of the biblical record, God couches a wonderful series of witnesses of His Son within the opening Hebrew phrase בְּרֵאשִׁית (beh-reh-SHEET), commonly translated into English as "In the beginning." Looking at the word's structure unlocks several of these testimonial elements as well as presenting a few Hebrew language examples of inclusio, a literary bracketing device, that witness to Christ being the First and the Last, the Creator and End of Times Sealer. 

Before analyzing the phrase, I need to disclose that there's nothing new that I'm bringing to the "theolingual" table except my own personal perspectives coupled with tying in a few scriptural references that support the doctrinal links between the language used in the initial Old Testament phrase and several of Christ's divine roles. 

To discover how the opening phrase references Christ, especially His capacity as Creator, it's necessary to break it down to into various consonant-based sub-words. The entire phrase, בראשית, means "in the first place" or "at inception". But progressively moving the consonant component groupings in order from right to left, since Hebrew is read in that direction, within this phrase yields the following sub-grouped words: 

1) בר (bahr) = son

2) ברא (bah-RAH) =  (verb) formed or shaped

3) ראש (rosh) = start, head, top, summit, God

4) אש (esh) = fire 

5) ת (the final letter of the Hebrew alphabet, tav) = life, sign, signature, seal of authority, seal of completion  

It's entirely fitting that the first consonant grouping within בראשית begins with the בר (bet-resh) combination, which means "son". That cluster is followed by the three consonant grouping that signifies the past tense verb "formed or organized", ברא (bah-RAH). The word bah-RAH is repeated as the second word in the biblical record. In the literal Hebrew word order, the opening verse reads, "In the beginning formed God the heavens and the earth." Next in order comes the word ראש (rosh), a logical follow-up since two of its key meanings are "start" and "God". 

The final two consonant signifiers, אש (esh) and ת (tav), introduce the poetic element of inclusio and again point the reader to Christ as the Creator and Sealer, harmonizing the Old Testament (Talmud) record with John's similar New Testament witness: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same (i.e., the Word) was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him..." (John 1:1-3. Also see Mosiah 3:8, The Book of Mormon) The first inclusio frontend and backend bracketing of theological teachings occurs with the constructive beginning in fire (esh) as the Earth was formed, then culminates in destructive renewal as the Earth is cleansed with fire sometime after the Lord's return. (See 2 Peter 3:12, 13) The second inclusio bookend reference is the letter ת (tav), which seals or closes the phrase בראשית. The bracketing begins with the Son (בר) and also closes the phrase with Him and His sealing or conclusion of the creative work of forming the heavens and the earth. Interestingly, the Early (Paleo) Hebrew pictograph for the letter tav was the crossed sticks/branches, or cross. So references pointing to the Son of God literally begin and end the first word of the Old Testament. 

The same can be said of the Bible itself since it begins by identifying the Lord, who began it all, with בְּרֵאשִׁית (beh-reh-SHEET) and then ends the record with the word amen (Revelation 22:21), which is an alternate name for Christ. 

"These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God."  Revelation 3:14

One of the most enlightening doctrinal messages captured in the the grammatical structure of בְּרֵאשִׁית (beh-reh-SHEET) is that the Lord's creative works continue. In Hebrew scholar Reb Jeff's blog post titled Bereshit: In the Beginning of What? (blog link), the author points out that the grammatical structure of the Hebrew phrase implies that "In the beginning..." was simply a beginning that was begun before at other times, making it part of a regular cycle. The doctrinal message implied by this grammatical complexity dovetails with several scriptural references to God's creative work never ending. (See Moses 7:30, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants 76:24)

What the Hebrew Verb “To Pray” Has to Say about Prayer

During the past couple of weeks I’ve been listening to tame Israeli pop music and Hebrew Bible readings during my work commute. I enjoy doing this for a number of reasons, one being that it’s a minimal-effort way to pick up new words and slang phrases outside of book study. I also like watching YouTube instructional videos in my spare time since this is another “path of least resistance” avenue for language learning.

Then there’s the heavy lifting of learning verb forms. Verb study is by far my least favorite part of learning a foreign language. But the hard truth is that there’s no way around it. Listening to Israeli ballads and Bible readings while traveling is great for vocabulary recognition, but it’s a poor substitute for studying verb forms. Trying to build your conversational skills without studying verb conjugations is like training to play an instrument without practicing scales. The end product will be choppy and inconsistent.

One silver lining to learning Hebrew verb structures is that they sometimes contain spiritual lessons. For me, this is the most satisfying trade-off for the long hours of memorization. One such verb that gives instructive lessons through its form is “to pray”. The structure itself teaches us volumes about the nature of prayer when it’s practiced at its highest, most impactful level.

To avoid taking this subject into the bottomless abyss of boring linguistic explanations, I’ll summarize the Hebrew verb system as briefly as possible. Unfortunately some explanation is necessary since none of the spiritual implications of “to pray” will make sense without this background.

So, just to summarize, Hebrew verbs are built around small consonant “roots”, which usually consist of three or four letters. For example, the infinitive “to speak” לְדַבֵּר (leh-dah-BEHR) is built around the three-consonant stem דבר (d-b-r).

There are seven potential stems that can be added to these simple consonant building blocks. The individual stem that's used determines whether the altered root is passive or active, plus it provides additional information that affects the modified verb’s meaning. I promise that these structures (in Hebrew they are called binyaneem, or “buildings”) are a lot simpler to understand than I’m making them out to be. The YouTube link I’ve inserted below explains this system much better than I ever could.

Explanation of Hebrew verb stems

Finally, three of the seven stems are active-voice types that have complementary forms on the passive side of the spectrum. The following chart gives a visual representation of these pairings:

These three complementary pairs build in intensity and complexity as they converge towards the middle of the pictured menorah, where we find the seventh binyan (“building”) at the center. This central verb construction that's labeled reflexive/cooperative in the above graphic is named hitpa’el. The “outside” or simplest stem pair (pa’al and nif’al) represent actions that generally don’t require more than one person to do them and are low on the intensity scale. In contrast, hitpa’el verbs usually (1) involve intensive effort, (2) are done with at least one other person or agent, and (3) involve the subject being impacted or changed directly by his or her own actions. So hitpa’el  verbs often describe actions that result in a significant change to a person’s condition or internal nature.

Let’s look at one example of a Hebrew hitpa’el form that meets all three criteria listed above. The three root letters that make up the verb stem for “to love” are אהב, or aleph-het-vet (a-h-v). At the lowest level active-voice binyan, the pa’al structure, we have the verb לֶאֱהוֹב (leh-eh-HOV), which means “to like” or “to love” someone or something. Its hitpa’el form is לְהִתְאַהֵב (leh-heet-ah-HEHV), which signifies “to fall in love”. This represents the pinnacle of the “to love” root since “to fall in love” (1) involves another person (as opposed to merely liking/loving an object), (2) is highly intensive, and (3) creates dramatic changes in those who experience this type of love. 

The Hebrew verb “to pray”, לְהִתְפַּלֵל (leh-HEET-pah-LEHL), is also a hitpa’el stem verb, which makes perfect sense to me. It fits all the basic requirements of this type of verb form. Prayer is the highest realization of communication since it’s done with God, it’s a very active (as opposed to passive) endeavor, and we are changed when we pray the way that Savior has invited us to. The scriptural verse below describes the hitpa’el characteristics of true prayer.

“Wherefore, my beloved brethren, pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart (high intensity), that ye may be filled with this love (prayer is interactive), which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ; that ye may become the sons of God; that when he shall appear we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is; that we may have this hope; that we may be purified even as he is pure (the result is that we are changed).” 

- Moroni 7:48 (parenthetical commentary added)

I wish I could say that all my daily prayers are of the hitpa’el kind, but they often aren't. My prayers are regularly of the pa’al type: a low-intensity, one-sided dialogue that doesn't result in a deeper connection with Father or deeper conversion. I think this kind of non- hitpa’el prayer that I default to is one facet of what the Savior calls “vain repetitions”. It's not the repetitious part that I worry about since I don't necessarily repeat the same wording from one prayer to the next. Instead, I'm guilty of the vanity part, in one sense of the definition. In modern English vain most often means "conceited or self-obsessed", but another common definition is  "futile, to no purpose, pointless". Centuries ago, engaging in vain repetitious prayer on street corners might have stemmed from being over-concerned with being heard by men, but the modern pitfall might be (in my case, at least) more tied to being under-concerned with being heard by God. 

What I find encouraging, though, is that Heavenly Father is always ready to receive each of us in meaningful prayer at any time when we’re prepared and committed to engaging Him in its highest hitpa’el form.   

The Hebrew Link between Yeshua, Victory, and Salvation

“Salvation is for a man to be saved from all his enemies; for until a man can triumph

over death, he is not saved.”

- Joseph Smith

When reading the Old Testament in the original Hebrew I use the Mechon-Mamre Hebrew-English Bible, which gives the English translation side-by-side with the Hebrew block script. (Click on this link to view it on-line.) Besides comparing the Mechon-Mamre English translation to the original Hebrew, I also evaluate it against the King James Version. It turns out that the two English translations often vary in subtle ways. In other instances, they diverge significantly.

One key to identifying a Hebrew-language connection between English words that now have divergent meanings is finding cases where two English terms are translated interchangeably in different passages of scripture. Over the past few months I’ve come across an example that occurs frequently throughout the Old Testament. Variants of the Hebrew verb לְהוֹשִׁיעַ (leh-ho-shee-AH) are routinely translated as “to save, deliver, rescue, preserve from” or alternatively as “to give victory to”, with the Mechon-Mamre and KJV translations regularly flip-flopping the uses of “salvation” and “victory” from one passage to the other.

For example, the forms of the verb לְהוֹשִׁיעַ (leh-ho-shee-AH) that appear in Psalms 98:1-2 read differently depending on which translation you use. I’ve highlighted the verbal and nominal forms of leh-ho-shee-AH in each verse.

Hebrew:

מִזְמוֹר, שִׁירוּ לַיהוָה שִׁיר חָדָשׁ כִּי-נִפְלָאוֹת עָשָׂה הוֹשִׁיעָה-לּוֹ יְמִינוֹ, וּזְרוֹעַ קָדְשׁו

יְשׁוּעָתוֹלְעֵינֵי הַגּוֹיִם גִּלָּה צִדְקָתוֹ הוֹדִיעַ יְהוָה 

King James Version:

ֹ1) O sing unto the Lord a new song; for he hath done marvelous things: his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory.

2) The Lord hath made known his salvation: his righteousness hath he openly shewed in the sight of the heathen.

Mechon-Mamre:

1) O sing unto the LORD a new song; for He hath done marvelous things; His right hand, and His holy arm, hath wrought salvation for Him.

2) The LORD hath made known His salvation; His righteousness hath He revealed in the sight of the nations.

Notice that in this passage the King James Version translators rendered the Hebrew root word (leh-ho-shee-AH) as two distinct English terms, using “victory” in the first verse and “salvation” in the second. You’ll also note that the KJV translation of the first verse differs significantly from the Mechon-Mamre in word choice, if not in meaning, since the doctrinal concepts of “getting the victory” and “working out one’s salvation” really aren’t that far removed from one another in English. The fact that both translations, one using “victory” and the other “salvation”, arrive at the same general meaning illustrates that these two terms have a doctrinal-conceptual link rooted in the Hebrew verb leh-ho-shee-AH.

Here’s a second example from the Old Testament (1 Chronicles 18:13) where the Hebrew verb leh-ho-shee-AH is translated using the two distinct, but conceptually related, English terms:

וַיּוֹשַׁע יְהוָה אֶת-דָּוִיד, בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר הָלָךְ

KJV: “Thus the Lord preserved (i.e., saved, rescued) David whithersoever he went.”

Mechon-Mamre: “And the LORD gave victory to David whithersoever he went.”

This interchangeability of meaning also exists in the New Testament, with 1 Corinth 15:57 serving as an example:

“But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory (i.e., salvation) through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

This verse leads us to the most important linguistic and doctrinal connection between “victory” and “salvation” – the name Jesus. This Latin variation of the Greek Iēsous was adopted from the Hebrew יֵשׁוּעַ (yeh-SHOO-ah). Both יֵשׁוּעַ (yeh-SHOO-ah) and the noun that signifies “salvation” or “deliverance”, יְשׁוּעָה (yeh-shoo-AH), come from the verb leh-ho-shee-AH. The only significant difference in spelling between the two words is the final silent heh (ה) that appears at the end of “salvation”, יְשׁוּעָה (yeh-shoo-AH). The doctrinal-linguistic link between Jesus’ name and His role as Savior is so important that the angel who appeared to Joseph prior to our Lord’s birth specifically told him “…thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.” (Matthew 1:21, emphasis added)

Messianic Jews (believers in Jesus as the Messiah who continue observing Jewish customs, festivals and holidays), Orthodox Jews, and secular Jews alike understand the linguistic connection between the name yeh-SHOO-ah and the Hebrew word for “salvation”. This is why they refer to Jesus in distinct ways, depending on how they regard Him. To maintain the inherent spiritual significance of the name Jesus (yeh-SHOO-ah), Messianic Jews always refer to Him by this name, often tagging on the suffixed title “The Messiah” (“The Anointed”), מָשִׁיחַה יֵשׁוּעַ (yeh-SHOO-ah hah meh-SHEE-akh). On the other hand, Jews and Hebrew speakers who don’t believe in Jesus as the Messiah call him by a different name, יֵשׁוּ (YEH-shoo), a name that’s unrelated to the verb leh-ho-shee-AH. This practice severs the doctrinal-linguistic thread between Jesus and redemption, in effect assigning Him a role as a mere historical figure. A common modified variation of the secular YEH-shoo is הַנוֹצרִי יֵשׁוּ (YEH-shoo hah nohtz-REE), meaning Jesus the Nazarene or Jesus of Nazareth.

The link below will take you to a short YouTube documentary about Messianic Jews living in Israel.

See the YouTube video link:

So, the name Jesus is itself a reference to His role as Savior of the world and the One who gives us victory over death and sin, through His sufferings and resurrection.

“And thus God breaketh the bands of death, having gained the victory over death; giving the Son power to make intercession for the children of men; having ascended into heaven, having the bowels of mercy; being filled with compassion towards the children of men; standing betwixt them and justice; having broken the bands of death, taken upon himself their iniquity and their transgressions, having redeemed them, and satisfied the demands of justice.” (Mosiah 15:8-9, emphasis added)

The Son of Man

Part of the fun of learning a foreign language is discovering how cultural and social values are often embedded in the language itself. Here’s one example that I was recently reminded of while watching an episode of the Israeli version of “The X Factor” on YouTube.

To ask someone his or her age in Hebrew, you’d use two separate phrases depending on the person’s gender. To a male, the question is phrased “Behn KAH-mah ah-TAH?” (?אתא כמה בן), which is often abbreviated to “Behn KAH-mah?”. This question literally means, “How many (years) have you been a son?” When asking a female, the phrasing is “Baht KAH-mah aht?”(?את כמה בת), or “Baht KAH-mah?” for short, with the translation being “How many (years) have you been a daughter?” Responses take the form of “I (have been) a son/daughter _____________ (years).”

We see this same figure of speech in Biblical Hebrew throughout the Old Testament. Genesis 7:6 demonstrates one example.

.הָאָרֶץ עַל מַיִם ,הָיָה וְהַמַּבּוּל ;שָׁנָה מֵאוֹת שֵׁשׁ בֶּן ,וְנֹחַ

“And Noah was six hundred years old (literally, “had been a son six hundred years”) when the flood of waters was upon the earth.”

Historically, the father-son relationship has been so uniquely distinguished in Semitic cultures that men and boys were either designated by (1) their male parentage in the form of ben-, meaning “son of -”, (examples include the names Ben-Hadad, Ben-Abinadab, Simon Bar-Jona, and Bar-Jesus, with bar- being the Aramaic equivalent to the Hebrew ben-) or (2) their city or region of origin (Jesus of Nazareth and Joseph of Arimathæa, for example). The underlying idea was that who and where you came from in large part defined you.

In addition to the “son of -” grammatical structure being used in Hebrew and other Semitic languages to create the equivalent of modern-day surnames, it’s also the basis of several terms for “(mortal) man” or “mankind”. Two principal expressions for these words are the Hebrew אָדָם בֶּן ben-adam, which has the varied literal meanings “son of Adam”, “son of man”, and “son of the earth”, and the Aramaic אֶנוֹשׁ בָּר bar 'ěnoš (bahr eh-NOSH), or “son of man”. For example, we find the first term, ben-adam, used in Isaiah 51:12.

“I, even I, am he that comforteth you: who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die, and of the son of man (אָדָם בֶּן) which shall be made as grass.”

In modern-day revelation the Lord continued using this term for human beings.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings." (Doctrine and Covenants 124:49)

It’s noteworthy that the Savior used the self-identifier “The Son of man” more than any other title when talking about Himself during His earthly ministry. The four New Testament Gospel writers recorded at least forty instances of the Savior calling Himself by this name. Christ continued this practice in revelations given during the early days of the Restoration, using the slightly-modified title “The Son of Man” (with Man being capitalized) as a self-identifier in six places in the Doctrine and Covenants. In D&C 49:5-6 the Father refers to Christ by this same title. The other instances of “The Son of Man” appearing in this book of scripture involve Joseph Smith referencing the Savior by this name. In Old Testament writings the prophets also used this phrase to reference the Messiah as demonstrated by Daniel 7:13-14.

“I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”

Going back to New Testament passages where the Savior used “The Son of man” to refer to Himself, I’ve thought a lot about why He chose to use this self-identifier more often than any other. Here’s my opinion on the topic, for what it’s worth. In the generic sense, bar enosh and ben-adam both signify “mortal human being”. But these phrases were also used to reference the promised Messiah as “The Son of man”, as illustrated in the passage I cited above from the Book of Daniel. So when Christ used this title in the grammatical 3^rd person to reference Himself, He was clearly indicating His identity as the Son of God to those of His listeners who had spiritual “ears to hear” (Matthew 11:15). The following two New Testament passages show examples of the ben-adam (Son of man) = Son of God message:

“But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then he saith he to the sick of the palsy) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.” (Matthew 9:6, emphasis added)

“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” (John 3:14-15, emphasis added)

“The Son of Man” with a capital “M” may have additional significance as it relates to a verse from

the Pearl of Great Price (Moses 7:35):

“Behold, I am God; Man of Holiness is my name; Man of Counsel is my name; and Endless and Eternal is my name, also.”

Not only was Christ the “Son of man(kind)” through Mary, who made available the mortal nature necessary to bring about His physical death, but He was also the “Son of Man (of Holiness)”, or of the Father. It was this Divine parentage that provided Him the power to take up His life again in mankind’s behalf. So when Jesus called Himself by the title “the Son of Man”, it may have served to underline His dual parentage of “man” and “Man”, with a strong emphasis on the latter. Descending below all things was the prerequisite to ascending above all things (Doctrine and Covenants 88:6).

As The Son of Man, He became one of us so that we could become one with Him.

Urim ve’Thumim

And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgement the Urim and the Thummim; and they shall be upon Aaron’s heart when he goeth in before the LORD; and Aaron shall bear the judgement of the children of Israel upon his heart before the LORD continually. (Exodus 28:30)

Before exploring the linguistic meaning of the phrase Urim and Thummim, I’ll mention the obvious point that a person’s opinion about its purpose and significance will be influenced by his or her religious background. In the footnotes at the end of this post I’ll include a few comments about Mormon theology on the subject, but for the time being I’ll only focus on common viewpoints that many faith-based groups share. These collective ideas primarily come from Old Testament references to this Divinely-prepared tool and its related gifts, so I’ll rely heavily on various Bible verses throughout this commentary.

Samuel 28:6 and Numbers 27:21 establish that the Urim and Thummim was a means by which prophets and priests in Israel received guidance, spiritual discernment (judgement), direction, and intelligence (light) from the Lord.

And he (Joshua) stall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him after the after the judgement of the Urim before the Lord… (Numbers 27:21)

We also learn from other Biblical references that it was a part of sacred ceremony associated with the tabernacle and priestly administrations. Tragically, the Urim and Thummim falls out of the Biblical picture sometime during the reign of King Saul. Afterwards it’s only referenced in connection with post-Diasporic Israel’s hopes for the future ministry of prophets and priests once again in the land. (See Ezra 2:63 and Nehemiah 7:65.)

Like many other members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I first learned that the Hebrew phrase Urim and Thummim אורים ותומים  (oo-REEM veh too-MEEM) meant “light(s) and perfection(s)” by reading the translation footnotes in the LDS King James version of the Bible. The introductory verse I quoted above is the earliest reference to the Urim and Thummim we find in the Old Testament, so this passage is probably the same that first exposed me to the term as a teenager. This happened long before I had developed any interest in studying Biblical Hebrew. For me, that linguistic footnote I came across was just one of those interesting scripture-based trivia facts that I considered fun to know.

The phrase means much more to me now. Once I learned enough Hebrew to be able to understand something about the broader meaning of its component parts, I found some instructive connections that have helped me better appreciate how revelation works, both on a universal and individual level. There’s obviously much more to be understood than the few personally-applicable insights that I’ve picked up from my studies, but this linguistic launching point has at least given me a place to begin.

Breaking down the phrase to its main parts, the most common word used in Hebrew for “light” in its singular form is ohr (אוֹר), while “perfection” in the singular is tohm (תוֹם). The other word that makes up this expression (and) is represented by the ve’ (veh sound) that’s attached to the front of Thummim.

Interestingly, the expression Urim and Thummim uses ohr and tohm in their plural forms (you’ll notice their altered vowel sounds, oh to oo, and the addition of the –im suffix), so the literal meaning of Urim ve’Thumim is “Lights and Perfections”. The “perfections” part sounds a little awkward to English speakers since this word is rarely used in its plural form. One explanation for why light and perfection were both pluralized in this Hebrew phrase lies in the language’s semantic rules, or how its grammatical structure influences meaning. One explanation goes as follows: the Hebrew suffix –im can either be a masculine-gender plural marker or a superlative suffix, like the English -est. So Urim ve’Thumim can also be read as “Supreme (highest) light and perfection” in addition to “Lights and Perfections”.

The second noun in Urim ve’Thumim, tohm (תוֹם) represents more ideas than just perfection. For example, it shares several meanings with shalom (a noun I detailed in my last blog post), including wholeness, completeness, and order. But tohm also carries additional meanings, such as righteousness, purity and integrity. So the Hebrew phrase can be alternatively translated as “Supreme (highest) light and order” or “Supreme (highest) light and purity.”

The Biblical record shows an unmistakable connection between tohm (righteousness, purity, order, and integrity) and the serviceable use of the Urim and Thummim for revelatory purposes. We have the account of Moses blessing members of the tribe of Levi with the following: “Let thy (the Lord’s) Thummim and Urim be with thy holy one…” (Deuteronomy 33:8). The Levites had qualified for this blessing of continued guidance through the Lord’s prophets and seers because “they (had) observed (God’s) word, and kept (His) covenant.” (Deuteronomy 33:9). In contrast, an example of self-disqualification from Divine direction via the Urim can be found in King Saul’s life. Through the prophet Samuel, God had chosen him to be the first King of Israel, but owing to his later extreme and repeated disobedience Saul lost the privilege of receiving spiritual help through the Urim and other means.

“And when Saul inquired of the LORD, the LORD answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.” (1 Samuel 28:6)  

This and other scriptural references support the translation of tohm as order. There were structured standards of behavior that qualified nations and individuals to receive Divine guidance through the Urim and Thummim. It also appears that the order of Heaven precluded more than one prophet-seer having an Urim at one time. For example, we don’t find evidence, Biblical or otherwise, of God having established competing interests with multiple Urim in the same geographical location at the same time. This type of arrangement would naturally run counter to the order of Heaven:

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” (1 Corinthians 14:33)

_______________________________

Footnotes:

1)      In the Standard Works of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, at least five different Urim and Thummim recipients are referenced:

a.       Abraham (Pearl of Great Price, Abraham 3:1, 4)

b.      Moses and Aaron - Eleazar the priest may have used this same Urim during Joshua’s prophetic reign (Numbers 27:21).

c.       The Brother of Jared (The Book of Mormon, Ether 3:21-28). This set was the one that Joseph Smith received to initially help him translate the records that were the source of The Book of Mormon (Doctrine and Covenants, Section 17:1).

d.      Mosiah, a Book of Mormon prophet-seer (Mosiah 8:13, 19 and Mosiah 28:17)

2)      Abraham, who was entrusted with an Urim, came from Ur of the Chaldees. Ur means “light”, just as ohr does. This is only one of many scriptural linguistic connections between the Urim and Thummin and “light”. In Mosiah 8:13-17, Ammon speaks about the Urim’s instrumentality in bringing God’s truth and judgments “to light” (i.e., out into the open and to one's understanding).

Peace, Perfection, and Payment

Although these three nouns don’t necessarily have an obvious connection in the English language, in Biblical Hebrew they’re linked both linguistically and conceptually. Many scriptural passages either hint at or directly reference the theological connections between peace, payment, and perfection. Before providing examples, I’ll give some background information on their linguistic associations.

In October of 2014 I wrote a blog post that included information about the expanded meaning of the Hebrew noun shalom (שָׁלוֹם). To briefly recap, instead of shalom just meaning “peace”, the most common English translation, it also signifies perfection in the sense of something being in a complete, whole, or finished state. The author of 1 Kings 6:7 gives us an example where the adjectival feminine form of shalom (she-leh-MAH) signifies “completion” and “perfection”. Here the writer uses the phrase EH-behn sheh-leh-MAH (שלמה אבן), literally “stones made complete”, to describe blocks used in the construction of Solomon’s Temple that were “finished” at the quarry instead of being hauled as rough slabs to the building site to be chiseled and smoothed there. Also, you’ll notice that the Hebrew words for “perfection” מוּשׁלָמוּת) moosh-lah-MOOT) and “perfect, completed” (מוּשׁלָם moosh-LAHM) contain the same 3-letter consonant root (SH-L-M) that makes up the core of shalom, supporting the dual linguistic and ideological connections. 

What's more, the Hebrew language itself seems fixated on the notion that unless people and things are in a daily, orderly progression towards a state of final completion (ultimate shalom), it isn’t possible to have peace (daily shalom). Two of the most common greetings used in Modern Hebrew are: Mah shlohm-KHAH? (Literally, “How is your peace?”) and Hah kohl beh-SEH-dehr? (“Is everything in order?”). The ideas of “peace” and “ordered completeness” (i.e., perfection) are inseparably connected in Biblical Hebrew. Interestingly, in the LDS Standard Works Topical Guide, the word Peace is followed by the parenthetical note “see also Order” (p. 360, Topical Guide). The two ideas are again intertwined in the following Old Testament verse:

“Mark (notice) the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of that man is peace.” (Psalms 37:37, emphasis added)

So how does the third word, payment, tie in linguistically to peace and perfection in Hebrew? The verb that’s used most often in Hebrew for “to pay, to settle an account or debt” is לְשַׁלֵם (leh-shah-LEHM). Again, the same root consonants found in shalom (SH-L-M) resurface in this verb. This imagery works since an unsettled or unpaid account is one that’s not finished, complete or satisfied. The borrower can’t be fully at peace as the owner of an unreconciled debt since his lender has a legitimate claim on his freedom or property; on the other hand, the lender can’t enjoy complete peace while there’s still a possibility of default. Payment bridges this gap so that the transactional relationship becomes perfect, or whole.

Extending this linkage theologically, in order for us to enjoy the connected conditions of perfection (i.e., being completed or finished) and peace, there must be an actual payment, settling of accounts, purchase, or redemption in our collective and individual behalf; the collective part being redemption from physical death, with the individualized piece being salvation from personal sin.

"For by one offering (i.e., payment) he hath perfected them that are sanctified." (Hebrews 10:14)

So not only is Christ the Prince of Peace in the sense of being the future Establisher of geopolitical peace once He returns to begin His millennial reign, but perhaps even more significantly, He offers personal peace through His payment that makes the perfection (completion) of our souls possible.

(For additional scriptural references on the topic, see Romans 3:24, 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, Doctrine and Covenants 76:69, and Mormon 9:13)

Biblical Hebrew Poetic Structures in the LDS Standard Works

A short time after I began studying literature and poetry in high school I bought into the idea that poetry in every language almost always includes rhyming schemes and meter, defined as rhythmic sound and stress patterns. This is true in many types of traditional Western poetry, but it turns out that rhyme and meter are rarely used in Biblical Hebrew. In fact, both poetic elements are almost entirely absent in even the most style-rich books of the Old Testament, which include Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, Isaiah, and Lamentations. Instead, Old Testament authors frequently used other common poetic devices in their writings, such as:

Alliteration – The structured repetition of consonant sounds

Paronomasia – A verbal pun based on alliteration

Parallelism – The ordered use of phrases or sentences that are connected in meaning

Variations include:

                1) Synonymous parallelism – The rephrasing of themes or ideas in different ways

                2) Antithetic parallelism – The side-by-side placement of opposing themes and ideas

                3) Climactic parallelism – The intensification or building of a theme or idea at intervals

Chiasmus – A type of parallelism that inverts the order of related words, ideas, or sentence structures

Imagery – The use of similes, metaphors and other figurative language

These and other elements help define what constitutes poetic literature in Semitic languages, a group that includes Old Testament Hebrew. Although the primary value of scripture is its doctrinal content, it’s not surprising to me that the Lord often chooses to package truth in beautiful and creative forms (in other words, poetry). Arranging food on a plate in an artistic way enhances the entire dining experience. A drink from a wooded mountain stream satisfies the body and spirit more than water taken from the tap.  When dealing with scripture, style will never trump content, but poetic form can help God’s word navigate through the mind to reach the heart.

Just a few personal observations before exploring specific examples of poetic structures from the Old Testament, The Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants:

1. After having read a good portion of the Old Testament in Hebrew, it seems that Biblical Hebrew writers used poetic devices much more often than Book of Mormon authors did. That being said, since we don’t have the original text that the latter was translated from, we don’t know for sure. I can only base my observations on the English translations of both books. What complicates the picture is that some poetic devices - alliteration and paronomasia, for example - are only detectable in the original language. Unfortunately we’ll have to wait until we’re able to study the Semitic language(s) the Book of Mormon prophets wrote in to completely understand how stylistically rich their writings are.

2. What we do know is that Book of Mormon authors were very familiar with all the non-phonetic structural devices that I listed at the beginning of my post since they appear frequently throughout the text. Nephi (the son of Lehi), King Benjamin, and Alma the Younger appear to have used them with more regularity than other New World prophet-writers. However, this may be because Mormon quoted these three authors directly in extensive passages, whereas he often just summarizes or abridges the writings of others.

3. From what I can tell, the Book of Mormon contains many more examples of poetic elements than the Doctrine and Covenants, which in turn includes many more than the Pearl of Great Price. This seems logical since the language(s) the Book of Mormon was translated from were Semitic in origin and closely related to Hebrew (see 1 Nephi 1:2 and Mormon 9:33). The Doctrine and Covenants would also be expected to include the frequent use of poetic devices since the Lord has perfect command of every language, plus He's the Master Teacher. Chiasmus, imagery and parallelism are especially effective at reemphasizing and “re-presenting” key doctrines and gospel principles, so these tend to surface most often in the Savior's teachings, including His revelations recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants. The Pearl of Great Price is a much shorter volume of scripture that focuses on the Creation, God’s interactions with Adam and Eve and their family, Jehovah’s communication with Abraham, and Joseph Smith’s firsthand account of the Restoration, so it leans towards a more straightforward presentation of religious principles and doctrines. 

4. As I mentioned above, poetic devices that we find in the scriptures typically involve the repetition of core doctrines, ideas, or teachings, packaged in different ways. This makes sense because learning is accelerated by repetition. The wonderful thing is that this principle operates on both the conscious and subconscious level. So even if the reader isn’t aware of repetition-based poetic components that are in play in a particular passage, the mind and spirit will still subconsciously pick up on key words and teachings that reoccur. As proof, in the previous sentence I included a section full of the alliterated use of the "p" sound: "repetition-based poetic components that are in play in a particular passage." Even if you didn't consciously recognize this example of alliteration the first time you read that phrase, your brain caught on to something unusual about it, possibly leading you to pause and/or reread it. 

Parallelism and imagery are the most common poetic elements found in the scriptures, so I’ll begin with examples of these two devices. And since it could be argued that the perfect marriage of both form and doctrinal content in the Old Testament is the book of Isaiah, I’ll start with his writings.

In Isaiah 44:3-4, the author seamlessly meshes imagery and synonymous parallelism. The first four phrases constitute a stanza of two couplets (distiches), followed by an isolated couplet that continues the metaphorical flow of the passage – that of water bringing forth life following drought.

(A1) For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, (B1) and floods upon the dry ground:

(A2) I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, (B2) and my blessing upon thine offspring:

 And they shall spring up as among the grass, as willows by the water courses.

A1 = A2, and B1 = B2 are examples of Synonymous Parallelism, where the ideas are linked metaphorically, with the first line describing physical water and the second detailing spiritual blessings. The last couplet, which stands alone, is a simile that’s rooted in the same imagery.

In the following passage from the Book of Mormon (Alma 7:19-21), Alma the Younger uses parallelism in three consecutive blocks (verses), each of which has a distinct theme.

1st theme = You are on the path that leads to God.

(A1) For I perceive that ye are in the paths of righteousness;

(A2) I perceive that ye are in the path which leads to the kingdom of God;

(A3) yea, I perceive that ye are making his paths straight.

2^nd theme = God is invariably righteous.

I perceive that it has been made known unto you, by the testimony of his word, (preface statement)

(B1) that he cannot walk in crooked paths;

(B2) neither doth he vary from that which he hath said;

(B3) neither hath he a shadow of turning from the right to the left,

(B4) or from that which is right to that which is wrong;

therefore, his course is one eternal round. (closing bookend statement)

3^rd theme = God and spiritual filthiness are incompatible.

(C1) And he doth not dwell in unholy temples;

(C2) neither can filthiness or anything which is unclean be received into the kingdom of God;

(C3) therefore I say unto you the time shall come, yea, and it shall be at the last day, that he who is filthy shall remain in his filthiness.

The Lord Himself uses this instructive, repetition-based structure, as seen in 3 Nephi 30:2.

"(A1) Turn all ye Gentiles from your wicked ways; and (A2) repent of you evil doings."

The two phrases in this passage are synonymous since the verbs “turn” and “repent” are linked through the Hebrew verb lah-SHOOV לָשׁוּב , which means to repent, turn, turn away from, go back.

The next examples are of Antithetic Parallelism. One is a familiar poetic passage from Ecclesiastes Chapter 3 (it’s so familiar in part because the rock band The Byrds used it as the lyrical foundation for their 1965 hit “Turn! Turn! Turn!”), while the second scripture is from Proverbs 13:1-6.

To every thing there is a season,

and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

A time to be born,

and a time to die; (death is antithetical to birth, life)
a time to plant,

and a time to pluck up that which is planted; (weeding is the opposite of planting)

In the following verses from Proverbs, I’ve highlighted the opposing elements from each line (couplet).

A wise son heareth (obeyeth) his father’s instruction: but a scorner heareth not (pays no attention to) rebuke.

A man shall eat good by the fruit of his mouth: but the soul of the transgressors shall eat violence.

He that keepeth his mouth keepeth (saveth) his life: but he that openeth wide his lips shall have destruction.

The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing: but the soul of the diligent shall be made fat (healthy/abundant).

A righteous man hateth lying: but a wicked man is loathsome, and cometh to shame.

Righteousness keepeth (saveth) him that is upright in the way: but wickedness overthroweth the sinner.

The next verses, which come from the Book of Mormon, also include Antithetic Parallelism.   

The one raised to happiness according to his desires of happiness, or good according to his desires of good; and the other to evil according to his desires of evil; for as he has desired to do evil all the day long even so shall he have his reward of evil when the night cometh. (Alma 41:5)

In the next reference, the word-for-word parallelism only becomes antithetical (oppositional) once we get to the contrasting verbs and direct objects, which I've indentified with B and C labels. The phrases' subjects, or A labeled elements, are examples of synonymous parallelism:

Behold, my soul (A1)  abhorreth (B1) sin (C1), and my heart (A2) delighteth (B2) in righteousness (C2);  - 2 Nephi 9:49)

The next group of scriptural quotations demonstrate Climactic Parallelism, a device that can be more difficult to detect in some cases. Outlining these passages in staircase-form helps reveal this poetic element more clearly. The first example comes from Psalms 23. The staircase builds upward from left to right, culminating with a apex phrase (4) that makes the strongest statement in the thread.

                                                           (4) and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.

                                       (3) Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life:

                      (2) thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.

(Step 1) Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies:

In this passage, the statements detailing the Lord’s favor towards the author gradually escalate from simple protection, to anointing, to the extension God’s mercy, to entrance into His Kingdom.

The following Book of Mormon verse includes an illustration of “Descending” Climactic Parallelism.  Notice that each phrase describes a further step down the path that ends in complete spiritual destruction. (See Alma 12:11)

And they that will harden their hearts, (this statement defines the group that will be effected by the following consequences)

                (Step 1) to them is given the lesser portion of the word

                                (2) until they know nothing concerning his mysteries;

                                                (3) and then they are taken captive by the devil,

                                                                (4) and led by his will down to destruction.

Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell.(Concluding summary statement.)

The Lord's message to the spiritually unresponsive found in Doctrine and Covenants 43:5 is a much more complex example of Climactic Parallelism. Here He uses three subgroups of this poetic device within one verse, with each detailing a different way God calls us to repentance. Group A focuses on verbal preaching, Group B on physical warnings, and Group C lists spiritual enticements/rewards associated with repentance.

                                                                (3) and by mine own voice,

                                (2) and by the ministering of angels,

(Step 1) How oft have I called upon you by the mouth of my servants,

Servants are lower in rank than angels, who in turn are lower than God.

                                                                (5) and by the voice of famines and pestilences of every kind,

                                                (4) and by the voice of earthquakes, and great hailstorms,

                                (3) and by the voice of tempests,

                (2) and by the voice of lightnings,

(Step 1) and by the voice of thunderings,

                                 

The progression in Group B is from minor to major threats to human life and safety, with famine being the most severe.

                                                                                                                                                               

                                                                (5) and would have saved you with an everlasting salvation,

                                                (4) and by the voice of glory and honor and the riches of eternal life,

                                (3) and by the voice of mercy all the day long,

                (2) and by the voice of judgment,

(Step 1) and by the great sound of a trump,                        (6) but ye would not!                                                                                                                                                                                                 

Group C is a series of escalating spiritual invitations, including a call to enter into Eternal Life. Then in dramatic contrast, line 6 bluntly affirms that the wicked will ultimately reject God’s mercy. This type of literary structuring makes the final contrasting statement (# 6) all the more effective at capturing the reader's attention. 

Chiasmus (Inverted Parallelism)

Ezekiel 33:11 contains a simple chiasm that demonstrates the basic pattern of inverting the order of synonymous or related concepts.

Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, (preface statement that’s not part of the chiasm)

(A) I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; (“A” theme = God does not delight in punishing His children)

       (B) but that the wicked turn from his way and live: (“B" theme = God delights in saving the  penitent)

                                (Now the order is inverted.)

       (B) turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; (Repentance message is “re”-presented again)

(A) for why will ye die, O house of Israel? (Same with the “A” theme now, using different wording)

This next example of chiasmus is much more complex in structure. It comes from the account of King Benjamin’s discourse found in the Book of Mormon. (See Mosiah 5:10-12)

 (A) And now it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall not take upon him the name of Christ

        (B) must be called by some other name; therefore, he findeth himself on the left hand of God.

                (C) And I would that ye should remember also, that this is the name that I said I should give unto you that never should be blotted out,

                             (D) except it be through transgression;                                                 

                             (D) therefore, take heed that ye do not transgress,

                (C) that the name be not blotted out of your hearts.

        (B) I say unto you, I would that ye should remember to retain the name written always in your hearts, that ye are not found on the left hand of God,

(A) but that ye hear and know the voice by which ye shall be called, and also, the name by which he shall call you.

_________________________________________________

Additional Notes:

1) For a more comprehensive article on Biblical Hebrew poetic devices, visit this link: Biblical Poetry

2) This next link explores chiasmus in the Book of Mormon: Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon

3) I didn’t give examples of alliteration or paronomasia in this post because (like I mentioned earlier) these poetic elements can only be identified by reading passages in the original language, so we can’t pull examples from the Book of Mormon or the Pearl of Great Price for comparison's sake. Just to show how these elements function in Biblical Hebrew, I’ll give one example from The Old Testament. In 1 Samuel chapter 2, the prophetess Deborah records a beautiful prayer of praise that’s full of poetic elements, some of which are phonetically based. For example, in the 3^rd verse she uses a rhythmic cadence coupled with a rhyming scheme, a relatively rare occurrence in Biblical Hebrew. The sentence’s translation reads:

“Talk no more so exceeding proudly;” which literally means something along the lines of “Don’t enlarge or increase your speech to an exceeding height.” 

   אַל-תַּרְבּוּ תְדַבְּרוּ גְּבֹהָה גְבֹהָהAl tar-BOO teh-dah-BROO gah-VOH-ah gah-VOH-ah.

In the first part of the sentence we see the jumbled repetition of the T-B-R consonant cluster (alliteration) that turns into a play on words (paronomasia), with the word-pun being between speech and increase or excess (talking too much or arrogantly). This is followed by a case of reduplication, or the back-to-back repetition of a word to intensify its meaning. Deborah repeats the adjective gah-VOH-ah (which means “high,” “elevated,” or “lofty”) in order to add the idea of “very” or “exceedingly” to "high."