Prepping my lesson. But I am intrigued by the following and I thought I would hopeful get your input:
Read Alma 30:7-11:
Quote:
|
(7) Now there was no law against a man's belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds. (8) For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve. (9) Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; or rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him; but if he did not believe in him there was no law to punish him. (10) But if he murdered he was punished unto death; and if he robbed he was also punished; and if he stole he was also punished; and if he committed adultery he was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished. (11) For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man's belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds.
|
Mormon digresses into a discussion of Nephite laws as he begins the Korihor story. I think it is interesting that equality ("for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds") is equated with the ability choose to serve God or not (Joshua 24:15).
- Do you find this surprising?
- Is equality related in some sense with the ability to choose to serve God or not?
- Does this definition or aspect of equality have any bearing on the way we read the rest of the Korihor narrative?
Don't have any good answers to these questions so I would thought I would throw this out there separately so it doesn't get swallowed up by the rest of the material