When I was a missionary, I had a older sister companion that taught that when Jesus had finished his ministry in Jerusalem, he came and taught the people in the Americas. I called her into question. Didn't Jesus appear to the Nephite's right after his crucifixion? I was pretty adamant that Jesus visited the Americas the day after his resurrection while the people in Judea were sleeping. I kind of bullied her into accepting my timeline. Years later I realized that she was right. Jesus spoke to the people during the three days of destruction at the time of his death, but his visit to the temple Bountiful was some time, maybe months later. Here are the scriptures that support this idea.
The beginning of the sign:
3 Nephi 8:5 "And it came to pass in the thirty and fourth year, in the first month, on the 4th day of the month, there arose a great storm..."
Jesus' actual visit:
3 Nephi 10:18 "And it came to pass that in the ending of the thirty and fourth year, behold I will show unto that the people of Nephi who were spared, ...did have great favors poured out upon their heads, insomuch that soon after the ascension of Christ into heaven he did truly manifest himself unto them."
There are two schools of thought on this. Some scholars think Jesus appeared to the Nephites after his ascension into heaven before the day of Pentecost. That would put it around 40 days after his crucifixion. Others suggest that is was nearly a full year, since Mormon said it was "in the ending of the thirty and fourth year" while his appearance was in the first month of that year. They think that his appearance was part of the High Holy Days observed by Jews at the end of the levitical calendar and that is why everyone was gathered at the temple.
I favor the second explanation. I think the people experienced the destructions at Jesus' death and then had to wait almost a year before they saw him appear in person. Here are some reasons I think that.
When Jesus spoke to the people out of the darkness he told them that "in me is the Law of Moses fulfilled" (9:17) and that they should "offer unto me no more shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings." (9:19) This pronouncement entailed a major shift in how the people worshiped. Up to this time there were (presumably) coming to offer animal sacrifices to atone for sin and to be pronounced clean from defilement. The animal sacrifices were the main way that they worshiped.
It makes sense to me that after all the destruction, the people would have gotten to work repairing the damage. A group of believers would have been tasked to not only clean up and repair the temple, but also to rework it to function without animal sacrifices. This was no small task. How would they know how to set up a new form of worship? I would hope that some of the leaders, perhaps Nephi himself, received directions and supervised the work.
When the people came to the temple "they were marveling and wondering one with another and showing each other the great and marvelous change which had taken place." This sentence makes sense, if it were only a day after the destruction took place, but if it were 40 days after the calamities, they would have already seen all the destruction, but they wouldn't have had much time to repair the temple. There wouldn't have yet been many changes that they could marvel at. But if they had been away from the temple complex for almost a year, and workers had repaired and transformed the temple for worship without blood sacrifice, a lot of things would have changed, and they truly may have wondered.
One more thing that I thought was interesting. When Jesus appeared to the apostles after his resurrection, he showed them his "hands and his side" (John 20:20). When Jesus appeared to the people at the temple of Bountiful, he told them to "thrust your hands into my side, and also that you may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and feet." (3 Nephi 11:14). Why side first in the Americas? It is totally possible that the Nephites did not practice crucifixion--It was kind of a Roman thing--so showing someone the wounds in your hands wouldn't have meant that you were resurrected from the dead. People can survive hand wounds. But the wound in the side would have been fatal no matter if you were in Jerusalem or the New World. It is a small thing, but it suggests authenticity.
So what does this all mean? I think that the people of the New World, after all the destruction was done, had time to contemplate their experience and begin to make changes in their worship and lives. I think they even actively started to transform their temple worship from animal sacrifices to some kind of ceremony more like what temple worship is like today. It was when they were done with the major clean up and had started to transform their temple, that Jesus understood they were ready for his visit. Then once there, he showed the tokens of his death the way that would most clearly transmit his resurrected state.
No comments:
Post a Comment