Nephi’s use of scripture in his two books of writing has been well documented and carefully studied, from his allusion to Hebrew Bible prophets such as David and Moses to his extensive quotations from the writings of Isaiah.[1] Nephi’s record is one that is quite comfortable interacting with the writings and records of those who preceded him. Nephi even encourages his people to find meaning and application in their scripture study:

And I did read many things unto them which were written in the books of Moses; but that I might more fully persuade them to believe in the Lord their Redeemer I did read unto them that which was written by the prophet Isaiah; for I did liken all scriptures unto us, that it might be for our profit and learning. Wherefore I spake unto them, saying: Hear ye the words of the prophet, ye who are a remnant of the house of Israel, a branch who have been broken off; hear ye the words of the prophet, which were written unto all the house of Israel, and liken them unto yourselves, that ye may have hope as well as your brethren from whom ye have been broken off; for after this manner has the prophet written. (1 Nephi 19:23–24)[2]

When Jacob, Nephi’s younger brother, takes up care of the small plates about fifty-five years following the exodus of Lehi’s family from Jerusalem (see Jacob 1:1), he records his own, albeit substantially shorter, record. As with Nephi’s writings, Jacob’s record also demonstrates a clear and careful engagement with scripture, one that attempts to “liken” scripture to his own people in their own circumstances. But Jacob’s use of scripture remains somewhat less studied than that of his brother Nephi.[3] In this paper I seek to carefully explore the many instances where Jacob weaves the scripture and narrative of the Old Testament into his own record.[4] Why, for example, does he choose the passages and persons that he does? How do these quotations or allusions add to his argument?[5] Does Jacob find meaning in the stories and accounts of the Old Testament in the same sense that Nephi finds meaning in the stories of Moses? And ultimately, what can we learn from Jacob’s words?

This chapter will proceed as follows. First I will work through the text of Jacob sequentially, identifying several important intersections between the Old Testament and the book of Jacob and providing an extended analysis of those passages.[6] I will endeavor to show why Jacob might have chosen these specific passages and how they support his larger argument and purpose.[7] In the second part of the paper, I will look at how Jacob may have drawn upon the narrative of the Old Testament, specifically the record describing the sayings and doings of his biblical namesake, Jacob the son of Isaac, in the construction of his record. Finally, I will consider what Jacob’s use of scripture can teach readers about Jacob as a prophet, as a person, and as a writer.

Jacob’s Use of Old Testament—Language

Jacob 1:7 // Psalm 95:8–11

In composing his record, Jacob seems to have two overriding concerns: first, that the Nephites don’t believe they are still part of the covenant people due to their relocation to the Americas, far removed from the biblical promised land; and second, that the Nephites don’t appreciate the severity of the consequences that come from not living up to the expectations of their covenants.[8] Jacob’s concern and anxiety over the Nephites’ recognition of and faithfulness to their covenant status can be seen in the way he integrates phrases from the Old Testament into his record. His integrations are typically not direct, lengthy quotes, but shorter phrases from one or more Old Testament passages. Jacob often uses language that is specific enough to be identifiable, but not specific enough to be obvious. These subtle but striking connections bring into stark relief both his hope and his fear as he makes comparisons between his Nephite contemporaries and their Israelite predecessors.

Consider, for example, Psalm 95. This is a short psalm that divides evenly into two very different halves.[9] In the first half of the psalm the people sing praises to Jehovah, celebrating his power and might. He is the “rock of our salvation” (v. 1) and the “great King above all gods” (v. 3), while we are “the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand” (v. 7). Let us rejoice, the first part of the psalm encourages, in his majesty and might. Jehovah is the God above all other gods, and we are invited to enter into his presence. The second half of the psalm, however, takes on a less optimistic tone. Beginning in v. 8, where Jacob begins his allusion, the language of rejoicing becomes an oracle of warning. This is not the first time, the psalmist reminds us, that Israel has found herself in this position. Centuries in the past Israel had stood on the precipice of entering into the presence of God, freed from the gods of Egypt by the almighty Jehovah. But Israel had forfeited that privilege, doubting that the Lord could preserve them even in the face of all he had done. Encamped at Meribah, suffering from thirst, the Israelites complained to Moses that they would have been better off dying in Egypt than serving Jehovah in the wilderness. Jehovah instructed Moses to strike a rock that produced water for the Israelites, but the damage had been done: “Because ye believed me not . . . ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them” (Numbers 20:12; compare Exodus 17:1–7).

Drawing from this history, Jacob begins his record on the small plates by identifying a certain tension or anxiety that he feels as he reflects upon the current status quo of the Nephites. On one hand, the spiritual leaders of the Nephites have been exceedingly blessed with “many revelations, and the spirit of much prophecy” (Jacob 1:6). Jacob emphasizes that he and others have labored diligently to pass on these revealed truths to the Nephites, inviting them to “come unto Christ, and partake of the goodness of God” (v. 7). Yet on the other hand, Jacob seems to sense the possibility that the Nephites may not accept this invitation, and this sets the stage for his allusion to Psalm 95. Compare these passages, from Psalm 95 and Jacob 1, respectively (emphasis added):

Harden not your heart, as in the provocation [Hebrew Meribah], and as in the day of temptation [Hebrew Massah] in the wilderness: When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work. Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said, It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways: Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest. (Psalm 95:8–11)

Wherefore we labored diligently among our people, that we might persuade them to come unto Christ, and partake of the goodness of God, that they might enter into his rest, lest by any means he should swear in his wrath they should not enter in, as in the provocation in the days of temptation while the children of Israel were in the wilderness. (Jacob 1:7)

Jacob’s introduction of Psalm 95 here suggests that he sees the Nephites as symbolically standing, like the Israelites of old, at the waters of Meribah. For Jacob, who never lived in Jerusalem, never walked the streets of the holy city, this comparison may have been very striking. He sees his people in a new promised land and is worrying that they are making the same mistakes as the Israelites of old. His use of Psalm 95:8–11 alerts his audience that he, at least, has not forgotten why Lehi had to leave Jerusalem and what happened after they left, and that he is not taking this new promised land for granted. Like the Israelites, the Nephites have been preserved from destruction. Like the Israelites, the Nephites have been led by the strength of the Lord through great perils, have crossed a desert, and have successfully navigated a large body of water. Like the Israelites, the Nephites have been invited to occupy a land of promise. The question for Jacob is simple: Can the Nephites avoid the sins that befell the Israelites? Can they avoid becoming so comfortable with the Lord’s hand that they confuse it with their own? The specter of Meribah runs throughout the book of Jacob, serving as a grim reminder that a God who has already denied one group of covenant people from entering into his presence will not hesitate to do so again.[10]

Jacob 4:5 // Genesis 15:6[11]

Jacob 4 finds Jacob looking to the future, specifically to future readers of the small plates. Jacob expresses his gratitude that a medium exists upon which he is able to record his thoughts because it enables him to preserve the cares and concerns of himself and his Nephite contemporaries for those who will come after him. Notably, the first item he raises, the primary idea that he wants his future readers to be aware of, is that he and other Nephites (and previous prophets) possessed a belief in Jesus Christ hundreds of years prior to Jesus’s actual birth. For Jacob, this is a theological hallmark for him and for those who shared his belief. They are perhaps defined more by this singular idea than by any other. It is in this context that Jacob raises the issue of the law of Moses. He and other Nephites keep the law because it serves as a constant reminder of their belief in the future Savior. Jacob, of course, does not believe that salvation comes through obeying the tenets of the law of Moses, as Sherem appears to subscribe to in Jacob 7. Rather, to Jacob, the law’s primary value comes in how it consistently directs its adherents to a belief in Jesus through the proscribed actions it requires.

At this point, in Jacob 4, Jacob points out an additional contribution of the law of Moses (emphasis added):

And for this intent we keep the law of Moses, it pointing our souls to him; and for this cause it is sanctified unto us for righteousness, even as it was accounted[12] unto Abraham in the wilderness to be obedient unto the commands of God in offering up his son Isaac, which is a similitude of God and his Only Begotten Son. (v. 5)

Jacob’s statement uses similar phrasing to Genesis 15:6 (emphasis added):

And he [Abraham] believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

In Genesis 15, Abraham is promised by Jehovah that his offspring will be as numerous as the stars in the heaven, if they were able to be numbered. The problem for Abraham, however, is how to reconcile this promise with his current state of childlessness. However, Abraham chooses to put his faith in Jehovah’s words and subsequently performs the covenant ceremony (vv. 7–21). The Hebrew words that are translated as “counted” (Hebrew hesheb) and “righteousness” (Hebrew tzedeqah)[13] are difficult ones to define with absolute certainty, but we can gather that Abraham’s bold expression of faith was “reckoned” or “imputed” to him for “righteousness.”[14] In other words, an expression of belief or confidence in a future, unrealized event can lead to God granting us a form of “righteousness”—some sort of spiritual blessing.

For Jacob, then, Genesis’s language provides a valuable framework for understanding why following the law of Moses would be so important for a people who also subscribe to the doctrine of Christ. Thus Jacob presents the argument that when the law of Moses is practiced in a context removed from a belief in Jesus Christ, the law loses something of its salvific potency. It becomes like a lamp without a lightbulb or a car without a battery. In contrast, when the law of Moses is observed within the context of a faith centered in the (at the time) unrealized coming of Christ, the law of Moses becomes “sanctified” unto those who observe it, in the same way that Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac in Genesis 22 was “accounted” to him. Likely Jacob saw a link between these two actions—namely, his following the law with an eye toward Christ and Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac—in how they both typified the future sacrifice of Jesus. In the process, Jacob reveals an important insight into Nephite religious observance. In a book focused so heavily on Jesus Christ and salvation through his name, the law of Moses may get lost in the shuffle, with readers left to think that it was something that the Nephites simply followed because they were told to while they bided their time for the main event. But Jacob 4:5 suggests that the Nephites followed the law of Moses because they saw in its observance something efficacious and truly meaningful, namely a means through which they could obtain “righteousness.”

Jacob 4:15–17 // Psalm 118:22 and Isaiah 28:16

Following his discussion of the prophetic foreknowledge of Jesus Christ, Jacob turns his attention to what he considers to be the most troublesome and potentially damning issue for the Jews as a people: what Jacob terms their “blindness” (Jacob 4:14).[15] As Jacob describes it, this “blindness” is the result of the Jewish people being unsatisfied with the plainness of the gospel as it had been delivered to them by the prophets over the years. Jacob explains that the Jewish people “sought for things that they could not understand” and, rather than delighting in the plainness of the gospel, began “looking beyond the mark” (v. 14). Because of this “blindness,” the Jewish people “must needs fall,” having no one to blame but themselves. Jacob even ascribes to God an active role in this process of “blindness,” writing that “God hath done it, that they may stumble” (v. 14).[16]

This elaboration of Jewish dissatisfaction with current conditions provides the context for Jacob’s next foray into intertextuality, Jacob 4:15, where Jacob once again weaves a series of Old Testament allusions into his own writings (emphasis added):

And now I, Jacob, am led on by the Spirit unto prophesying; for I perceive by the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that by the stumbling of the Jews they will reject the stone upon which they might build and have safe foundation. But behold, according to the scriptures, this stone shall become the great, and the last, and the only sure foundation, upon which the Jews can build. And now, my beloved, how is it possible that these, after having rejected the sure foundation, can ever build upon it, that it may become the head of their corner? (vv. 15–17)

Jacobs’s words here allude to two specific Old Testament passages (emphasis added):

The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. (Psalm 118:22)

Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste. (Isaiah 28:16)

In context, Psalm 118 is a psalm of deliverance and celebration. Israel has won a great (perhaps unexpected) victory, and now the joyful Israelites march through the streets of Jerusalem toward the temple.[17] The psalmist declares proudly that the Lord “is on [his] side” (v. 6) and that it is “better to trust in the Lord” (vv. 8–9). Toward the end of the Psalm, the image of a stone is introduced. This stone, once rejected, has now become “the head stone of the corner” (v. 22). While there is a great deal of ambiguity surrounding just what the stone refers to, one interpretation is that it refers to the king himself, the man who led Israel to victory in the face of criticism and doubt.[18] The king’s trust in the Lord, even in the face of daunting circumstances, has found the king vindicated in the eyes of the people.

Isaiah 28:16 also employs the image of a “stone,” as the seer again entreats the kingdom of Judah to stand firm in the Lord. The kingdom of Assyria has threatened to invade Judah and conquer her, as they had previously done with the Northern Kingdom of Israel in 722 BC. Judah is faced with a critical decision: will she reach out to another kingdom, such as Egypt, for assistance, or will she remain firm and place confidence and trust in the Lord? In verse 16, Isaiah hints that the Lord has been working for a long while to establish a measure of protection that will allow Judah to repel the Assyrians. Isaiah calls this measure of protection a “stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation.” What exactly Isaiah has in mind here remains a mystery. Is this a reference to the Messiah/king? The temple? The law of Moses? The covenant? While the exact identity of the stone is uncertain,[19] Isaiah’s message is clear—Judah already possesses what they need and should steer clear of aligning with Egypt.

It is easy to see why Jacob would latch on to both of these passages, for both play into the theme of “blindness” that Jacob has been developing throughout Jacob 4.[20] The builders of Psalm 118 initially reject the stone, and the Judean monarchs of Isaiah 28 fail to realize what God has been building in their midst all along. Jacob worries that this blindness will cause the Jews to reject the “head stone of the corner,” the “sure foundation,” which he interprets to be Jesus Christ, the coming Messiah or king. He asks, if and when the Jews do reject Jesus, “how is it possible . . . that they can ever build upon [the foundation]?” In other words, how can something that has been rejected become so important that it provides a foundation or a cornerstone to those very people? What deliverance can Israel expect if they continue to reject the instrument of their deliverance? Jacob’s anxiety over Israel’s fate continues to build and leads him to promise to speak prophetically. In order to provide a context for his prophecy, Jacob first quotes an allegory of an olive tree attributed to an Israelite prophet named Zenos and preserved upon the brass plates. If anything can lift the scales of darkness from the eyes of his fellow Jews, Jacob believes, it will be this allegory.

Zenos’s allegory in Jacob 5 uses the technical language of olive tree horticulture to allegorically describe the dealings of God with his covenant people from beginning to end.[21] Zenos begins by describing the origin of the House of Israel as an olive tree that is planted in a vineyard. Over time, some of the branches of this olive tree begin to decay, leading the lord of the vineyard to dig and prune around the tree. The effort is partially successful, but the top of the tree continues to decay. The lord of the vineyard takes more drastic action by cutting out and burning the most decayed branches, grafting in branches from wild olive trees, and taking some of the natural branches and grafting them into trees in the outer parts of the vineyard. Over a period of a long time, the lord of the vineyard will return periodically to check on the status of the olive tree, which has brought forth good fruit, as have most of the natural branches that were grafted into the wild olive trees. Unfortunately, after another period of time the lord returns to find the olive tree and the natural branches bearing only bad fruit, but rather than giving up on the tree and destroying it, the lord tries to preserve it by grafting back into the olive tree all the branches he had grafted out earlier. Additionally, he cuts out any branches bringing forth wild fruit until no more wild fruit is found on the tree. While the lord’s efforts are successful for a time, the wild fruit eventually returns, resulting in the lord of the vineyard burning down the olive tree.

It is not difficult to see why Jacob would find relevance in Zenos’s allegory. Jacob is dealing with a people he perceives as being recalcitrant in their worship, rejecting the Lord in favor of a complicated devotion (itself the imposed consequence of “looking beyond the mark”). In Zenos’s allegory, the lord of the vineyard wrestles with an olive tree that refuses to fulfill its purpose and bring forth good fruit. Again and again the lord schemes to find a way to bring out the tree’s full potential. Jehovah acts likewise with Israel, whether by bringing in non-Israelites to merge with Israel or by scattering Israel to the further parts of the earth (as is the case with the Nephites, among others). In both cases, success is fleeting, but the Lord continues to try, giving the tree (Israel) every chance to find a sustained positive trajectory. The terrifying question that hovers over the allegory (and Israel’s current predicament) is this: When will the Lord, out of frustration, simply move on and leave the tree to its fate?

Jacob 6:2–4 // Isaiah 11:11; 65:2

It is this question that Jacob turns to as chapter 6 opens. Jacob finally delivers the prophecy that he alluded to back in Jacob 4 (emphasis added):

And the day that he shall set his hand again the second time to recover his people, is the day, yea, even the last time, that the servants of the Lord shall go forth in his power, to nourish and prune his vineyard; and after that the end soon cometh. And how blessed are they who have labored diligently in his vineyard; and how cursed are they who shall be cast out into their own place! And the world shall be burned with fire. And how merciful is our God unto us, for he remembereth the house of Israel, both roots and branches; and he stretches forth his hands unto them all the day long; and they are a stiffnecked and a gainsaying people; but as many as will not harden their hearts shall be saved in the kingdom of God. (Jacob 6:2–4)

In constructing this prophecy, Jacob carefully weaves the following two Old Testament passages into his own words (emphasis added):

And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. (Isaiah 11:11)

I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts. (Isaiah 65:2)

Due to the circumstances behind these prophecies, both of these biblical passages would appeal to Jacob and add an additional voice of authority to his own prophecy. The first passage, Isaiah 11, appears to refer back to the exodus from Egypt, declaring that God will, on a second occasion, reach out and gather to him the fragments of his covenant people.[22] Isaiah’s reference to many geographic areas, such as “Egypt” and the “islands of the sea,” suggests that God’s reach can extend anywhere on the earth. The second allusion is drawn from a poignant scene in Isaiah 65 where Jehovah laments how many times he has reached out to his people and begged them to return to him, to accept him once more as their God.[23] It is not he who must change direction and focus; it is not he who must adapt to them. Rather it is Israel who, through their stubbornness, set off in a problematic direction “after their own thoughts” (Isaiah 65:2). One cannot claim to be following God while also doling out the terms of that arrangement. Instead, one follows God, and God lays out the terms. For those willing to accept that arrangement, the Lord’s hands remain open and welcoming.

While Isaiah’s prophecy in Isaiah 11 does not lay out the timing in which this “second” recovery will occur, Jacob applies the temporal blueprint of the olive-tree allegory and prophecies that this act of gathering will occur in “the last time.”[24] Jacob is attempting to assuage his fellow Nephites, men and women who feel cut off and alone, believing that they and their descendants will live out their days forgotten in a strange land. Jacob’s reassurance comes in the form of a reminder that, even centuries into the future, God will still be engaged in the act of bringing his people home, no matter how far away they may have been scattered by the various world empires. Jacob’s allusion to Isaiah 65:2 serves to remind the Nephites that God has not forgotten them and eagerly awaits their return. This same allusion also warns the Nephites that they could miss out on this reunion due to their stubbornness and refusal to bend their will to that of Jehovah.

Jacob 6:6 // Psalm 95:7–8

Jacob’s continued anxiety over the recalcitrance of the Nephites can be seen in his final Old Testament allusion, which is, fittingly enough, a repetition of the first Old Testament passage he quoted in his record, the warning from Psalm 95:7–8 (emphasis added):

Yea, today, if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts; for why will ye die? (Jacob 6:6)

For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice, Harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness. (Psalm 95:7–8)

Through Jacob’s prophecy and the Old Testament prophecies he quotes, the Nephites have “heard [the Lord’s] voice.” It is now up to them to find a way to soften their hearts and yield their wills to Jehovah. Jacob’s rhetorical question “for why will ye die?” serves to tie a nice bow on his argument by placing the responsibility for the Nephites’ choice solely upon them. While they may be strangers in a foreign land, perceiving themselves as forgotten outcasts, God knows them and has a plan for them if they will yield to his will. Their “death” would only result from a conscious choice to diverge from Jehovah’s path, to stubbornly walk in their own way, to ignore the hands of Jehovah that led them to the promised land and that remain spread out, awaiting their hopeful return. As with the previous allusions, Jacob’s weaving of Old Testament language into his sermons accentuates and enlivens his message: The Nephites are very much still a part of covenant Israel, but faith is required to maintain that status.

Jacob’s Use of Old Testament—Narrative

The second element of the Old Testament I want to explore in this paper is how much Jacob may have followed his brother Nephi and relied upon the narrative of the Old Testament in composing his record.[25] I will examine first Jacob’s references to David and Solomon and second his possible adaptation of the stories involving his (presumed) namesake, Jacob the son of Isaac.

The events of Jacob 2–3 suggest that Jacob’s concern for the people in Jacob 1 was well-founded, and again Jacob reaches back into Israelite history to find examples of what not to do. In this case, Jacob’s antipathy extends to two of Israel’s most influential monarchs, David and his son Solomon.[26] The context for the discussion of David and Solomon appears to be a developing practice among the Nephites of taking more than one wife. How the Nephites could develop a large enough pool of women from which to draw these wives poses some intriguing questions,[27] but what concerns us here is the specific mention of David and Solomon. In addition to David’s named wives, such as Michal, Abigail and Bathsheba, according to 2 Samuel 5:13, “David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David.” Solomon famously outdoes his father, for “he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart” (1 Kings 11:3).[28] While God may have allowed David and Solomon to marry all of these women (see Doctrine and Covenants 132:38–39), the question for Jacob is one of approval, and he clearly comes down on the side that the marriages of David and Solomon were not approved (as opposed to, presumably, the marriages of Abraham and Jacob, whom Jacob omits from his discussion). Jacob almost certainly has in mind his father Lehi’s injunction preserved in Jacob 2:34 (compare v. 27). He could also have in mind Deuteronomy 17:17’s injunction against the Israelite king “multiply[ing] wives to himself.” He could also be referring to something from the brass plates or a personal revelation: he quotes the Lord, saying that David and Solomon’s marriages were “abominable before [him].”[29] Once again, we see Jacob turning to Israel as a mirror of sorts, one that shows the Nephites following a similar path to the Israelites that can only lead to a similar fate—for “the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old” (Jacob 2:26).

Despite Jacob’s knowledge of and penchant for finding intersections between his own experiences and those of Old Testament figures, it’s more difficult to find interaction between Jacob and his biblical namesake. That the sharing of names was intentional is likely. Prior to receiving the brass plates, Lehi had named his four sons names with little reference to biblical figures—Laman, Lemuel, Nephi, and Sam. Following his reception of the brass plates, his next two sons are given the names Jacob and Joseph, names with strong Old Testament ties, and the strong link between the Old Testament Jacob and Joseph (who are father and son) suggests that Lehi and Sariah had the patriarch and his favorite son in mind when naming their two sons born in the wilderness.[30] After all, these are not two names one in Lehi’s time would randomly pick without recognizing the biblical relevance of both men. [31]

In the opening chapters of 2 Nephi, Lehi gathers his family to give them blessings prior to his death. As he addresses Jacob, he calls him “my firstborn in the days of my tribulation in the wilderness” (2 Nephi 2:1) and in the next verse addresses him with the slightly shorter “my firstborn in the wilderness” (v. 2). Jacob is, of course, the fifth of Lehi’s six sons, and Laman (presumably) is recognized as the actual firstborn son of Lehi,[32] but it is hard to miss the Book of Mormon Jacob’s narrative connection with the biblical Jacob.[33] After all, the biblical Jacob is at the center of three famous examples of younger sons being elevated above older sons: Jacob himself being given the blessing meant for Esau (Genesis 27:27–29); Jacob presumably designating Joseph as his son of choice (or heir) when he gives Joseph, his firstborn from Rachel but eleventh child overall, a special coat (Genesis 37:3); and Jacob switching his hands as he is blessing Manasseh and his younger brother Ephraim (Genesis 48:14). Are such connections merely literary coincidence, or is Lehi giving a nod to his son Jacob’s biblical namesake by pointing out the discrepancy between Jacob and some of his older brothers?

Turning our attention to Jacob’s own record, can we find similar narrative nods to the biblical Jacob? If we look solely at explicit references to the Old Testament Jacob in the Nephite Jacob’s record, the answer is a firm “no.” Of the twenty uses of the name Jacob in the book of Jacob, every single one of them refers to the Nephite son of Lehi.[34] In a later sermon, Jacob does refer to both Abraham and Isaac when discussing the sacrifice of Isaac as a “similitude of God and his Only Begotten Son” (Jacob 4:5), but strangely he omits any explicit references to his own biblical namesake. However, if we look for places where implicit connections with the biblical Jacob may have been worked into Jacob’s own story, the results are more promising. Consider for example the narrative event that closes Jacob’s record: an encounter with a devotee of the law of Moses named Sherem. What occurs is something of a theological “wrestling match,” as both men stridently argue for their own doctrinal answer to the proper source for salvation. Jacob writes that Sherem attempts to “shake [him] from the faith,” but quickly learns that Jacob “could not be shaken” (Jacob 7:5). Jacob finally emerges victorious when Sherem “[falls] to the earth,” (v. 15). Again, it is tempting to see another analogue with the biblical Jacob and the wrestle he had at Peniel prior to his return into the land of Canaan (see Genesis 32:22–32). While Jacob never actually uses the word wrestle in his record, his son Enos does when he speaks of the “wrestle which [he] had before God” (Enos 1:2). This is the only time the term appears in the Book of Mormon, and it is certainly possible to see the biblical Jacob and his “wrestle” as the inspiration for Enos’s use of this word.[35]

Finally, just as the biblical Jacob emerges from his wrestling match victorious but also wounded (the encounter leaves his thigh “out of joint” according to Genesis 32:25), the Nephite Jacob emerges from his victory over Sherem with his own wounds on display. In a strikingly honest and devastatingly poignant scene, Jacob closes his record by reflecting back on his experience living in the so-called land of promise:

The time passed away with us, and also our lives passed away like as it were unto us a dream, we being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem, born in tribulation, in a wilderness, and hated of our brethren, which caused wars and contentions; wherefore, we did mourn out our days. (Jacob 7:26)

Again, I wonder if we can’t find in Jacob’s words a certain sadness or resentment that his own life hasn’t turned out to be what he had hoped for. Unlike the biblical Jacob, who returned home after an extended stay abroad, the Nephite Jacob remains “cast out.” Unlike the biblical Jacob and his family, who play a critical role in Israel’s rise to glory, Jacob’s Nephite clan remain “lonesome” and “solemn.” Unlike the biblical Jacob, who enjoyed a wonderful, heartfelt reunion with his estranged sibling Esau, the Nephite Jacob remains “hated of [his] brethren.”[36] I’m especially struck by Jacob’s phrase that their lives “passed away like as it were unto us a dream.” The biblical Jacob also speaks of how he perceives the passing of time as he works to secure the hand of his beloved Rachel:

And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her. (Genesis 29:20)

For both our Jacobs, the passing of time earns their reflection, yet the Nephite Jacob’s reflection evinces a lament that the length of his servitude has not ended for him as joyously as it did for the biblical Jacob. There is no Rachel, no joyous fraternal reunion, no successful return home to mark the passing of time for Lehi’s “firstborn in the wilderness,” only a dirge for what might have been as he is left to “mourn out” the rest of his days.[37]

Conclusion

What, then, can we say about Jacob’s use of the Old Testament in his record? There are two things that stand out to me. First, Jacob’s anxiety and emotion as a writer, the concern and emotion with which he writes, has long been noted,[38] but I’m struck by how much the Old Testament passages he chose to integrate into his record accentuate that anxiety and emotion. Jacob begins and ends his record with an allusion to Psalm 95, a warning to Israel that the stakes are high and the consequences serious when it comes to how they, God’s people, choose to act. He seems deeply concerned that the Nephites will take for granted their position and status and, like their Israelite forebears, forget how the hand of the Lord has brought them success and prosperity. While his allusion to Psalm 95 could be seen as a fear tactic, an attempt to scare the Nephites into submission, the motivation for that tactic is likely Jacob’s deeply felt anxiety, a sense that the Nephites won’t respond to simple urges or pleas unless they are faced squarely with their own demise.[39] This level of critique can also be seen in Jacob’s use of Psalm 118:22 and Isaiah 28:16, passages Jacob employs to imply that the Nephites are blind to their circumstances. The Nephites emulate the works of David and Solomon in their accumulation of wives, but they reject the cornerstone upon which the covenant is built, namely Jesus Christ. And Jacob’s anxiety only deepens.

Yet in Jacob’s Old Testament allusions there is also an appeal to God’s love. Jacob’s allusion to Genesis 15:6 reinforces the original meaning behind the giving of the law of Moses, namely that it was intended to direct God’s people toward the Savior and that obedience to those laws brings sanctification. In his love and mercy, God grants the gift of grace to his beloved children. Similarly, the quotes from Isaiah 11:11 and Isaiah 65:2 paint a picture of a kind and loving Jehovah, his arms extended, eager to welcome the people of Israel home whenever they are ready to respond. Geography and time are not impediments for the Lord. In these two expressions of his anxiety—fear and love—Jacob reminds me of Jude, the brother of Jesus whose short epistle is preserved in the New Testament. Jude remarked that when dealing with those whose faith is wavering, “of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh” (Jude 1:22–23). Through his use of scripture, Jacob exemplifies what it means to save through both love and fear.

Second, Jacob’s use of scripture gives us further insight into how Jacob thinks. The scriptures provide the foundation for the expression of his thoughts and the lens through which he comes to understand his circumstances. He interprets the actions of the new-world Nephites through the experiences of the old-world Israelites. If my own reading provided in the second half of this paper is accurate, Jacob may also interpret his personal experiences, the highs and the lows, through the narrative lens of the experiences of the biblical Jacob. Having sketched out this typological framework, Jacob then feels free to add in his own thoughts and opinions on how the Nephites can avoid the fate of those in Jerusalem, replacing blindness with sight and stubbornness with humility. It is absolutely true that Jacob weaves Old Testament language and narrative into his record in a remarkably adept fashion, allowing the words of scripture to bolster meaning, accentuate argument, and stimulate thinking. Yet while I cannot help but be impressed with his technique, I also can’t help but notice how human he is. Jacob is a man who yearns—both for the people around him to find their sight and for himself to find a measure of happiness. As preserved in the Book of Mormon, Jacob’s record is a remarkable one, in which the Old Testament allusions embrace and play upon their Israelite context while also developing and deepening an innovative Nephite message. As a student of the Bible, I find such writing extraordinary.

To bring this paper full-circle, I also find in Jacob’s writing something provocative about how he answers his brother’s charge to “liken” the scriptures. Nearly every pericope in Jacob’s record attests to an author who has immersed himself in the Old World, drawing upon its language and narrative as he seeks to make sense of his new one. Whether he’s using a short allusion or a lengthy allegory, Jacob’s world makes sense to him because the Old Testament makes sense to him. What provokes me about Jacob’s record is the inevitable self-critique I often feel upon turning the final page—can I liken the scriptures in a similar manner to Jacob? And if not, why not? Do I know its words so thoroughly that I could weave passages together in a way that would show how the scriptural past mirrors my present? Do I grasp the big picture firmly enough that a lengthy allegory simplifies rather than complicates my outlook? Ultimately, can I trust the scriptures to the extent that Jacob does, confident that they will provide for me the answers I desperately seek as I grapple with the passing of time?

I would like to think that the answer to many of these questions is “yes,” but I’ve never been put to the test the way that Jacob has. I deeply appreciate Jacob’s engagement with the scriptures, not just for the answers such an engagement provides, but for the questions it provokes.

Notes

[1] See, for example, Ben McGuire, “Nephi and Goliath: A Case Study of Literary Allusion in the Book of Mormon,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 18, no. 1 (2009): 16–31; S. Kent Brown, “The Exodus Pattern in the Book of Mormon,” BYU Studies 30, no. 3 (1990): 111–26; Joseph M. Spencer, The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi’s Record (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford, 2016); and Grant Hardy, Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader’s Guide (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 58–86.

[2] As Joseph M. Spencer has noted, when it comes to Nephi’s idea of likening, “Nephi speaks only of likening Isaiah’s writings to a group of people, not to individual persons. . . . This focus on likening a text to a whole people (rather than to individuals) is confirmed in every other instance of the word in Nephi’s writings. . . . All these examples—striking in their consistency—make clear that likening is for Nephi an interpretive approach founded on collective rather than individual experience.” Spencer, An Other Testament: On Typology (Salem, OR: Salt Press, 2012), 76.

[3] Some notable exceptions to this include Kimberly Matheson Berkey, “The Lord’s Prayer(s) in Jacob 7,” in Christ and Antichrist: Reading Jacob 7, ed. Adam S. Miller and Joseph M. Spencer (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2018), 28–42; Daniel Belnap, “‘I Will Contend with Them That Contendeth with Thee’: The Divine Warrior in Jacob’s Speech of 2 Nephi 6–10,” Journal of the Book of Mormon and Restoration Scripture 17, no. 1–2 (2008): 20–39; John Hilton III, “Old Testament Psalms in the Book of Mormon,” in Ascending the Mountain of the Lord: Temple, Praise, and Worship in the Old Testament, ed. David R. Seely, Jeffrey R. Chadwick, and Matthew J. Grey (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2013), 291–311; David E. Bokovoy, “Ancient Temple Imagery in the Sermons of Jacob,” Interpreter 46 (2021): 31–46; and Matthew L. Bowen, “‘I Have Done According to My Will’: Reading Jacob 5 as a Temple Text,” in The Temple: Ancient and Restored, Proceedings of the Second Interpreter Matthew B. Brown Memorial Conference, ed. Stephen D. Ricks and Donald W. Parry (Salt Lake City: Eborn Books and Interpreter Foundation, 2016), 235–72.

[4] I debated greatly the appropriate terminology to use in this paper when discussing the source of Jacob’s allusions. Jacob would likely be drawing upon the Egyptian language of the brass plates when citing scripture, but that record is not extant today and thus can’t be compared with what is recorded in the Book of Mormon. I also considered referring to Jacob’s source as the Hebrew Bible, but that seemed problematic for the reasons just discussed—Jacob didn’t have access to what we call the Hebrew Bible today. He only had access to the brass plates, which may have had some overlap with the Hebrew Bible but clearly isn’t the same text. Because the closest textual link between the allusions cited in the book of Jacob and extant scripture is the King James Version of the Old Testament, I decided to use “Old Testament” as my reference point for the source of Jacob’s text. Readers should not infer that I’m claiming that the source of Jacob’s actual language was the KJV Old Testament. I would argue, however, that there is a corollary between the Old Testament citations made in the book of Joseph and the brass plates. For studies on the possible nature of the relationship between the Hebrew Bible and the English text of the Book of Mormon, see Avram R. Shannon, “The Documentary Hypothesis and the Book of Mormon,” and Joshua M. Sears, “Deutero-Isaiah in the Book of Mormon: Latter-day Saint Approaches,” both in They Shall Grow Together: The Bible in the Book of Mormon, ed. Charles Swift and Nicholas J. Frederick (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2022), 250–75 and 365–91 . For the argument that the translation of the gold plates allows for a preservation of meaning as the text moves from Egyptian into English, see Donald W. Parry, Preserved in Translation: Hebrew and Other Ancient Literary Forms in the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2020), xv–xxxi.

[5] Among scholars of intertextuality, the term allusion is notoriously difficult to define. Often it is positioned as less defined and harder to identify than a quotation, but more defined and identifiable than an echo. See the helpful discussion in Christopher A. Beetham, Echoes of Scripture in the Letter of Paul to the Colossians (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 11–40. For the purpose of clarity, this essay will use the word allusion to refer to any instance where the Book of Mormon adopts the language (usually phrasal) of the Old Testament in a manner that is clear and identifiable.

[6] Because this is a paper on Jacob’s use of scripture (as preserved in translation), I’m going to avoid discussion of New Testament allusions that appear throughout the English book of Jacob which are more likely the addition of the translator than they are an accurate preservation of what Jacob actually said. I have in mind here Jacob 3:11 // Revelation 21:8; Jacob 4:8 // Romans 11:33; Jacob 6:5 // Acts 11:23; and Jacob 7:14 // Luke 22:42.

[7] The technical name for the study of how two or more texts interact is intertextuality. It has become common in biblical studies to use intertextuality in studying the impact of the Old Testament on the New Testament. Important to this type of intertextual study are the following works: Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1989); Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005); and G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, eds., Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007). For a discussion of how various scholars have explored the connections specifically between the Bible and the Book of Mormon, see Nicholas J. Frederick, “The Bible and the Book of Mormon: A Review of Literature,” in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 28, no. 1 (2019): 205–36.

[8] These concerns, in particular how they are expressed in Jacob’s sermon in 2 Nephi 6–10, have been teased out nicely by Brant A. Gardner in Traditions of the Fathers: The Book of Mormon as History (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2015), 168–170. See also John Gee and Matthew Roper, “‘I Did Liken All Scripture Unto Us’: Early Nephite Understandings of Isaiah and Implications for ‘Others’ in the Land,” in The Fulness of the Gospel: Foundational Teachings from the Book of Mormon, ed. Camille Fronk Olson, Brian M. Hauglid, Patty Smith, and Thomas A. Wayment (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2003), 51–65.

[9] For more on the context of Psalm 95, see Beth Tanner and Rolf A. Jacobson, “Psalm 95: A History Lesson in the Midst of the Celebration,” in The Book of Psalms, ed. Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament 21 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2014), 715–18 (hereafter NICOT); Marvin E. Tate, Psalms 51–100, Word Biblical Commentary 20 (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1990), 496–503; Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51–100, ed. Klaus Baltzer, trans. Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia 9 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 458–62; and W. M. Schniedewind, “‘Are We His People or Not?’ Biblical Interpretation During Crisis,” Biblica 76, no. 4 (1995): 540–50. For a thorough discussion of how the author of the letter to the Hebrews integrates the language of Psalm 95 in a similar fashion to Jacob, see Gareth Lee Cockerill, The Epistle to the Hebrews, The New International Commentary on the New Testament 14 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2012), 41–59; and especially Beale and Carson, Commentary on the New Testament, 952–56. For a Latter-day Saint approach to the “provocation” in the wilderness, see M. Catherine Thomas, “The Provocation in the Wilderness and the Rejection of Grace,” in Sperry Symposium Classics: The Old Testament, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2005), 164–76.

[10] Alma the Younger relies upon a similar application of Psalm 95 in his discussion with the Nephites in Ammonihah; see Alma 12:36.

[11] It could be argued that this is a New Testament quotation rather than an Old Testament one, both because the language is so similar to Romans 4:3 and Galatians 3:6 and because Jacob’s argument regarding the relationship of faith to the law of Moses has some general similarities with the larger scope of Galatians 3. However, because Romans 4:3 and Galatians 3:6 are clearly drawing upon Genesis 15:6, I will assume the same for Jacob 4:5.

[12] According to Webster’s 1828 Dictionary, accounted means “esteemed; deemed; considered; regarded; valued,” whereas counted means “numbered; told; esteemed; reckoned; imputed.” Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (1828), https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/.

[13] How scholars and linguists choose to translate tzedeqah obviously carries with it high stakes. For a thorough discussion, see B. Johnson, s.v. “sadaq,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 12:239–64.

[14] See discussion in Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17, NICOT 8 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 423–27; and Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, Word Biblical Commentary 1 (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1987), 329–30.

[15] Jacob’s language here and in other passages, such as 2 Nephi 10:3–5 (especially when read in conjunction with Moses 7:36), carry overtones of anti-Jewish sentiment. As I interpret his words, Jacob is speaking of a disheartening trend he has become aware of among some of the Jews of his time, a tendency to reach “beyond the mark” in spiritual concerns. This tendency became a cause of their scattering when Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 BC. Additionally, Jacob is also aware that some “among the Jews, among those who are the more wicked part of the world” (2 Nephi 10:3) will be responsible for the crucifixion of the Savior. It’s certainly possible that Jacob is projecting his frustrations and disappointments with some of the Jews of his day—those who demonstrated a level of wickedness that led to their destruction at the hands of Babylon—upon the Jews of Christ’s day, especially since Jacob is aware of when and how the Messiah will be killed. In reality, some Jews living in Jerusalem during the first century AD may bear responsibility for the crucifixion of the Savior, but certainly not all of them do, and obviously none who consider themselves Jews today bear this responsibility. I would therefore advise caution in applying Jacob’s language to anyone beyond the Jews of Jacob’s day. This element of Jacob’s personality has yet to be thoroughly documented or studied, although one possible explanation for Jacob’s anti-Jewish sentiment can be found in Spencer, A Vision of All, 132–37. For a study on how the Book of Mormon as a whole can be seen as a reaction against anti-Jewishness, see Bradley J. Kramer, Gathered in One: How the Book of Mormon Counters Anti-Semitism in the New Testament (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2019). Important work on the topic can also be found in Steven Epperson, Mormons and Jews: Early Mormon Theologies of Israel (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1992), 19–41; and especially Jared W. Ludlow, Andrew C. Reed, and Shon D. Hopkin, “Supersessionism and Latter-day Saint Thought: An Appraisal,” in Understanding Covenants and Communities, ed. Mark S. Diamond and Andrew C. Reed (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; New York: Central Conference of American Rabbis, 2020), 89–137.

[16] Matthew L. Bowen, with his usual precision, explores both the biblical roots of Jacob’s words in Jacob 4:14 as well as the possible Book of Mormon antecedents in “‘God Hath Taken Away His Plainness’: Some Notes on Jacob 4:14, Revelation, Canon, Covenant, and Law,” Interpreter 39 (2020): 81–102.

[17] See discussion in Nancy deClaissé-Walford, “Psalm 118: The Lord Is for Me; I Will Not Fear,” in The Book of Psalms, 864–69; Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101–150 (Revised), Word Biblical Commentary 21 (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002), 159–68. For how Psalm 118 is integrated into New Testament texts such as Mark 12:10–11 and Luke 20:17–18, see Beale and Carson, Commentary on the New Testament, 212–14, 362–65.

[18] See discussion in Allen, Psalms 101–150, 165–68.

[19] The various interpretations of the “stone” are discussed in John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39, NICOT 5 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), 517–19.

[20] In reading these passages (in particular Psalm 118) typologically as references to Jesus, we can interpret that Jacob anticipates Jesus, Paul, and Peter (compare Mark 12:10–11; Acts 4:11; Ephesians 2:20–21; 1 Peter 2:4–8).

[21] The possible context and background of Zenos’s allegory has been thoroughly explored in Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree (Provo, UT: FARMS; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1994). For a theological reading of the olive tree allegory centered on God’s love and atonement, see Deidre Nicole Green, Jacob: A Brief Theological Introduction (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, Brigham Young University), 96–107. Val Larsen argues that grappling with theodicy and the existence of evil was a driving force behind much of Jacob’s record, including his inclusion of the olive tree allegory. See Larsen, “A Mormon Theodicy: Jacob and the Problem of Evil,” Interpreter 15 (2015): 239–66.

[22] See discussion in Oswalt, Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39, 286–87.

[23] See discussion in Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, NICOT 13 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 634–37.

[24] Latter-day Saint readers of the Book of Mormon will likely see Isaiah’s prophecy, and Jacob’s interpretation of it, as referring to the gathering of Israel in the time of the Restoration, with the coming forth of the Book of Mormon and the worldwide missionary efforts of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, the “last days” can be understood a few different ways, including the lengthy temporal era spanning from Jesus’s ascension until his Second Coming, or simply the end or “last time” of a dispensation. Jacob may have in mind a specifically Latter-day Saint context, but we should be wary of limiting our readings to just such a context.

[25] In addition to the sources cited in note 1, see Jared W. Ludlow, “The Influence of the Figure of Moses in the Book of Mormon,” in Swift and Frederick, They Shall Grow Together, 1–27, esp. 2–9.

[26] The curious absence of King David from what is primarily a Jewish record has been noted by several scholars, including Grant Hardy, who wrote an insightful piece exploring the implications of David’s relative absence from the Book of Mormon. See Hardy, “The Book of Mormon’s Missing Covenant,” Meridian Magazine,December 27, 2010, https://latterdaysaintmag.com/article-1-7089/. Also of note is the recent graduate thesis arguing that such an absence weighs against the book’s historicity; see Kyle Beshears, “Davidic References in the Book of Mormon as Evidence Against its Historicity” (master’s thesis, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2016); and the response by Jeff Lindsay, “Too Little or Too Much Like the Bible? A Novel Critique of the Book of Mormon Involving David and the Psalms,” Interpreter 29 (2018): 31–64.

[27] A possible Mesoamerican context for what Jacob is reacting against in Jacob 2–3 is provided in Gardner, Book of Mormon as History, 197–204. Specifically, Gardner sees in Jacob’s writings an emerging practice involving “elite men arranging diplomatic marriages to assure commercial and political alliances.” Gardner, 203. Such a development would certainly add a poignant context to the “cries of the fair daughters of this people” who are now being led away as “captive[s]” (Jacob 2:32–33). Green agrees, writing that the language of passages such as Jacob 2:33 “further implies the commodification and possibly even trafficking of women.” Green, Jacob, 89. Such a practice would certainly justify Jacob’s comparison of these people with David and Solomon. The biblical roots of plural marriage, specifically in the context of Jacob 2–3, are explored in Brian J. Baird, “Understanding Jacob’s Teachings about Plural Marriage from a Law of Moses Context,” Interpreter 25 (2017): 227–37.

[28] This is likely an exaggeration on the part of the biblical author, used for rhetorical effect.

[29] Jacob could, in addition, be alluding to Deuteronomy 28:15–19 (for example, v. 16, “cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field”) when he declares that “except ye repent the land is cursed for your sakes” (Jacob 3:3). It is also intriguing to consider the cursing that comes a few verses later (Deuteronomy 15:49), namely that “the LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth.” This passage could have provided the rationale for Jacob’s warning that “the Lamanites . . . shall scourge you even unto destruction” (Jacob 3:3). If so, these allusions would provide further evidence for Jacob’s use of the Old Testament.

[30] Bowen argues that Lehi and Sariah chose the name Jacob, which means “may he protect” or “he has protected,” because they saw Nephi as one who would “protect” Jacob as he came of age in the wilderness. See Bowen, “Jacob’s Protector,” in Interpreter 27 (2017): 229–56.

[31] As Green observes, “While Sariah and Lehi give none of their four elder sons names that bear clear resonance with the Old Testament, the two younger sons who are born after the family flees Jerusalem, Jacob and Joseph, share names with prominent figures from the book of Genesis. The names evoke themes of covenant, gathering, and reconciliation.” Green, Jacob, 8.

[32] Note that it is Laman and his family that board the boat first in 1 Nephi 18:6.

[33] As Hugh W. Nibley observes, “The last two, born amid tribulations in the desert, were called with fitting humility, Jacob and Joseph. Whether the names of the first four [sons] were meant, as those of the last two sons certainly were . . . , to call to mind the circumstances under which they were born, the names are certainly a striking indication of their triple heritage, and it was certainly the custom of Lehi’s people to name their children with a purpose.” Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon: The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, 3rd ed. (Provo, UT: FARMS; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1988), 77.

[34] The biblical Jacob’s other name, “Israel,” does appear in Jacob’s record, but always as a reference to the house of Israel or Israel as a corporate body rather than the individual person Jacob (see Jacob 1:7; 5:1–3; and 6:1, 4).

[35] This idea has been developed quite impressively by Bowen, who writes, “There can be little doubt that Enos, in describing his transformative ‘wrestle before God’ (Enos 1:2), alludes to his ancestor Jacob’s transformative ‘wrestle’ at Peniel, with a view to the name ‘Jacob’ which was also borne by his father, whose teachings Enos also had to ‘wrestle’ with and become reconciled to.” Bowen, “‘And There Wrestled a Man with Him’ (Genesis 32:24): Enos’s Adaptations of the Onomastic Wordplay of Genesis,” Interpreter 10 (2014): 159. The possible ways the book of Enos incorporates the story of Esau have also been explored by Bowen in “‘I Kneeled Down Before My Maker’: Allusions to Esau in the Book of Enos,” Interpreter 27 (2017): 29–56.

[36] It is fair to ask, as Adam S. Miller does, just how much the encounter with Sherem would have reminded Jacob of his brothers and raised a particle of hope that the fraternal schism could be healed, as Jacob and Esau’s schism was. See Miller, “Reading Signs or Repeating Symptoms,” in Miller and Spencer, Christ and Antichrist, 18–27; but see also Loren Blake Spendlove, “Rethinking the Encounter Between Jacob and Sherem,” Interpreter 54 (2022): 65–96.

[37] Larsen observes, “Though they may have alleviated his suffering, the profound patriarchal blessing, the Allegory of the Olive Tree, and other revelations Jacob received could not fully relieve his anguish. . . . But perhaps because he himself suffered so much sorrow, Jacob was able to leave, as his legacy to us, profound insights into the nature and causes of evil and a profound testament to the goodness of the God who has done or will do all that can be done to save us from the sorrow of sin.” Larsen, “Mormon Theodicy,” 265–66.

[38] See, for example, John S. Tanner, “Literary Reflections on Jacob and his Descendants,” in The Book of Mormon: Jacob through Words of Mormon, To Learn with Joy, ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1990). Based upon the prominence of words such as anxiety, grieve, and shame in Jacob’s record, Tanner views him as a “sensitive” writer who “lives close to his emotions.” Tanner, “Literary Reflections on Jacob,” 260. Green goes a step further in her analysis, seeing Jacob as “a vulnerable and empathic religious leader [who] concerns himself largely with issues of social justice.” Green, Jacob, 2.

[39] Of Jacob’s anxiety, Green writes:

Going so far as to express anxiety about his anxiety, Jacob understands that his discomfort results from his profound love and concern for his people. He worries that his fear over them will outweigh his love for them. From the very first instance that his speaking is recorded in the Book of Mormon, he expresses trepidation concerning the Nephites’ spiritual standing. . . . Although his distress most often stems from his concerns about his own people, he continually chooses to remain in relation to them. Because he views his people’s eternal welfare and righteousness as inextricably intertwined with their temporal welfare and the creation of a just society, he catalyzes his anxiety into compassion for the oppressed. (Green, Jacob, 10.)