Alma 2:7-13

⁸ Now this did cause much joy in the hearts of those who were against him; but Amlici did stir up those who were in his favor to anger against those who were not in his favor. ⁹ And it came to pass that they gathered themselves together, and did consecrate Amlici to be their king. ¹⁰ Now when Amlici was made king over them he commanded them that they should take up arms against their brethren; and this he did that he might subject them to him.

Alma 2:8-10 (Emphasis mine)

Let’s go back to election night, 2008.  The results come in, and it becomes clear that Barak Obama is going to be elected the next president of the United States.  Later that night, John McCain comes out and announces that he rejects the results.  He has been appointed president by his supporters, and they are ready to take up arms against the government. 

This situation faces Alma (2) and the people of Zarahemla.  Most were pleased with the defeat of Amlici, but he was angry.  His supporters gathered and made him king.  He then had them prepare for war.  He was going to have his followers install him as king through violence.

Nephi(1) warned against priestcrafts after they had arrived in the New World.  He told us that the Lord  “commandeth that there shall be no priestcrafts; for, behold, priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion. Behold, the Lord hath forbidden this thing…” (2 Nephi 26:29-30).

Joseph Smith experienced what happens when leaders exercise unrighteous dominion over the people.  Writing from Liberty Jail, “[w]e have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion” (D&C 121:39).

Explaining what Amlici and his followers believe they had to do, Hugh Nibley observed that “[t]he church is an obstacle now; you can see that. Like a society of social freaks, they had to get rid of them because they never would accept [the Amlicites].” [1]

¹¹ Now the people of Amlici were distinguished by the name of Amlici, being called Amlicites; and the remainder were called Nephites, or the people of God. ¹² Therefore the people of the Nephites were aware of the intent of the Amlicites, and therefore they did prepare to meet them; yea, they did arm themselves with swords, and with cimeters, and with bows, and with arrows, and with stones, and with slings, and with all manner of weapons of war, of every kind. ¹³ And thus they were prepared to meet the Amlicites at the time of their coming.  And there were appointed captains, and higher captains, and chief captains, according to their numbers.

Alma 2:11-13 (Emphasis mine)

Amlici’s supporters called themselves Amlicites as a way to distinguish themselves from the Nephites. “[T]he Amlicites were distinguished from the Nephites, for they had marked themselves with red in their foreheads after the manner of the Lamanites; nevertheless they had not shorn their heads like unto the Lamanites” (Alma 3:4).

The Nephites knew “the intent of the Amlicites, and therefore they did prepare to meet them” (verse 12).  John Welch explains “[i]n the civil war with the Amlicites, for example, the Nephites evidently knew when and where the Amlicites would attack, for they had time to prepare and gather for the battle, knowing the ‘intent of the Amlicites’ and ‘the time of their coming’ (Alma 2:12-13).” [2]

They armed “themselves with swords, and with cimeters, and with bows, and with arrows, and with stones, and with slings, and with all manner of weapons of war, of every kind” (verse 13).  Critics of the Church argue the Nephites didn’t know what a cimeter was.  Paul Hoskisson explains that these critics…

“… base their claim on the mistaken assumption that scimitars did not exist in the pre-Islamic Old World and therefore could not have appeared among Book of Mormon … This assumption is based no doubt on one or more of the following considerations: (1) the scimitar is not mentioned earlier than the sixteenth century in English texts; (2) the Persian word samsir probably provided the etymon for the English word; and (3) the mistaken assumption that the period from A.D. 1000 to 1200 saw the ‘perfection of the Moslem scimitar.’ None of these observations asserts the presence or absence of scimitars in pre-Islamic times. Any arguments to the contrary based on these observations are simply arguments from silence and in this case would result in false conclusions.

“There can be no question that scimitars, or sickle swords, were known in the ancient Near East during the Late Bronze Period, that is, about six hundred years prior to Lehi's departure from Jerusalem.” [3] (Emphasis mine)

---

[1] Lecture 43: Alma 1-2, Hugh W. Nibley, Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, accessed February 22, 2012.

[2] Law and War in the Book of Mormon, John W. Welch, Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, accessed February 22, 2012.

[3] Scimitars, Cimeters! We Have Scimitars! Do We Need Another Cimeter?, Paul Y. Hoskisson, Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, accessed February 22, 2012.