"And my father dwelt in a tent" (1 Nephi 2:15)

Lehi's Tent

One of the truly remarkable and overlooked verses recorded by Nephi in the Book of Mormon is probably his shortest and most simple: "And my father dwelt in a tent" (1 Nephi 2:15). Some commentators suggest that this verse was a simple expression of Nephi's astonishment that his father, who used to be a man of material means, was now willing to live in a dwelling that offer much less comfort. The record states that Lehi "dwelt at Jerusalem in all his days" (1 Nephi 1:4). Thus, Lehi's living conditions undoubtedly changed as he adapted to the lifestyle of the nomad, but dwelling in a tent was not something completely foreign to him. This is suggested by an earlier notation made by Nephi that when his father departed into the wilderness, he "took nothing with him, save it were his family, and provisions, and tents. . ." (1 Nephi 2:4). Owing to the fact that he possessed tents, it reasonable to conclude that Lehi had more experience dwelling in them than what would have been discovered in this first epoch journey into the wilderness.

Nephi's record was written nearly 30 years after the actual events contained therein took place (see 2 Nephi 5:28-33). He further emphasized that upon "these plates" he recorded "the things of [his] soul" (2 Nephi 4:15) and did not "write anything upon plates save it be that [he thought] it be sacred" (1 Nephi 19:6) and "of worth unto the children of men" (1 Nephi 6:6). From a temporal perspective, Jacob noted that he could not "write but a little of [his] words, because of the difficulty of engraving [their] words upon plates" (Jacob 4:1). Nephi, his brothers, and Ishmael and his family all dwelt in tents as they traveled in the wilderness. So, why did Nephi make particular mention that his father dwelt in a tent when such a simple fact would have been more than obvious to any one reading the record? In light of all that is noted above, Nephi's mention of this rather ordinary fact must mean that he thought it was sacred and of worth to the children of men.

Although tents were the ordinary dwelling places of nomads, there were times when a tent represented much more. This was one of those times. The Hebrew for "tent" is o'-hel which means "a tent (as clearly conspicuous from a distance): covering, dwelling place, home, tabernacle, tent." In close connection herewith, the word "atonement" is derived from the Hebrew kaphar which means "to cover." Thus, the "covering of the tent" of the Tabernacle is symbolic of the covering provided by the Atonement for those who make the journey to come under its protection. Tent, therefore, is the name given to the dwelling places of many of the ancient patriarchs. Of particular interest is the description of the tent in which Abraham dwelt as he traveled from Ur, in Chaldea (i.e., Babylon):

Abraham's Tent

And I took Sarai, whom I took to wife when I was in Ur, in Chaldea, and Lot, my brother’s son, and all our substance that we had gathered, and the souls that we had won in Haran, and came forth in the way to the land of Canaan, and dwelt in tents as we came on our way;

Therefore, eternity was our covering and our rock and our salvation, as we journeyed from Haran by the way of Jershon, to come to the land of Canaan. (Abraham 2:15-16)

The conjunction "therefore" in verse 16 associates "tents" in verse 15 with "eternity as a covering, a rock, and salvation". In short, it places Abraham's tent in context of the "tent" of the Tabernacle, the name of the "covering" built by Moses and "every wisehearted man" in Israel (Exodus 35:10). To Moses, the Lord instructed:

And thou shalt make curtains of goats’ hair to be a covering upon the tabernacle: eleven curtains shalt thou make.

And thou shalt make fifty taches of brass, and put the taches into the loops, and couple the tent together, that it may be one.

And the remnant that remaineth of the curtains of the tent, the half curtain that remaineth, shall hang over the backside of the tabernacle.

And a cubit on the one side, and a cubit on the other side of that which remaineth in the length of the curtains of the tent, it shall hang over the sides of the tabernacle on this side and on that side, to cover it.

And thou shalt make a covering for the tent of rams’ skins dyed red, and a covering above of badgers’ skins. (Exodus 26:7, 11-14; note that "badger's skins" is a mistranslation made by the King James translators. In each case, it should be translated as "dolphins' skins").

When King David afterwards became determined to build a house for the Lord, the Lord instructed Nathan, the prophet, to go to David and inform him that he was not to be the one who was to build a temple. He further informed Nathan that He had not dwelt in a house since the day when the children of Israel were brought up out of Egypt "but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle" (2 Samuel 7:4-7).

The tent in which Lehi dwelt was distinct from the tent in which Nephi and other members of the family dwelt. This is observed in the fact that Lehi's tent was the place where Nephi, his brothers, and Ishmael and his family congregated to offer sacrifice and burnt offerings:

And it came to pass that we did come down unto the tent of our father. And after I and my brethren and all the house of Ishmael had come down unto the tent of my father, they did give thanks unto the Lord their God; and they did offer sacrifice and burnt offerings unto him (1 Nephi 7:22).

The tent in which Lehi dwelt was a temple! Stating that his father, Lehi, dwelt in a tent was, therefore, "sacred" (1 Nephi 19:6), "of worth unto the children of men" (1 Nephi 6:6), and reflected "the things of [his] soul" (2 Nephi 4:15). Thus, despite "the difficulty of engraving [their] words upon plates" (Jacob 4:1), this simple sentence was certainly worth the effort and space.

As an aside, I think it is interesting to note that implicit in the concept of tent was the idea that it was "clearly conspicuous from a distance." Most temples today are built on high places and are such large edifices as to be "clearly conspicuous from a distance." In this regard, the Hebrew for "tent" is derived from from the primitive root word aw-hal' which means "to be clear: shine." In the dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland temple, the prophet Joseph Smith made this important connection:

Remember all thy church, O Lord, with all their families, and all their immediate connections, with all their sick and afflicted ones, with all the poor and meek of the earth; that the kingdom, which thou hast set up without hands, may become a great mountain and fill the whole earth;

That thy church may come forth out of the wilderness of darkness, and shine forth fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners;

And be adorned as a bride for that day when thou shalt unveil the heavens, and cause the mountains to flow down at thy presence, and the valleys to be exalted, the rough places made smooth; that thy glory may fill the earth (D&C 109:72-74).

Referring to this bride, John, the Revelator recorded: "And there appeared a great sign in heaven, in the likeness of things on the earth; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars" (JST Revelation 12). When Joseph Smith built the Nauvoo temple, it was built with moonstones at its base. Above the moonstones were sunstones that circumferenced the temple round about. Around the top of the temple and under its eaves, were five and six-pointed stars, respectively. Wandle Mace—the foreman for all of the framework done on the Nauvoo Temple—left behind a statement that makes a clear connection between the visions of John the Revelator and the design of the Nauvoo temple. He said,

The order of architecture [on the Nauvoo Temple] was unlike anything in existence; it was purely original; being a representation of the Church, the Bride, the Lamb's wife. John the Revelator, in the 12[th] chapter [and] first verse of [the book of Revelation] says, 'And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars.' This is portrayed in the beautifully cut stone of this grand temple (Wandle Mace, autobiography, 207, L. Tom Perry Special Collections Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah).

This woman, according to JST Revelation 12:7, is the Church of God. On earth, it is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Its temples on earth represent the bride being adorned for the coming of the bridegroom. They are clearly conspicuous from a distance and are the means by which the "church comes forth out of the wilderness of darkness, and shines forth fair as the moon, clear as the sun". Upon the east wall of each bride is the name of her husband, "The house of the LORD", symbolizing the fact that she has taken upon herself His name in solemn marriage. Another name for "house" is "tabernacle" and another name for "tabernacle" is "the body". Thus, she, the Church, is also referred to in scriptures as the "body of Christ" (see 1 Corinthians 12:27 and Ephesians 4:12). In her, the new birth occurs and the children of Christ are brought forth. Such children are "pure in heart" (D&C 97:21), or Zion (see JST Revelation 12:2-3, 7 and D&C 105:32).

What Nephi wrote concerning his father's tent places him squarely in an Old Testament setting. Maintaining this verse in the translation of the Book of Mormon is a confirmation that the Book of Mormon begins as an Old Testament book. If also confirms the truthfulness of its translation and witnesses that its translator, Joseph Smith, was a prophet, seer, and revelator. Of this I bear witness.

The Lost Sheep

NOTE: If you have not yet read the previous blog entitled The Ninety and Nine, I invite you to do so prior to reading this blog to provide you with the proper context of the following comments.

There are several details regarding the Parable of the Lost Sheep that I intentionally left out of my prior blog concerning the ninety and nine. This I did for two reasons. First, these details require me to navigate waters that are deeper than I will ordinarily risk with others aboard and, second, these details properly belong in a blog of their own. When included, however, they bring the parable to a whole new level and give it life far beyond its simple words. Keeping in mind that Christ spoke in parables so that his teachings would not be understood by those lacking ears to hear (see Matthew 13:10-13), it holds that the scathing rebuke of the ninety and nine was not the parable's true meaning; it was too obvious. Even the Pharisees, who thought of themselves as "just persons, which needed no repentance" (see Luke 15:7), could not have missed the Master's scathing rebuke. Rather, the unheard message pertained to the Shepherd and His relationship with the lost ewe and the wilderness into which He went that He might find her.

From a brief comment in the prior blog, it will be recalled that when Jesus came to the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, a woman of Canaan came out unto him, saying, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil." But "he answered her not a word." Consequently, the woman addressed the Lord's disciples who were also present. They, in turn, besought Jesus to "send her away; for she crieth after us." Breaking his silence to the woman, Jesus refused her request a second time explaining, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Drawing closer, she then worshipped him, saying, "Lord, help me." One could hardly imagine anyone refusing this poor soul. Yet, for a third time, the Lord dismissed her request and said, "It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs." Acknowledging the distinction the Lord had made between Jew and Gentile, she responded, "Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table." Relenting, Jesus granted her request and said, "O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt." And the record notes that "her daughter was made whole from that very hour" (Matthew 15:24).

This dialogue should, at a minimum, cause the reader to question why Jesus discriminated against this woman of Gentile descent; especially in light of the scriptural expression that "he inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile" (2 Nephi 26:33). Today, Jesus would be dragged before Supreme Court of the United States for racial profiling. But Jesus was a nonconformist and expressed open resentment towards the Gentiles (see Matthew 10:16). This aversion towards them was not only seen in his mortal ministry, but continued to be witnessed following his resurrection. Speaking to a remnant of the House of Israel in America and explaining to them some remarks he had made to his twelve apostles regarding his visit to other sheep which were not of their fold (see John 10:16), Jesus said:

And verily I say unto you, that ye are they of whom I said: Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

And they understood me not, for they supposed it had been the Gentiles; for they understood not that the Gentiles should be converted through their preaching.

And they understood me not that I said they shall hear my voice; and they understood me not that the Gentiles should not at any time hear my voice—that I should not manifest myself unto them save it were by the Holy Ghost. (3 Nephi 15:21-23)

Why would the Shepherd permit the Gentiles to neither hear his voice nor see his face? Why did they have to be converted through the voice of the twelve? Why could they not be "other sheep" too? Thankfully, it is not my purpose here to discuss all the reasons why Jesus had a predilection towards Israel and ambivalence towards the Gentiles (see 2 Nephi 33:7-9, Ether 12:35-37, and D&C 135:5). This, I hope, to do in a future article. Rather, the foregoing illustration and verses are given to prove that the Lord's proclivity towards Israel is very real and has faithfully continued since the day she was born as a nation (see Deuteronomy 7:6-8). Although there may be numerous reasons for this predilection, they can condensed into one--Israel is the wife of Jesus Christ. This is a concept that has been largely lost to latter-day Israel. Could there be any better reason for Jesus Christ to love Israel! Is there any other fundamental reason why He left His Father and Mother? . . . that He might cleave unto His wife! (see Ephesians 5:30-32).

As taught throughout the scriptures, Israel's true relationship with the Lord is that of being his wife. Isaiah wrote: "For thy Maker is thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called" (Isaiah 54:5). The apostle Paul likewise noted this relationship in many of his letters (see 1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 4:15-16, Ephesians 5:23-32, Colossians 1:18, and Colossians 2:19). But, in his second letter to the Corinthians, the apostle added that he, with a godly jealousy, was one who had arranged for the marriage and had "espoused [them] to one husband" (2 Corinthians 11:1-2). In his letter to the Romans, Paul mentions being married "to him who is raised from the dead" and further explains that the purpose of this joining together of head and body is so that they "should bring forth fruit unto God" (see Romans 7:4). In short, the purpose of the Husband and his wife is to bring forth a child (I will say very little about the child in this article). Indeed, the gospel is family-centered.

Thus being, the scriptures are nothing more than a record of the love-affair between the Husband and his wife. Her millennia of infidelity is, therefore, a principle topic addressed throughout the ancient records (see, in particular, Ezekiel 16, Ezekiel 23, and the whole of Hosea). The prophet Ezekiel lived during an era of the wife's adultery, or turning to "strangers instead of her husband" (Ezekiel 16:32). Jeremiah likewise experienced Israel's departure from her Husband and described it as treachery. "Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband," he wrote, "so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel" (Jeremiah 3:20). I found it of great interest that Jeremiah used this word to describe the wife's adulterous conduct inasmuch as the word treachery means "a violation of faith, betrayal of trust, an act of perfidy, faithlessness, or treason." How appropriate!

I wish that such descriptions of the Lord's wife were confined to Old Testament times. Nonetheless, in a revelation given to the prophet Joseph Smith in August 1831, the Lord declared that many in Israel (i.e., his wife) had "turned away from my commandments and have not kept them" (D&C 63:13). Continuing, the Lord explained to the prophet that "there were among you adulterers and adulteresses; some of whom have turned away from you, and others remain with you that hereafter shall be revealed" (D&C 63:14). For such treachery, the Lord afterwards outlined three penalties that shall come upon all saints who turn from their Husband and, thereby, commit adultery in their hearts: 1) fear, 2) judgment as the snare, and 3) the pit which burneth with fire and brimstone (see D&C 63:15-17). Even though it seems that there my be more penalties listed in these verses, I purposefully limited my observation to these three because they are the very ones enumerated by Isaiah as pertaining to the latter-days. As you read them, notee how Isaiah also uses the word treacherous to describe the woman of whom he is speaking:

From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, even glory to the righteous. But I said, My leanness, my leanness, woe unto me! the treacherous dealers have dealt treacherously; yea, the treacherous dealers have dealt very treacherously.

Fear, and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, O inhabitant of the earth.

And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake (Isaiah 24:16-18).

In contrast to these instances of infidelity, all of the sacred records detail of the Husband's patience and long-suffering with His whorish wife (see Jacob 5). And, central to the gospel, the scriptures record the depths to which He was willing to descend (see D&C 88:6) that He might bring her out of the pit into which she had fallen to redeem her (see Alma 7:11-13). For so many years, it has seemed as though this relationship has been a one-sided love-affair. Is it any wonder that the Husband occasionally tired of His wife's infidelity and forsook her for awhile. Isaiah wrote of such a time, but also described the willingness of the Lord to return to His wife to encircle Her in the arms of His love:

For the Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God.

For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.

In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer (Isaiah 54:6-8).

The earliest stages of this spousal-relationship between Christ and Israel is portrayed in the apostle John's panoramic view called the Book of Revelation. In Chapter 12 thereof, John recorded that "there appeared a great sign in heaven, in the likeness of things on the earth; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars" (JST, Revelation 12:1). He shortly, thereafter, identified this woman in heaven as "the church of God" (JST, Revelation 1:7). And because "the head of the woman is the man" (see 1 Corinthians 11:3, both the Husband and his wife are placed center-stage in this first verse . . . and upon Him rested the crown of twelve stars.

With the word, or seed, of her Husband planted in her womb, she fulfilled her divine role and brought forth her firstborn son, "who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron" (JST, Revelation 12:3). Because "every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness (see Alma 32:31), the child was defined by John as "the kingdom of our God and his Christ." (JST, Revelation 12:7). Joseph Smith more precisely identified this child as Zion, for "the kingdom of Zion," he wrote, "is in very deed the kingdom of our God and his Christ" (see D&C 105:32-33). The Husband, then a Father, was crowned "King of Zion" (see Moses 7:53) and his royal subjects were given a name . . . "the pure in heart" (see D&C 97:21).

On the other side of the spectrum, John also saw a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, stand "before the woman which was delivered, ready to devour her child after it was born" (JST, Revelation 12:4, compare D&C 76:25-29). It was then, that the "woman (or Church of God) fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore years" (JST, Revelation 12:1–5).

By now, you may be wondering what does all the foregoing have to do with the parable of the lost sheep. You might have even forgotten that this blog was about that parable. Well, the connection between all of the foregoing and the parable is this found in a few words. The Greek for wilderness is érēmos. It has various meanings including "solitary, lonely, desolate, uninhabited" and "deprived of the aid and protection of others, especially of friends, acquaintances, kindred." But the definition that is of most interest is "a flock deserted by the shepherd" or "a woman neglected by her husband, from whom the husband withholds himself." I find these definitions to be spectacular in context of both the parable and John's revelation.

The wilderness into which the Shepherd went to recover his lost sheep in JST, Luke 15:2 is the very same wilderness into which the woman in Revelation 12:5 fled. Hence, the lost sheep is the Lord's bride. The characteristics between the lost sheep and the Church of God are identical. No wonder he didn't hesitate to leave the ninety and nine after that which was lost. No wonder he took her home to his friends and neighbors rejoicing. It is also of interest that the Greek for friends as used in JST, Luke 15:6 is phílos meaning “friend, to be friendly to one, wish him well, he who associates familiarly with one, or a companion." But, in context with the parable, it means "one of the bridegroom's friends who on his behalf asked the hand of the bride and rendered him various services in closing the marriage and celebrating the nuptials." Hence, similar to the apostle Paul who had arranged for the marriage of those to whom he had written and had "espoused [them] to one husband" (2 Corinthians 11:1-2), the friends to whom the Shepherd took his lost sheep were those who would arrange for the marriage of the lamb.

Indeed, this parable has great depth and meaning . . . some of which has yet to be mentioned. What began as a question concerning why Christ would eat with sinners concluded with a feast . . . the marriage supper of the Lamb.