“The law of witnesses has always been a part of the Lord’s work on earth. This law states that “in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established” (2 Cor. 13:1; see also Deut. 17:6; Deut. 19:15; Matt. 18:15–16; John 8:12–29). This witness confirms that certain events took place and that God-given doctrine and principles are true.” Witnesses 1995 Loren C. Dunn
“The Lord has almost always used witnesses to help establish his word and his power on the earth. One of his purposes is to test us—that is, to see if we will believe in him and obey his laws while we live separated from his presence. (See Abr. 3:25.) Because of that purpose, he has, according to Elder Bruce R. McConkie, “ordained the law of witnesses, the law whereby he reveals himself to prophets and righteous men and sends them forth to teach his laws and bear testimony of their truth and divinity.” (The Promised Messiah: The First Coming of Christ, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1978, p. 84.) We Prophesy of Christ”: The Law of Witnesses in 2 Nephi 1990 By Bruce A. Van Orden
Joseph Fielding Smith, “The Divine Law of Witnesses”
By President Joseph Fielding Smith
Tuesday, Dec 8, 1953
“Now, coming to our own day. When Joseph Smith received his first vision, he was alone. That was of necessity The Lord had to reveal himself to one man alone When Moroni came to him in the beginning, the Prophet was alone; but when the way was opened for three men to behold an angel and bear witness of the Book of Mormon, the prophet returned home and said that a great load had been lifted from his shoulders. Now he was not carrying the load alone. Three other men were called to be witnesses with the Prophet Joseph Smith of the restoration of the Gospel.
Moreover, when the priesthood was restored, it was necessary that not only Joseph Smith should hold the keys and receive the ordination but there should be another witness, and Oliver Cowdrey was always present, so far as any history is concerned that we have, whenever the priesthood was restored; whenever the keys of the priesthood were restored Oliver Cowdrey received the authority with the Prophet Joseph Smith. When John the Baptist came, he came to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey. He conferred upon each of them the priesthood of Aaron, When Peter, James and John came, Oliver Cowdrey and Joseph Smith were together. They received the keys for the power of the priesthood from Peter, James and John. Not the prophet alone. When other revelations came, the opening of the heavens and the great bestowal of gifts and blessings? they were given to Oliver Cowdrey as well as to Joseph Smith, In the Kirtland Temple when Moses came he conferred not only upon the head of Joseph Smith but upon the head of Oliver Cowdrey the keys of the gathering of Israel. When Elias came he gave to Joseph Smith and to Oliver Cowdrey the keys of the priesthood of Abraham. When Elijah came it was to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey, the first and second elders of the Church, And every time keys were given to the Prophet they were also given to Oliver Cowdrey. (Doctrine & Covenants: 110)
Now there is a reason for this, For the Lord says, “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” (Doctrine & Covenants 6:28) Joseph Smith could not stand alone in the beginning of this dispensation. There had to be another witness, and Oliver Cowdrey was called to be that other witness. In other words, Oliver Cowdrey was an assistant president of the Church. Had Oliver Cowdrey lived and been faithful, at the time of the death of the Prophet Joseph Smith he would have, been the President of the Church, But Oliver Cowdrey transgressed and lost his calling, and it became necessary to appoint another in his stead; so we read in Section 124 in the Doctrine and Covenants that Hyrum Smith, my grandfather, had bestowed upon him all the keys and the authority that had been given to Oliver Cowdrey, and Hyrum Smith stood in the stead of Oliver Cowdrey as the second elder of the Church and an assistant president of the Church. And President Young said truthfully, ” had Hyrum Smith lived’ he would have been President of the Church.” (Doctrine and Covenants 124:95) He was already a president of the Church. We had two presidents of the Church during all the ministry of the Prophet Joseph Smith, a senior and a junior, or an assistant president, and there would have been no necessity for his ordination because he already had been so ordained.
Now I don’t think this is a matter that is generally understood, and I am going to read to you what the Lord said to the Prophet Joseph Smith in regard to Oliver Cowdrey and the duties of the assistant president. In The History of the Church under the date of December 6, 1834, we read:
Oliver Cowdrey was ordained by Joseph Smith by the command of the Lord as an assistant president of the high priesthood, to hold the keys of presidency with Joseph Smith in his ministry. This was in harmony with the ordinations he received under the hands of John the Baptist, and Peter, James and John. I’m not quoting the exact words, but this is the substance of that statement of December 5th, 1834. But here is an exact statement from the Prophet explaining the office given to Oliver Cowdrey. “The office of assistant president is to assist in presiding over the whole church and to officiate in the absence of the President according to his rank and appointment Namely, President Cowdrey first, President Rigdon second, arid President Williams third as they were severally called, The office of this priesthood is also to act as spokesman, taking Aaron for an example. The virtue of the above priesthood is to hold the keys of the kingdom of heaven and the Church militant. “ (History of the Church, Book A, Chapter I)
Oliver Cowdrey in rank preceded Sidney Rigdon and Fredrick G. Williams. Now, I have said, and I think it is absolutely true, I have never been questioned on it, that had Oliver Cowdrey lived faithful and true to his calling as the second elder, or President of the Church, he would have gone to his martyrdom with the Prophet Joseph Smith at Carthage, Illinois, on the 27th day of June, 1844. For I think it required the sealing of the testimony of the two men; but Oliver Cowdrey lost his place, and Hyrum Smith was appointed to it, and it became necessary for Hyrum Smith to become a martyr just as well as it was for the Prophet Joseph Smith. For the two witnesses for this dispensation holding the keys–and they now hold the keys of this dispensation-both had to seal that testimony, make it binding upon the world through the shedding of their blood.” Joseph Fielding Smith
We want to thank Mark Hales who is the husband of our new Navajo Podcaster and friend from the last conference, Andrea Hales. He approached me at the conference and wanted to share this Law of Witnesses that he authored. I really enjoyed it and wanted to share it with each of you. This Law of Witnesses in the Scriptures and from the Lord, is a critical part of our laws and order of the Church in the last days. Think about how often this law applies in most of our law today.
The Law of Witnesses in the Book of Mormon
By Mark R. Hales
All rights, copyrights, and privileges, are reserved to the author, Mark R. Hales. © Mark R. Hales 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE LAW OF WITNESSES. 1
II. EXAMPLES OF THE LAW OF WITNESSES IN BOOK OF MORMON.. 2
1. Election of their leaders. 8
2. Choosing the type of government 9
4. Joining a group or changing of names. 10
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE LAW OF WITNESSES
In ancient Israel during biblical times, legal transactions and activities required the presence of witnesses in order to be valid (see Deuteronomy 19:15).[1] For example, “contracts were considered invalid unless there were witnesses present and their names inscribed at the end of the text.”[2]
Witnesses were also needed in every stage of a trial. Specifically, two witnesses were required against an accused to initiate criminal charges (see Deuteronomy 17:6-7).[3] During most trials, these same witnesses gave testimony,[4] were present when the decision was rendered[5], and expected executed any sentence.[6]
Besides legal trials, witnesses were necessary when purchasing property,[7] creating a bailee/bailor relationship,[8] disputing over the legal status of a potential slave,[9] dividing up inheritances,[10] making marriage agreements,[11] regarding accounting issues,[12] recording shipping records,[13] creating records in private archives,[14] during undocumented transactions[15] and other certain dealings.[16]
Because of the necessity of witnesses in all business and legal functions, being a witness required personal accountability because “being a witness was not simply a passive function but carried some responsibility.”[17]
The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that the Nephites and Lamanites of the Book of Mormon followed the law of witnesses in their various property transactions, legal proceedings, governmental and political functions, and several other legal and non-legal activities like those living in the geography of Near Eastern and Eastern Mediterranean.
II. EXAMPLES OF THE LAW OF WITNESSES IN BOOK OF MORMON
Throughout The Book of Mormon, the Nephites and Lamanites[18] followed the law of witnesses involving property transactions, legal trials, politics activities, military actions, and religious events.
A. Property Transactions
Under the laws of ancient Israel, to avoid being considered thief, both the purchasers and seller of real property needed to provide witnesses.[19] In order to ensure that witnesses were available for important business transactions, the participants went to specific locations where witnesses would be accessible. For example, Boaz, went into the presence of the people at the gate and took off his shoe as proof of purchasing Ruth and her property (see Ruth 4: 1-11). These witnesses were called “people of the gate.”[20]
To discuss property, I have separated the transactions into those that involve real property (i.e., land) and personal property.
1. Real Property
The oldest legal documents discovered involve the sale of land in Mesopotamia.[21] In the Bible, the prophet Jeremiah took with him witnesses when he purchased Hanameel’s field in Anaththoth (see Jeremiah 32:6-16).[22]
With a small population during the first few years of the people of the Book of Mormon, few documented transactions of real property were necessary since Lehi’s family were nomadic. However, after Lehi and his family landed in the Promised Land, they quickly established permanent residence, the land of first inheritance (see 1 Nephi 18:23). Unfortunately, conflicts arose and the Nephites separated themselves and formed the land of Nephi (see 2 Nephi 5:6-8). As the population of these two cities grew the law of witnesses became more necessary and apparent.
The most frequent reference to witnesses regarding a real property transaction occurred when a particular group of people requested to possess a specific city. One example was that of Zeniff and those Nephites who lived with him (see Mosiah 9:1).[23] Zeniff had a great desire to inherit the land of his fathers, or the land of Nephi, so he and four of his men went into the Laman, king of the Lamanites, to “know if [they] might go in with [their] people and possess the land [of Lehi-Nephi] in peace” (Mosiah 9:5). Even though King Laman intended to bring Zeniff and his people into bondage, he still followed the law of witnesses and covenanted with Zeniff that his people would depart of that land in order that Zeniff and his people could possess it (see Mosiah 9:6-7).
In addition to the presence of witnesses, use of oaths in a property transaction since “[o]ccasionally, parties took oaths when making a contract.”[24] This can be seen with the people of Limhi. When the Lamanites invaded the land of Lehi-Nephi, the king of the Lamanites made an oath unto King Limhi[25] and his people wherewith the Lamanites would allow the Limhi and his people to remain in the land of Nephi if the Nephites in return would pay a tax of “one half of all that they possessed” (Mosiah 19:15-25). Limhi agreed to these terms, and in return made an oath unto the King of the Lamanites that his people would pay the requested tribute (see Mosiah 19:26). Several witnesses to this transaction were Gideon and his men. To prevent future problems, Gideon and his men were sent to find several of the priests of Noah who had fled with King Noah when the Lamanites attacked. These priests were seeking to attack the Lamanites when Gideon and his men told them of their ability to possess the land of Nephi in relative peace (see Mosiah 19:22). The fact Gideon and his men were present as witnesses may have prevented continued war.
This pattern of witnesses to real property negotiations is further seen when the Nephites allowed the Anti-Nephi-Lehies to possess the land of Jershon. When Alma and his brethren returned to Zarahemla they talked with Nephihah, the chief judge, about what they accomplished in the land of Nephi. Having a desire to help the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi, Nephihah “sent a proclamation throughout all the land, desiring the voice of the people concerning admitting their brethren, who were the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi, among the Nephites. And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold we will give up the land of Jershon . . . for an inheritance” (Alma 27:21-22). In addition to giving them land, the Nephites agreed to provide military protection (see Alma 27:23-24). In informing the Anti-Nephi-Lehies Ammon, Alma, Aaron, and the other brethren present with the chief judge, corroborated all that was made known unto them concerning the possession and protection of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies (see Alma 27:25).
Witnesses were also used when searching for particular locations. King Mosiah, for example, commanded “sixteen of their strong men [that they] might go up to the land of Lehi-Nephi, to inquire concerning their brethren” (Mosiah 7:2). Similarly, Limhi sent several brethren to find the land of Zarahemla (see Mosiah 21:23) and Ammon, the leader of these men, specifically took with him Amaleki, Helem, and Hem to meet with the king (see Mosiah 7:3-8). Obviously, sending several men might increase the chance of finding the proposed locations, but in addition, it provides witnesses to any potential transaction that may occur. For if only one or two men are sent to a city, they are often bond, captured, and imprisoned.[26] Such was not the case when a group of people came into the city.
Another real property transaction that occurred by the voice of the people is the naming of cities and lands. Specific examples include: the valley of Alma (see Mosiah 24:20), the city of Ammonihah (see Alma 8:7), the land of Amulon (see Mosiah 23:31), the city and valley of Gideon (see Alma 6:7; Alma 2:20), and the land of Nephi (see 2 Nephi 5:8).
2. Personal Property
Since personal property is moveable, witnesses to personal property transactions are imperative to prove ownership and to avoid being accused of being a thief.
The problem of not having a witness for a real property transaction occurred early in the Book of Mormon and caused major problems for hundreds of years between the Nephites and the Lamanites. Once Lehi and his family landed in the land of promise they established the land of their first inheritance (see 1 Nephi 18:23). But, after several years of disputations between the families of Nephi and Laman the Nephites left the main group and brought with them the plates of brass, the Liahona, and the sword of Laban (see 2 Nephi 5:5-14). Since Laman was the oldest son of Lehi, he felt that it was his birth right to retain possession of the brass plates and thus since claimed he was “wronged” by Nephi and thus taught his children, and their children to hate, murder, rob, and plunder the Nephites (Mosiah 10:17). Since there was no record of Nephite negotiating the keeping of these items, it could be argued that he was a thief and the Lamanites had a legitimate claim against Nephi and his descendants.
In reference to the plates of brass, prior to leaving the land of Jerusalem Lehi requested his sons to obtain these same brass plates directly from Laban. When Laman first attempted to obtain the plates on his own, Laban cast him out of his house and called him a robber (see 1 Nephi 3:13).[27] Later, when Laman and all of his brethren attempted to purchase the plates, they were chased away by the servants of Laban (see 1 Nephi 3:23-27). Finally, when Nephi had killed Laban, he requested Zoram “go with [him] into the treasury” (1 Nephi 4:20). Even though he was not Laban, Nephi obtained a witness in retrieving the plates. Obviously requesting Zoram to retrieve the plates was not to later verify ownership if needed, but possibly to follow a legal procedure; to do otherwise may have tipped off Zoram of Nephi’s disguise.
B. Legal Trials
Another common occurrence involving the use of witnesses were legal trials. I will not specifically analyze the legal context of each trial, but just point out the use of witnesses through the legal process, including bringing forth an accusation or complaint, during the trial itself, and in carrying out the sentence.
1. The Accusation/Complaint
To establish a valid legal procedure able to enforce a judgment, “the aggrieved party had to physically bring the perpetrator before the judges.”[28] One of the best examples of such a legal proceeding is the trial of Abinadi. When Abinadi entered the city of Nephi, he began to preach repentance among the people and prophesy that God will destroy them (see Mosiah 12:1-8). Abinadi’s words were not accepted well, and the citizens “were angry with him; and they took him and carried him before the king” and accused Abinadi of false prophesy (see Mosiah 12:9-13). As Abinadi confounded the priests of Noah, they continued to accuse him of additional crimes (see Mosiah 17:12). During his trial, one of the Noah’s priest, Alma, believed Abinadi’s words and was a witness in his defense. Because of Alma’s verbal actions in defense of Abinadi, the remaining council of priests accused Alma of his own crimes, chased him from out of the city, and attempted to kill him (see Mosiah 17:2-3). Other examples include Nehor, Alma, Amulek, and Paanchi.
During Alma’s first year in his judgment seat, Nehor began to preach that the people should support priests and teachers, and that God will redeem all men regardless of their level of repentance (see Alma 1:3-6). During Nehor’s preaching, he was confronted by Gideon, wherewith Nehor killed Gideon by the sword (see Alma 1:7-9). It was because of this murder, that Nehor “was taken by the people of the church, and was brought before Alma, to be judged according to the crimes which he had committed” (Alma 1:10).
After Alma and Amulek preached unto the people of Ammonihah, the people became angry and felt that Alma and Amulek had “lied unto them, and had reviled against their law and also against their lawyers and judges,” the people of Ammonihah, first “sought to put them away privily” (Alma 14:2-3). But, because of the law of witnesses, the people of Ammonihah instead “took [Alma and Amulek] and bound them with strong cords, and took them before the chief judge of the land” and testified that they “had reviled against the law, and their lawyers and judges of the land, and also of all the people that were in the land” (Alma 14:4-5).
The satisfaction of the law of witnesses is also evidenced within the accusation of Paanchi, one of the sons of Pahoran I vying to become the chief judge around the “fortieth year of the reign of judges over the people of Nephi” (Helaman 1:1). When Paanchi lost his bid for the judgment seat to his brother Pahoran, he “was exceedingly wroth; therefore he was about to flatter away those people to rise up in rebellion against their brethren” (Helaman 1:7). Because of his attempted rebellion, “he was taken” by the people of Nephi before the chief judge to be “tried according to the voice of the people” (Helaman 1:8).
The people of Zarahemla also followed the law of witnesses when they accused Nephi, the son of Helaman, of the murder of the chief judge Seezrom. While in the garden of Nephi near the city of Zarahemla, Nephi sent five messengers to verify, “the chief judge had fallen to the earth and did lie in his blood” (Helaman 9:1-3). When these five messengers arrived and saw the chief judge dead, they knew Nephi had spoken the truth and they fell to the earth (see Helaman 9:5). Meanwhile, prior to the messengers arriving at the judgment-seat, several of Seezorm’s servants saw Seezrom dead, and ran out among the people crying murder (see Helaman 9:6). As Seezorm’s servants returned with a multitude from the city, they saw the five messengers sent by Nephi passed out near the Seezorm’s body, and quickly accused them of murder (see Helaman 9:7-8). Now, since there was a different crowd that gathered in the garden when Nephi sent out the five messengers, these people could testify to the innocence of the messengers (see Helaman 9:11). Though these five men contended that Nephi was innocent, the circumstances led the people to believe that Nephi had conspired to murder Seezrom (see Helaman 9:12-17). So, the group present “caused the Nephi should be taken and bound and brought before the multitude” to be tried (Helaman 9:19).
To prevent false accusations, witnesses were also used. One example includes Aaron and the king of the Lamanites. After Aaron expounded the scriptures to the king, the king prayed to God to have his sins taken away (see Alma 22:2-18). After the king’s prayer, “he was struck as if he were dead” (Alma 22:18). In response, his servants rushed to tell his wife, who admittedly accused Aaron of murder and commanded these same servants to kill Aaron (see Alma 22:19-23). But, because the servants witnessed the event, they knew that Aaron was not a murder and refused the queen’s order. Similar circumstances occurred with Ammon and the king’s son, Lamoni (see Alma 18-19).
Because of the law of witnesses, unfortunately, witnesses were often used to corroborate lies and misdeeds. The prime example is Amalickiah, who used treachery, murder, and intrigue to become king of the Lamanites. When the existing king of the Lamanites came out to greet Amalickiah and some his men, one of Amalickiah’s servants murdered the king (see Alma 47:22-24). In fear of their own life, the servants of the king that witnessed his slaying fled[29] (see Alma 47:25). In response, the servant’s of Amalickiah, to cover their actions, blamed the murder on the king’s servants crying, “behold, the servants of the king have stabbed him to the heart, and he has fallen and they have fled; behold, come and see” (Alma 47:26). To gain the support of the people, Amalickiah “pretended to be wroth” and commanded his armies, and all that loved the king to come forth and purse after the servants of the king (see Alma 47:27-29). Though Amalickiah’s army did not capture the king’s servants, the Lamanites believed in the lies of Amalickiah and his men that the king’s servants were those that assassinated the king (see Alma 47:30). To testify the queen, Amalickiah took the same servant that actually killed the king, and all those that were with him, and “testified unto her that the king was slain by his own servants” (Alma 47:32-34). It was because of the verified testimony of Amalickiah and his witnesses, that the queen believed that the king’s former servants murdered her husband (see Alma 47:34-35). Through the corroborated abuse of the law of witnesses, Amalickiah used the queen’s trust to gain her favor, marry her, and become the king of the Lamanites.
Other situations of witness making accusations include times when prophets were captured by the people and taken before the king/chief judge, thrown into prison, or cast out of the city include Ammon (see Alma 17:20), Nephi and Lehi (see Helaman 5:21), and Samuel the Lamanite (see Helaman 13:1).
2. The Trial
As with accusations, a trial before a legal authority required the presence of witnesses.[30] After being cast into prison, Abinadi stood trial before King Noah and the council of King Noah’s Priests to be questioned so “that they might cross him, that thereby they might have wherewith to accuse him” (Mosiah 12:17-19). After Abinadi confounded their words, he was again placed in prison for three days but was later brought back in front of the king and his counselors where King Noah officially accused Abinadi of crimes and asked how he would plead (see Mosiah 17:6-12). It is before these witnesses, that Abinadi refused to recant his words and accepted the fate of his peers.
The trial of Nehor was simple, and in front of his accusers, Nehor was condemned to die by Alma, the chief judge (see Alma 1:12-14). During Alma and Amulek’s trial, all was done before the chief judge of the land (see Alma 14:4). Now, this chief judge was the local magistrate and not the highest judicial authority Nephihah, to whom Alma had appointed to his judgment seat (see Alma 4:16-17). Before this judge, the people brought forth their accusations of Alma and Amulek, while Zeerom, defendants’ witness, testified in their behalf. After their initial trial and the execution of many believers of Christ, Alma and Amulek are cast into prison wherewith many lawyers, judges, priests, and teachers again questioned them (see Alma 14:17-26). But Alma and Amulek remained silent and did not respond to their questioning. But, as their persecution in prison continued, eventually the chief judge, and those with him, challenged Alma and Amulek to break their bands to testify of the truthfulness of their words. In doing so, the power of God was manifested, Alma and Amulek broke their bands, and the prison walls came down killing everyone but Alma and Amulek (see Alma 14:29). As they were leaving the fallen prison, a multitude gathered and witnessed Alma and Amulek leave without harm.
There is little mentioned about the trial of Paanchi, but the law of witnesses was still exhibited. After Paanchi’s defeat for the position of chief judge, he tried to rebel against his brothers. Because of his attempted rebellion “he was taken, and was tried according to the voice of the people, and condemned unto death” (Helaman 1:8). As with his accusation, Paanchi’s case also demonstrates the use of witnesses during the trial.
Not only did the people of Zarahemla use the law of witnesses to accuse Nephi, but Nephi himself used this same law exonerate himself of false accusations. Within the trial of Nephi, the five messengers that Nephi sent were acquitted because of the testimony of the judges and others that had gathered in the garden of Nephi when Nephi had sent them to the house of Seezoram. Even though these messengers testified to the innocence of Nephi, he was arrested and taken before the multitude where several judges, one by one, attempted to confound and cross him so “that they might accuse him to death” (Helaman 9:16-20). But, to defend himself, Nephi prophesied how Seantum would confess to the murder of Seezoram (see Helaman 9:25:36). While Nephi remained under the watchful eye of his accusers and the judges, to substantiate Nephi’s claims several witnesses went unto Seantum wherewith, Seantum confessed as Nephi had prophesied, thus again proving the innocence of Nephi (see Helaman 9:37-38). It was this last act that finally liberated Nephi.
3. The Sentence
As stated previously, often the witnesses under the Ancient Near East and the Mosaic Law executed the judgment or sentence.[31] This is also true in the Book of Mormon. Returning to the trial of Abinadi, it was the priests of Noah that executed the death sentence on Abinadi for reviving against the King (see Mosiah 17:12-20). Though this was not the original charge the people brought before the king, it was the accusations of these priests that resulted in Abinadi’s death.
In regard to Nehor, the same people that brought him to Alma (the chief judge at the time), after his death sentence, took him and “carried him upon the top of the hill Manti . . . [where] he suffered an ignominious death” (Alma 1:15).
In the trial of Alma and Amulek, though the chief judge rendered no legal judgment, the people punished Zeerom for his “false testimony” by spitting in his face, and casting him from among the people, along with all those that also believed in the words of Alma and Amulek (see Alma 14:7). To punish those followers of God that were cast out, the men were stoned while the women and children were thrown into a fire (see Alma 14:7-9). While Alma and Amulek were required to watch the punishments of their followers, the chief judge “smote them with his hand upon their cheeks” (Alma 14:14-17). Alma and Amulek were later sent back to prison where they were mocked, slapped, spit upon, bound with strong cords, and had no food, drink, or clothes (see Alma 14:18-25).
C. Political Activities
Besides legal transactions and trials, witnesses were used in other aspects of the government or political environment since “[o] ne of the most important functions of an government is the administration of a legal system.”[32] Examples of this in the Book of Mormon include deciding who should be a group’s ruler, selecting what type of government should be used, requesting a change of the law, or becoming a citizen of a existing or new civilization.
1. Election of their leaders
By the “voice of the people” kings, judges, and military leaders were elected. Though the appointment of new king was recognized as a divine decision, the people to show their support of a new king, often acclaimed “the popular blessing of ‘long live the king.’”[33]
Just as the Nephites were establishing themselves, they sought Nephi to be their first king (see 2 Nephi 5:18).[34] There is no record that subsequent kings were individually appointed by the voice of the people among the Lamanties, but Most of the other kings in the Book of Mormon were not elected by the people but inherited the throne and had their authority conferred upon them by the current king. Exceptions occurred when outsiders, as with Amalickiah, used murder and power to become king (see Alma 46-47). Current kings also received support of people joining their cities. For example, the Mulekites appointed Mosiah to be their king, when the Nephites joined them in the city of Zarahemla (see Mosiah 25:12).
Often, small groups became distraught over the current government regime, rebelled, and elected their own king. This occurred either by breaking off and creating your own following, as with Amlici (see Alma 2:9-10) and Amalickiah (see Alma 47:6), or by completely taking over the city and establishing your own king, as with the king-men (see Alma 61:4-8). The Gadination Robbers also elected their leaders; for Kishkumen (see Helaman 1:11-12), Gadination (see Helaman 2:4-5), and Jacob (see 3 Nephi 7:9-10) were placed in power by the voice of their people.
Later the Nephites elected, by the voice of the people, their local and chief judges. These wise men would be appointed by the people to judge “according to the commandments of God” and laws of the land (see Mosiah 29:11, 25). With the first election under the reign of judges, the people assembled together and cast “their voices concerning who should be their judges,” and appointed Alma the Younger, the current High Priest of the Church, the chief judge (Mosiah 29:39-42). For nine years, Alma served in these dual capacities until he resigned and “selected a wise man” named Nephihah to serve as chief judge, and “gave him power according to the voice of the people” to enact laws, judge, and govern the people (Alma 4:16-17).
For the next 25 years, Nephihah judged in “perfect uprightness before God” until his death in 67 B.C. (see Alma 50:37). After Nephihah’s death, his son, Pahoran, was appointed to fill the judgment seat “with an oath and sacred ordinance to judge righteously” (Alma 50:39). Though it is not stated whether Pahoran was elected by the voice of the people, it is obvious he covenanted to serve them righteously. This was similar to the actions of kings in Hebrew Law when a king was “accepted by the people through a covenant specifying his rights and duties.”[35] Soon into Pahoran’s reign, “there were a few part of the people who desired that a few particular points of the law be altered” and desired “to overthrow the free government and to establish a king over the land” (Alma 51:2-5). To resolve this contention, an election occurred and “voice of the people” voted to have Pahoran remain as the chief judge (Alma 51:7).
After Pahoran’s death in 52 B.C., three of his sons vied for the judgment seat, with the “voice of the people” appointing Pahoran II as the new chief judge (Helaman 1:2-5). But, soon after his appointment, Pahoran II was murdered, and the people had a new election and chose his brother Pacumeni (see Helaman 1:12-13). But such as the fate of many chief judges, Pacumeni was also murdered (see Helaman 1:21), and a contention again arose as to who should be the new chief judge (see Helaman 2:1). As a result of Pacumeni’s assassination, the people gathered their voices together and appointed Helaman II, the son of Helaman, as the new chief judge (see Helaman 2:2).
Years later, Cezoram was the Chief Judge, where remained until “he was murdered by an unknown hand as he sat upon the judgment seat” in the sixty and six year of the reign of judges (Helaman 6:15). After Cezoram’s murder, his son was “appointed by the people” to sit upon the judgment seat (Helaman 6:15). Also, after Seantum killed his brother Seezoarm, the Chief Judge, (Helaman 9:3-6; 23-38), Seantum sought the appointment of the judgment seat by the people (Helaman 8:27).
After the reign of judges ended, the people elected their tribal leaders (see 3 Nephi 7:3). Both Captain Moroni (see Alma 46:34)[36] and Captain Mormon (see Mormon 2:1) were appointed as military leaders by the voice of the people. The actions of the military leaders will be discussed later.
2. Choosing the type of government
Unique to the Nephites, was the opportunity to choose their type of government. While the Lamanites continued to have a king, the Nephites established three different types of governmental systems involving kings, judges, and tribal leaders. Whenever there was a change in the governmental structure, or a challenge to switch to a different type of government, it was the voice of people that chose which style of government they wanted. Thus, with people selecting their method of government, the law of witnesses was fulfilled.
When the Nephites first formed, they desired their government to be ruled by a king (see 2 Nephi 5:18). This governmental system lasted for over 400 years until King Mosiah II suggested a government controlled by judges elected by the people (see Mosiah 29:11-47). The people accepted this proposed government style (see Alma 1:1), and elected Alma as the first chief judge (see Mosiah 29:42).
In regard to Chief Judges, these wise men would be appointed by the voice of people to judge “according to the commandments of God” and laws of the land (Mosiah 29:11, 25). Though all judges were to be selected by the voice of the people, there was a difference in how a new chief judge was appointed based on if the previous chief judge died or resigned.
Soon after the reign of judges began, Amlici desired a reestablishment of the reign of kings (see Alma 2:1-4). So, the people gathered together and voted to retain the reign of judges (see Alma 2:5-7). In revolt of the choice of the people, Amlici and his followers joined the Lamanites and stirred up a battle against the Nephites (see Alma 2:7-31). A similar election occurred between the freemen and the king-men (see Alma 51:1-8). Unlike Amlici, after the king-men’s defeat, the king-men were silent on their cause for they “durst not oppose but were obligated to maintain the cause of freedom” since the “voice of the people came in favor of the freemen” (Alma 51:7).[37]
The Nephites selected a third type of government after chief judge Lachoneus II was murder. Under this new tribal government did “every tribe did appoint [an individual] chief or leader” (3 Nephi 7:3).
3. Legislative actions
During the reign of the judges, the voice of the people also initiated legislative actions to change existing laws. The Book of Mormon shares two examples of legislative actions instituted by the Nephites. The first involved the king-men. When the king-men were denied their political objectives, though the king-men remained silent, they still were unhappy and refused to take up arms in defense of the Lamanites (see Alma 51:1-13). In response, the people of Zarahemla, under the assistance of Captain Moroni, sent a petition unto Pahoran, the chief judge and governor, to change the law and allow Moroni the power to compel all dissenters to defend their country or be put to death (see Alma 51:13-15). This was the first time that the Nephites handled such “contentions and dissentions among the people” so the law had to be altered in response (Alma 51:16). The governor supported the request of the people, and the laws of the land were changed (see Alma 51:16).
A later example of the Nephites taking legislative action was due to judges secretly murdering prophets. In response, the Nephites sent a complaint to their governor informing him of the judge’s illegal acts, hoping that the governor would act (see 3 Nephi 6:21-25). Unfortunately, the chief judge was also murdered before any action could be taken (see 3 Nephi 7:1).
4. Joining a group or changing of names
Citizenship often bestowed significant privileges.[38] A person’s privileges, protections, and duties were based on “belonging to a family, clan or tribe.”[39] Because of the importance of belonging to a specific group of people, whenever an individual or individuals desired to form their own society, or to join a different society, they expressed this desire in front of witnesses. Some examples include when: Zoram joined with Nephi and his brethren (see 1 Nephi 4:33-35); the Mulekites became Nephites while assembled together (see Mosiah 25:1-13); the Amilcites, as a group, joined the Lamanites (see Alma 2:24); many Lamanites and Zormaites joined the Anti-Nephi-Lehies (see Alma 25:13; Alma 35:6-7; Alma 62:16-17);[40] and converted Lamanites united with the Nephites (3 Nephi 2:14-15).
Similar to that of joining a new civilization, when people formed their own group, they would decide what name they were to be called by. Those with Nephi desired to be called Nephites (see 2 Nephi 5:9). Other groups similar formed, namely: “Jacobites, Josephites, Zoramites, Lamanites, Lemulites and Ismaelites” (Jacob 1:13).[41] These major societies existed unto the time of Christ, until there became no “Lamanites, nor any manner of ites, but; they were one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God” (4 Nephi 1:17). Eventually the Lamanites were reestablished (see 4 Nephi 1:20); in time, all of the other five original groups were again formed (see 4 Nephi 1:35-38). Several times people changed their name to “be distinguished from their brethren” (Alma 23:16). This change was serious and was supported by the voice of the people. Many converted Lamanites called themselves Anti-Nephi-Lehies (see Alma 23:17); later these people called themselves the people of Ammon (see Alma 27:26).
D. Military Activities
The actions of military leaders were heavily scrutinized, for laws prevented officers from abusing their power or forming illegal treaties.[42] Because of this, military leaders followed the law of witnesses. The most common occurrence was during negotiations between opposing parties. One example is the meeting between Lehonti and Amalickiah (see Alma 47:10-14). Because of the need of witnesses, Amalickiah was very specific in his request to have Lehonti “bring his guards with him” (Alma 47:12). Not only did Lehonti bring his guards for protection, but also to substantiate any potential agreement.
Another example is the settlement offer by Captain Moroni to Zerahemna. After overtaking Zerahemna and his men, Moroni requested Zerahemna to surrender and take an oath of peace in front of all the soldiers (see Alma 44: 1-9). Though Zerahemna refused to surrender and to take an oath unto the Nephites, there were witnesses on both sides available to testify of Zerahemna’s actions. Other groups made oaths or covenants in regards to fighting: The king of the Lamanites made an oath not to slay the people of Limhi (see Mosiah 19:25); the Anti-Nephi-Lehies made a covenant never to fight again (see Alma 24:7-18); the Nephites covenanted to protect the Anti-Nephi-Lehies (see Alma 27:23-24); the Lamanite chief captains swore to each other to attack the land of Noah (see Alma 49:13,17); and the sons of Helaman, who were children of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies, covenanted to go to war (see Alma 53:16). The importance of witnesses associated with oaths is complex and is not discussed in depth in this study.
The uses of witnesses were also used in forming military and governmental factions. The most common alliance was the Gadination Robbers. Kishkumen, Gadination, Jacob, and others seeking to establish power over the people formed at different times this band of secrecy by swearing oaths and covenants (see Helaman 1:9; Helaman 2:3-5; Helaman 6:21-32).[43]
E. Religious Activities
Though there are distinctions between religion and law, they are also intertwined. “Hebrew tradition did not distinguish between the norms of religion, morality, and law.”[44] God himself gave the Law of Moses, and “was said to supervise the judges.”[45] Because of the importance of God, the law of witnesses was seen in many religious aspects or ceremonies.
Typically, it was the outward religious rituals that required witnesses. Among the Nephites, baptisms required witnesses (see Mosiah 18:8-16; Alma 15-6-12; Helaman 5:18). Other outward symbolic religious acts were oaths and covenants. One example of people making religious oaths or covenants was the people of Zarahemla. After King Benjamin spoke to the people about serving God and each other, keeping the commandments, among other things, the people of Zarahemla covenanted “to be obedient” to God’s commandments (Mosiah 5:5).
Beyond just religious symbols and ordinances, more than one individual generally witnessed angelic visitations. After Nephi and his brothers failed a second time to get the plates of brass from Laban, Laman and Lemuel began to beat Nephi with a rod. As this was occurring, an angel appeared unto them and commanded Laman and Lemuel to stop beating Nephi and told them that Laban would be delivered unto their hands (see 1 Nephi 3:29). A second angelic visit occurred while Alma the Younger and the Sons of Mosiah were rebelling against God and leading many of the people astray. In response, “an angel of the Lord appeared unto them” and commanded them to repent (see Mosiah 27:11-18; Alma 17:2).
As stated above, witnesses were needed in making legal accusations; the same principal applied with religious accusations. To be brought before the prophet to be judged for one’s sins, witnesses were required. When the non-believers created dissensions among the Nephites, witnesses brought them before Alma, the “authority over the church” (Mosiah 26:7-9). Since these were purely religious violations, King Mosiah refused to judge them criminally (Mosiah 26:11-12). But, as seen with Nehor, when you mixed religious and criminal actions, it was appropriate to be judged by the legal authorities (see Alma 1:1-15). Korihor, for his preaching, was captured by the people and taken before Alma, the high priest (see Alma 30:20-21). Other examples include Abinadi (see Mosiah 12:9), Alma and Amulek (see Alma 14:1-4), Ammon (see Alma 17:20), and Helaman’s sons Nephi and Lehi (see Helaman 5:21; Helaman 9:19).[46]
Out of the mouth of two to three witnesses shall every word be established (see Deuteronomy 19:15; Matthew 18:16). Not only is principle prophesying the coming worth of the Book of Mormon, but also sets forth the standard needed for legal transactions for the people of Ancient America. As established in the laws of the Ancient Near East, the Nephites also practiced the law of witnesses by including witness with all property transactions, legal trials, elections, legislative proceedings, military actions, and religious activities.
III. CONCLUSION
[1]Deuteronomy 19:15 reads. “One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinth: at the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.” For other Biblical references, read: 1 King 21:13; John 8:17; 2 Corinthians. 13:1; Hebrews. 10:28.
[2] Russ VerSteeg, Early Mesopotamian Law, §11.2[B] Formalities: Seals, Witnesses, Oaths, and Clay Envelopes, Carolina Academic Press (Durham, 2000), 169. [Hereafter EML]
[3]Other biblical references are: Exodus 20:16, 22:9, 23:1; and Numbers 35:30.
[4] David Daube, The Law of Witnesses in Transferred Operations, Journal of the Near Eastern Society of Columbia University (1973), 91.
[5] EML §4.2 “Lawsuits: Trial Procedure,” 57; §4.3 “Evidence,” 60; §4.4 “Witnesses and Perjury,” 61; and §4.5 “Enforcement of Judgments,” 62.
[6] Ze’ev W. Falk, Hebrew Law in the Biblical Times, “Procedure,” John W. Welch, ed. (Winona Lake, In. and Provo, Utah: Eisenbrauns and Brigham Young University Press, 2001), 58. [Hereafter Falk]
[7] Code of Hammurabi #9, 10, & 11. See also, EML 8.3[C] “Black Market Sales,” 116; §10.2 “Sale of Land, Prices, Deeds, & Recordation of Real Property,” 146.
[8] Code of Hammurabi # 122.
[9] Laws of Gortyn # 2-3.
[10] Laws of Gortyn #10, 20, 21, & 36.
[11] Eva von Dassow, Introducing the Witness in Neo-Babylonian Documents, Ancient near Eastern Biblical Judicial Studies in Honor of Baruch A. Levine. Robert Chazan & others, eds. (Eisenbrauns, Winonon Lake, In. 1999), 9.
[12] Id., 13.
[13] Id.
[14] Id., 15.
[15] Id.
[16] Id., 18.
[17] Id., 5.
[18] For simplicity purposes, the author includes the Mulekties in the activities of the Nephites and Lamanites.
[19] EML §8.3[B] “Selling Goods Under False Pretense & Theft by Fraud,” 115. See also Code of Hammurabi #9-11.
[20]See Falk, “Local Government,” 36.
[21] EML §10.2 “Sale of Land, Prices, Deeds & Recordation of Real Property,” 146.
[22] In this purchase, Jeremiah produced a witnessed document in which the terms of the transaction were written twice, one part that “was sealed according to the law and custom,” and the other part that “was open.” The purpose was to provide a second witness to the terms of the contract if discrepancies developed between the parties or possible damage to the open portion of the document. The additional testimony of the sealed portion may be the exact reason why the Book of Mormon has an open and sealed portion. For an extended discussion on this topic, see John W. Welch, Doubled Sealed, Witnessed Documents: from the Ancient World to the Book of Mormon, in Mormons, Scripture, and the Ancient World, ed. Davis Britton (Provo, Utah: Farms, 1998), 391-444; and John W. Welch, Doubled, Sealed, and Witnessed Documents, in FARMS Update Research in Progress, Update No. 147, Vol. 21, 2001.
[23] This was nearly 400 after the Nephites left Jerusalem.
[24]EML §11.2[B] “Formalities: Seals, Witnesses, Oaths & Clay Envelopes,” 169-170.
[25] King Limhi is the son of King Noah.
[26] Abinadi (see Mosiah 12:9); Alma and Amulek (see Alma 14:4); Ammon (see Alma 17:20); and Nephi and Lehi (see Helaman 5:21) are good examples of individuals quickly being thrown in jail upon arriving into a city.
[27]Though there are obvious differences in ancient legal theology between a thief and a robber, the basic understanding is still applicable. Because Laman did not retain a witness when attempting to purchase property, he is accused of a crime against property. In this situation, Laman may also fit the description of a robber. Robbers were outsiders and outlaws; robbers acted in a group or band; robbers acted in open; and robbers kept their hideouts secret. This can apply to Laman and his brothers since their father was accused of false prophecy, their family had left Jerusalem to an unknown location, and Laman and his brother returned as a group to Jerusalem. See John W. Welch and John F. Hall, Charting the New Testament, Chart 3-12, FARMS (2002).
[28] EML §4.5 “Enforcement of Judgments,” 62.
[29] The servants of the king eventually joined the people of Ammon (see Alma 47:29).
[30]EML §4.2 “Lawsuits: Trial Procedure,” 57.
[31]See Falk, “Procedure,” 58.
[32] EML, §4.1 “Organization & Personnel,” 51.
[33] See Falk, “Kingship,” 32. (Citing 1 Samuel 10:24; 2 Samuel 16:16; 1 Kings 1:25,34; and 2 Kings 11:12).
[34]To remember and honor Nephi, the people called all successive kings “second Nephi, third Nephi, and so according to the reign of the Kings” (Jacob 1:11). The Jaredites also elected their first king, Orihah (Ether 6:14).
[35] Ze’ev W. Falk, Hebrew Law in the Biblical Times, Brigham Young University Press, 2nd Edition (2001), 14.
[36]Captain Moronihah, Moroni’s son, was the military leader following Captain Moroni. He was not appointed by the voice of the people, but “Moroni yielded up the command of his armies” into Moronihah’s hands (Alma 62:43).
[37]As stated before, eventually these king-men established their political desire and revolted against Pahoran and established a king over the city of Zarahemla (see Alma 61: 1-8). In addition, the Nephites later sought help from Pahoran, the chief judge, in compelling the king-men to defend the country. This is discussed in the “Legislative Actions” section of this paper.
[38] EML §5.1 “Citizenship & Status in General,” 66.
[39] See Falk, “Foreigners,”112.
[40]The Anti-Nephi-Lehies later became the people of Ammon.
[41] Other groups were also formed in the Book of Mormon. These include the Amalekites (see Alma 21:2), Amalickiahites (see Alma 46:28), Amulonites (see Alma 21:3), Jaredites (see Ether 1:33), the people of Zarahemla (see Omni 1:14), and the people of Ammon or the Anti-Nephi-Lehies (see Alma 23:17 and Alma 27:26).
[42] EML, §8.5 “Military Crimes,” 122.
[43] Akish, in the Book of Ether, formed a similar group among the Jaredites to slay their king (see Ether 8:7-19).
[44] Falk, “Law and Religion,” 4.
[45] Id., 5.
[46] Nephi was accused with his brother Lehi in Helaman 5:21 and by himself in Helaman 9:19.
Here is a bio on Mark Hales
Mark Hales has over 17 years of legal experience in areas of family, criminal, and civil law. He handles all types of domestic matters including, but not limited to, custody, divorce, child support, alimony, annulment, termination of parental rights, paternity, modifications, and adoptions. In addition, he defends clients charged with issues of domestic violence and abuse, stalking, violations of a protective order and other criminal charges. Mark is a certified mediator for all legal matters and is also a certified guardian ad litem.
Mark has been a volunteer Small Claims Court Judge since 2009 and has presided over five thousands of cases involving torts, breach of contract, and personal injury.
Mark previously spent time in American Samoa as an Assistant Attorney General. While there, Mark handled criminal cases ranging from “too many coconuts in the back of a pick-up truck” up to, and including, cases of murder, rape, incest, arson, and governmental corruption. He also defended the government in civil matters, provided legal counsel to the Governor and other departments, and was the Deputy Director of Consumer Protection.
Mark was elected to his first term on the Bluffdale City Council in 2019. Previously, he was the Chair of the Bluffdale Historic Preservation Commission and a member of the Board of Adjustments for Bluffdale and West Valley City. He also was on the Board of Directors for Camp Kostopulos, which is Utah’s #1 charity for children and adults with disabilities. Mark has his HAM radio license, has been a high school football coach, and has acted in several movies and plays.
Mark’s legal work and effort can best be summed up by United States District Court Senior Judge Reggie Walton when he wrote, “[Counsel] Hales has gone above and beyond the call of duty.” Mahjor v. Kempthorne, 518 F.Supp.2d 221, 240 (2007).
