Having set up camp, Lehi named the river Laman, after his
eldest son. When he did this, he told
Laman, “O that thou mightest be like unto
this river, continually running into the fountain of all righteousness!” (1
Nephi 2:9). He then named the valley
Lemuel, after his second son. He did
this, telling Lemuel, “O that thou
mightest be like unto this valley, firm and steadfast [IE like Ezion-geber, the
Hebrew roots of which denote firmness and strength, or might of a man], and immovable
in keeping the commandments of the Lord!” (1 Nephi 2:10).
Nephi gives us our first introduction to his two older
brothers, Laman and Lemuel. (In the
remainder of his writings, with one exception, he will always refer to his two
brothers together, always as “Laman and Lemuel.”) He tells us that Laman and Lemuel were
stiffnecked (arrogant, stubborn; rebellious); they would murmur (a private
expression of dissatisfaction) against their father because he was a visionary
man.
As has been mentioned, Lehi was a wealthy man. Laman and Lemuel enjoyed that lifestyle. They were very dissatisfied with having left
all their wealth and comfortable lifestyle behind and went off into the
wilderness because of the “foolish imaginations of [Lehi].”
Ken Haubrock compares Laman and Lemuel with the third son,
Sam.
Though the journey had barely begun
in 1 Nephi 2:8–10, already we find Lehi cautioning Laman and Lemuel because of
their "stiffneckedness" (1 Nephi 2:11). Yet no mention is made of a
word of warning to Sam; it appears that Sam has made righteous decisions early
in life. This is further confirmed in 1 Nephi 2:16–17, where we read of Nephi's
cry "unto the Lord; and behold he did visit me." Significantly, Nephi
first shares this experience with his brother Sam. From this one can deduce a
special relationship of trust between these two brothers.[1]
Why would Lehi name a river or valley? Naming is a custom common among those in the
Middle East. Hugh Nibley explains this custom.
Lehi's intimacy with desert
practices becomes apparent right at the outset of his journey, not only in the
skillful way he managed things but also in the quaint and peculiar practices he
observed, such as those applying to the naming of places in the desert…
By what right do these people
rename streams and valleys to suit themselves? By the immemorial custom of the
desert, to be sure. Among the laws "which no Bedouin would dream of
transgressing," the first, according to Jennings-Bramley, is that
"any water you may discover, either in your own or in the territory of another
tribe, is named after you” … “One and the same place may have several names,
and the wady (valley) running close to the same, or the
mountain connected with it, will naturally be called differently by different
clans," according to Canaan…
This confusing custom of renaming
everything on the spot seems to go back to the earliest times, and
"probably, as often as not, the Israelites named for themselves their own
camps, or unconsciously confounded a native name in their carelessness." Yet
in spite of its undoubted antiquity, only the most recent explorers have
commented on this strange practice, which seems to have escaped the notice of
travelers until explorers in our own times started to make official maps.
Even more whimsical and senseless
to a westerner must appear the behavior of Lehi in naming a river after one son
and its valley after another. But the Arabs don't think that way, for Thomas
reports from the south country that "as is commonly the case in these mountains,
the water bears a different name from the wadi [valley]." Likewise the
Book of Mormon follows the Arabic system of designating Lehi's camp not by the
name of the river by which it stood (for rivers may easily dry up), but rather
by the name of the valley (1 Nephi 10:16; 16:6).[2]
The problem with Laman and Lemuel is they did not understand
the ways of the Lord and how he dealt with man.
They also rejected the idea that Jerusalem could be destroyed. They continued their murmurings to the point
where Nephi would describe them as “like
unto the Jews who were at Jerusalem, who sought to take away the life of my
father” (1 Nephi 2:13).
Hugh Nibley describes rising tensions in the family.
In the desert, trouble within the
family, which began in the city, only gets worse. Laman and Lemuel side with
the people at Jerusalem: "We perish if we leave Jerusalem," they
said. "You perish if you stay," said Nephi, because there isn't going
to be any Jerusalem. How does he know? "I have seen a vision" (2
Nephi 1:4). That is just what is wrong, say Laman and Lemuel. Here they are
being led by the "foolish imaginations" of "a visionary
man"—apiqqeah, one who sees things that others do not—to give
up "the land of their inheritance, and their gold, and their silver, and
their precious things," and for what? "To perish in the
wilderness" (1 Nephi 2:11). Jerusalem offered Laman and Lemuel wealth,
social position, the security of a great city with strong alliances (1 Nephi
2:13).[3]
The time came when Lehi had had enough of Laman and Lemuel’s
whining. Being filled with the Spirit,
he confronted them and confounded them.
Their “frames did shake before
him.” They no longer dared to
complain and did what Lehi commanded them (for a time).
After this powerful experience, Nephi suddenly writes, “my father dwelt in a tent” (1 Nephi
2:15). This statement almost seems out
of place as well as an obvious statement.
Why would Nephi write this? The
tent played an important role in family life.
It is most significant how Nephi
speaks of his father's tent; it is the official center of all administration
and authority. First the dogged insistence of Nephi on telling us again and
again that "my father dwelt in a tent" (1 Nephi 2:15; 9:1; 10:16;
16:6). So what? we ask, but to an Oriental that statement says everything.
Since time immemorial the whole population of the Near East have been either
tent-dwellers or house-dwellers, the people of the bait ash-sha'r or
the bait at-tin, "houses of hair or houses of clay" ... Not
only has it been the custom for herdsmen and traders to spend part of the year
in tents and part in houses, but "persons of distinction" in the East
have always enjoyed spending part of the year in tents for the pure pleasure of
a complete change.
It is clear from 1 Nephi 3:1; 4:38;
5:7; 7:5; 21—22; 15:1; and 16:10, that Lehi's tent is the headquarters for all
activities, all discussion and decisions.[4]
[1] Notes and Communications: Sam: A Just and
Holy Man, Ken Haubrock, Provo,
Utah: Maxwell Institute, accessed December 27, 2012.
[2] Lehi and the Arabs, Hugh W. Nibley, Provo, Utah:
Maxwell Institute, accessed December 27, 2012.
[3] Last Call: An Apocalyptic Warning from the
Book of Mormon, Hugh Nibley,
Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, accessed December 27, 2012.
[4] Man Versus Man, Hugh W. Nibley, Provo, Utah:
Maxwell Institute, accessed December 27, 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment