Can two fathers, separated by hundreds of years, give the same words of wisdom to two very different sons? The answer is yes. As described in the previous chapter, Alma heavily drew on Abinadi’s words of the life to come when speaking to his wayward son Corianton. In this chapter we will explore a different set of harmonizing voices by comparing Alma’s words to his troubled son Corianton in Alma 42 with Lehi’s words to his faithful son Jacob in 2 Nephi 2.

Both fathers loved the Lord and shared their testimonies, words of wisdom, and counsel with their sons. As his life drew to a close, Lehi gave a series of final speeches to his posterity. In 2 Nephi 2 he turned his attention to Jacob, after first addressing Jacob’s older brothers. Similarly, Alma may have been approaching the end of his life[1] in Alma 36–42, when he took the time to speak with each of his sons. In Alma 39–42 he spoke to Corianton, after having first spoken to Corianton’s older brothers.

The sons also shared some similarities. They both had fathers who were faithful patriarchs and prophets. In addition, both Jacob and Corianton are specifically mentioned as being ordained in God’s holy order. Jacob says he was “ordained after the manner of his [God’s] holy order” (2 Nephi 6:2), while Mormon tells us that Corianton, along with others, “had been ordained by the holy order of God” (Alma 49:30).[2] These connections may be coincidental,[3] but they do prime us to look for similarities between 2 Nephi 2 and Alma 42. If we can assume that some version of 2 Nephi 2 was part of the canon with which Alma was familiar, it makes sense that Alma would turn to it when talking to Corianton because Lehi directly addressed the concern that plagued Corianton.[4]

Corianton’s Concern

Corianton’s poor choices weren’t Alma’s only concern; Corianton also had doubts about key gospel doctrine. Alma explicitly states one of Corianton’s concerns at the beginning of Alma 42, identifying it in two different ways: “And now, my son, I perceive there is somewhat more which doth worry your mind, which ye cannot understand—which is [1] concerning the justice of God in the punishment of the sinner; for ye do try to suppose that [2] it is injustice that the sinner should be consigned to a state of misery” (verse 1). Along with calling Corianton to repentance, Alma wanted to help his son find peace in Christ. At the forefront of our examination of connections between these chapters is the question “How might 2 Nephi 2 help one understand the justice of God in punishing a sinner?” Interestingly, with the exceptions of Alma 30 and 42, the word punish appears more times in 2 Nephi 2 than in any other chapter of the Book of Mormon, making it a likely candidate for Alma to employ when addressing this concern. Similarly, misery and its variants occur more frequently in 2 Nephi 2 than in any other chapter in scripture.[5] What father wouldn’t use such a fitting resource at his disposal?

Ultimately, Alma’s words to his son Corianton are full of doctrinal insights, due in part to Lehi’s teachings to his own son generations before. In this chapter I will look at some of the key doctrines both fathers taught, as well as how they taught them. I will show that Alma employs 2 Nephi 2 in order to (1) expand Lehi’s teachings on the Fall, (2) illustrate a series of oppositional statements demonstrating that punishment must exist in order for God to exist, (3) show how punishment has been “affixed,” and (4) assert that people’s ability to act ultimately gives them the freedom to choose what their rewards or consequences will be.

Alma’s Expansion of 2 Nephi 2:18–19, 21

After identifying and expressing Corianton’s concern, Alma explicitly states that he will “explain this thing” to his son (Alma 42:2). Alma apparently first turns to the brass plates, quoting from what we have as Genesis 3:22–24. Table 10.1 provides a comparison between these two passages.

Table 10.1. A Comparison of Alma 42:2–3 and Genesis 3:22–24.[6]

Lehi had also evidently been reading from the same brass plates when he taught Jacob. He stated, “I, Lehi, according to the things which I have read, must needs suppose that an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen from heaven [Isaiah 14:12]. . . . Wherefore, he said unto Eve, yea, even that old serpent, who is the devil, who is the father of all lies, wherefore he said: Partake of the forbidden fruit, and ye shall not die, but ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil [Genesis 3:1–5]” (2 Nephi 2:17–18).

Lehi expands on what we have in Genesis, and Alma in turn expands on Lehi’s teachings. Table 10.2 illustrates the connections between these expansions.

Table 10.2. A comparison of Alma 42:2–10 and 2 Nephi 2:18–19, 21.[8]

Significantly, after naming Corianton’s concern, the first thing Alma refers to is the Fall. While Lehi’s discussion of the Fall takes place in the second half of 2 Nephi 2, Alma shifts this focus to the beginning of his discussion regarding the justice of God in punishing sinners. Why might this be the case? Some in Alma’s society had misunderstood the Fall, and perhaps Corianton was among them. He might have subscribed to Korihor’s words: “Ye say that this people is a guilty and a fallen people, because of the transgression of a parent. Behold, I say that a child is not guilty because of its parents” (Alma 30:25).

In a sense, one cannot fault Corianton if he feels God is unjust in having the descendants of Adam and Eve suffer the effects of the Fall—why should he be punished for his ancestors’ mistakes? Alma answers this implicit question by explaining the concept of “a probationary time” (Alma 42:4). In doing so, he follows Lehi, who, as he taught Jacob about the Fall, explained that connected to the Fall was a space of time granted for people to repent. Lehi said, “The days of the children of men were prolonged, according to the will of God, that they might repent while in the flesh; wherefore, their state became a state of probation, and their time was lengthened. . . . Behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden” (2 Nephi 2:21–22). Drawing on Lehi’s words, Alma says, For behold, if Adam had put forth his hand immediately, and partaken of the tree of life, he would have lived forever, . . . having no space for repentance. . . . This probationary state became a state for them to prepare” (Alma 42:4–5, 10).[9]

These two passages share multiple textual connections. Both use the unique phrase if Adam had[10] to describe alternate scenarios surrounding the Fall. The phrase state became a state similarly appears only in 2 Nephi 2:21 and Alma 42:10. Alma follows Lehi’s insight that a time of probation exists after the Fall and teaches (as did Lehi) that this time allows for repentance. Perhaps this was an effort to extend hope to Corianton so that he would know it was not too late.

Both fathers taught their sons about Jesus Christ. Shortly after Lehi taught about “a state of probation” (2 Nephi 2:21), he testified that “the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall” (2 Nephi 2:26). Alma similarly connected Christ’s Atonement with the probationary state, explaining, “The plan of mercy could not be brought about except an atonement should be made; therefore God himself atoneth for the sins of the world, to bring about the plan of mercy, to appease the demands of justice, that God might be a perfect, just God, and a merciful God also” (Alma 42:15). It may not be just for humans to suffer the effects of the Fall, but it is likewise not just for Christ’s sufferings to take away these effects. In other words, any lack of justice received by humans because of the Fall is counterbalanced by an abundance of mercy received because of Christ’s Atonement—a key concept for Corianton to understand.

Alma’s intent was to point his son to Jesus Christ, the only source of real joy and salvation. Repentance was not easy, as Alma experienced long ago, but the alternative was a fate he hoped his son would avoid. So Alma taught plainly and boldly of repentance. The Savior’s atoning sacrifice opens the possibility for both mercy and justice, predicated on repentance. Alma states that if it were not for “conditions of repentance . . . , mercy could not take effect” (Alma 42:13). However, he teaches that repentance does not exist in a vacuum: “Repentance could not come unto men except there were a punishment” (verse 16). Here Alma returns to the concern of the justice of God in punishing a sinner. This connection between repentance and punishment is crucial; but before we more carefully explore it, we must first examine it in the context of opposing forces and God ceasing to be God.

Opposition and God Ceasing to Be God

Both Lehi and Alma use a similar structure to discuss opposition and God ceasing to be God. Both Alma 42:11–23 and 2 Nephi 2:10–14 are organized as follows: (1) because of Christ, we can come into God’s presence; (2) there is opposition; (3) if this opposition weren’t in place, the justice of God would be destroyed; (4) a series of cause-and-effect statements; (5) a hypothetical statement that if these things weren’t in place, God would cease to be God; and (6) a declaration that the hypothetical statement is not true—there is in fact a God. A closer textual examination of these passages is found in table 10.3.

Table 10.3. A textual comparison of Alma 42:11–23 and 2 Nephi 2:10–14.

At the heart of both Lehi’s and Alma’s arguments is that without opposition, God would cease to be God. Lehi, teaching his obedient son, stated that a lack of opposition “must needs destroy . . . the mercy and the justice of God” (2 Nephi 2:12). It is interesting to note the parallel statement of Alma as he teaches his rebellious son: “Mercy could not take effect except it should destroy the work of justice” (Alma 42:13).[11] Focusing on Corianton’s concern about the “justice of God”[12] in punishing the sinner, Alma emphasizes that God must have justice or he would not exist, providing at least a partial explanation of why God needs to exercise justice on unrepentant sinners and, hopefully, helping Corianton remove misplaced blame, anger, or rationalization.

Following Lehi’s statement about the justice of God being destroyed, Lehi launches into a series of hypothetical statements: “If ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God” (2 Nephi 2:13). Lehi’s chain of cause and effect can be diagrammed as follows:

This type of extensive cause-and-effect logic only appears in the Book of Mormon in 2 Nephi 2 and Alma 42.[13] Like Lehi, Alma connects law and sin, but before doing so he adds two important elements. This significant expansion of Lehi’s teachings brings us back to a phrase discussed previously: “Repentance could not come unto men except there were a punishment” (Alma 42:16). As though going from repentance to punishment were too great a leap for Corianton (and perhaps some of us), Alma logically walks step by step through the connection between repentance and punishment. He states, “How could a man repent except he should sin? How could he sin if there was no law? How could there be a law save there was a punishment?” (Alma 42:17).[14] Alma’s connections could be diagrammed as follows:

Lehi touched on righteousness and happiness before connecting sin to punishment. In contrast, Alma goes directly from sin and law to punishment, perhaps to focus on the justice of God in punishing the sinner. Alma had previously taught that “according to justice, the plan of redemption could not be brought about, only on conditions of repentance of men . . . except it were for these conditions, mercy could not take effect except it should destroy the work of justice” (Alma 42:13). Therefore, the previous diagram could be expanded:

Mercy, a vital component in returning to live with God, requires punishment in order to not destroy the work of justice. Why is it just for God to punish sinners? Because without punishment there could be no repentance, and without repentance “mercy could not take effect except it should destroy the work of justice” (Alma 42:13). Justice would be destroyed without punishment, and if this happened, “God would cease to be God” (verse 23). Thus Alma points out that punishing a sinner is not a harsh mechanism; rather, it allows mercy, justice, and God himself to exist.

It is difficult to comprehend why it is that “if there be no . . . punishment . . . there is no God” (2 Nephi 2:13), but Alma reiterates this point: “The law inflicteth the punishment; if not so . . . God would cease to be God” (Alma 42:22). How does eliminating punishment eliminate God? Perhaps Corianton struggled to understand this as well. Let us explore this question by focusing on the word affix and its use in these two chapters.

The Punishment Which Is Affixed

Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines affix as “to attach, unite, or connect with, as names affixed to ideas, or ideas affixed to things.”[15]Affix appears only six times in the Book of Mormon:[16] three in 2 Nephi 2 and three in Alma 42. In 2 Nephi 2:10 Lehi says, “Wherefore, the ends of the law which the Holy One hath given, unto the inflicting of the punishment which is affixed, which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement.” In other words, law is connected to punishment, and the atonement is connected to happiness.[17] Lehi does not explicitly say who has affixed law and punishment; Alma perhaps utilizes this ambiguity to allay Corianton’s concern. In three separate instances, Alma speaks of punishment being affixed using the passive voice (as did Lehi):

• “Repentance could not come unto men except there were a punishment, which also was eternal as the life of the soul should be, affixed opposite to the plan of happiness, which was as eternal also as the life of the soul” (Alma 42:16).
• “Now, there was a punishment affixed and a just law given” (Alma 42:18).
• “But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted” (Alma 42:22).

The idea of punishment passively being affixed may be important to Alma’s line of reasoning with Corianton. Corianton struggles to understand how it is just for God to punish the sinner, and Alma follows Lehi in showing that this punishment is connected with the law. The phrase the punishment appears only in 2 Nephi 2 and Alma 42, and even more significant are the similarities between the phrases “wherefore, the ends of the law which the Holy One has given, unto the inflicting of the punishment” (2 Nephi 2:10) and “the law inflicteth the punishment” (Alma 42:22).[18] While Lehi specifies that the law connected to punishment was given by the Holy One of Israel, Alma omits this detail. Perhaps by not identifying God as the one who is (potentially) affixing the punishment, Alma in effect says, “Son, punishments and laws have been put in place. God is not arbitrarily being unfair—it is an inherent part of the system. These things are affixed,and if there were no punishment, there would be no God.” Alma also points out that while certain laws are in place, one’s destiny is not fixed. This brings us to the crucial point of acting and being acted upon, which is also emphasized by both Lehi and Alma.

Acting and Being Acted upon

Partway through his words to Jacob, Lehi states that “God gave unto man that he should act for himself” (2 Nephi 2:16), but Lehi later adds a caveat: “[Men] have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day” (verse 26). While we typically think of humans as being completely free to act, Lehi says there is an exception: the punishment of the law can act on us at the last day.[19]

Alma also makes a statement that could be construed as an instance in which humans are acted upon. He states, “Repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflicteth the punishment” (Alma 42:22). Mercy and justice both claim,[20] which means “to ask or seek to obtain, by virtue of authority, right or supposed right; to challenge as a right; to demand as due.”[21] Mercy claims repentance; otherwise justice makes its claim and executes the law, which leads to punishment. But sinners are not consigned to punishment. Alma teaches that “mercy claimeth the penitent, and mercy cometh because of the atonement” (Alma 42:23). Although mercy cannot rob justice, because of Jesus Christ it can claim those who repent—and repentance is a choice we can make.

Ultimately, Lehi points out, we “are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil” (2 Nephi 2:27). Alma similarly states that we are free to choose which course we take: “Whosoever will come may come and partake of the waters of life freely; and whosoever will not come the same is not compelled to come; but in the last day it shall be restored unto him according to his deeds” (Alma 42:27).[22] In other words, Alma says, “Corianton, you have been worried about the justice of God in condemning the sinner, but you have misunderstood. God does not condemn sinners. People act for themselves; they are free. It is true that the law condemns sinners, but without punishment there could be no justice, and God would cease to exist. Ultimately, agency eliminates the argument that God is not just—because while the Fall allows the possibility of eternal death, Christ’s Atonement grants the possibility of eternal life. It is not God (or your ancestors’ decisions) who chooses your destiny. It all depends on your choices. So repent, and let mercy claim you.”

Therefore, What?

I can imagine Alma asking Corianton at the end of his words something like this: “I’ve taught you these things; now, what will you choose to believe? What will you choose to do?” Alma must have wondered, “Will the doctrine I’ve taught help Corianton change?” We know that Corianton did in fact change. A few years after Corianton’s conversation with Alma, we read that there was “great prosperity in the church because of [the diligent heed people] gave unto the word of God, which was declared unto them by Helaman, and Shiblon, and Corianton” (Alma 49:30). Corianton did in fact accept his father’s invitation to “preach the word unto this people” (Alma 42:31).

Alma’s use of Lehi’s words to help Corianton reminds me of an oft-quoted statement from Elder Boyd K. Packer: “True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior. The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior. . . . That is why we stress so forcefully the study of the doctrines of the gospel.”[23] Although Corianton has a behavioral problem, Alma does not spend very much of their conversation discussing behavior. Instead, he stresses gospel doctrine and testifies of truth.

On another occasion, Elder Packer taught,

Most of the difficult questions we face in the Church right now . . . cannot be answered without some knowledge of the plan as a background.

Alma said . . . : “God gave unto them commandments, after having made known unto them the plan of redemption” (Alma 12:32; emphasis added). Let me say that again: “God gave unto them commandments, after having made known unto them the plan of redemption.” Now, let me say it again: “God gave unto them commandments, AFTER having made known unto them the plan of redemption.”

. . . If you are trying to give [your students or children] a “why,” follow that pattern: “God gave unto them commandments, after having made known unto them the plan of redemption.”[24]

God’s plan of redemption was a core part of Alma’s message to Corianton. As Alma spoke to Corianton, he taught doctrines such as Christ’s Atonement, justice, mercy, and Resurrection. Alma provides a model of centering teaching not on the specific behavioral issue but rather on the doctrinal backdrop of God’s plan for his children to return to his presence.

As described in the previous chapter, Alma was able to help Corianton by expounding on the words of previous prophets, which tells us something about the depth of Alma’s scripture study. This same principle is seen in Alma’s use of Lehi’s words. The textual connections between Alma, Abinadi, and Lehi remind me that Alma must have spent a significant amount of personal time in the scriptures. His careful mining of scriptural text prepared him to know which sections would best help Corianton. We can do likewise as we deeply study the scriptures, perhaps sometimes with the explicit intent of discerning how certain segments would address concerns others might have.

It is also interesting to identify places where Alma does not directly follow Lehi. For example, the words mercy and repentance each appear eleven times in Alma 42, in contrast to just twice each in 2 Nephi 2.[25] Perhaps some of the reason for this difference lies in the audience. Lehi’s son Jacob had different needs than Corianton. Corianton was in a serious spiritual struggle, and Alma felt inspired to focus on both mercy and repentance in equal measure. The ability to personalize a message is also an important skill for parents and leaders to develop.

In addition, Alma’s balanced use of mercy and repentance may be a helpful model for those assisting people struggling with serious sin. At times it may be tempting to focus only on God’s mercy, which could inadvertently send a message that “whatever you do is OK, because God’s mercy has you covered.” On the other hand, a message solely concentrated on repentance might communicate, “If you don’t get your act together, you’re in big trouble.” When teaching others (and pondering our own lives), we would do well to remember Alma’s equal focus on repentance and mercy.

Just as Alma drew on Lehi’s words, modern parents and teachers can turn to Alma, Lehi, and other prophets to teach the truths their loved ones need to hear today. These words speak of the power of agency and the sweetness of repentance. We can intertwine our own unique voices to testify to our children, or others who may need to hear it, that God is merciful, and when we choose him, we choose life.

Notes

[1] Although we do not have an actual death date for Alma (see Alma 45:17–19), the two instances of “farewell” in his addresses to his sons indicate that some sort of separation was about to take place (Alma 37:47; 38:15).

[2] Outside these verses, the words holy, order, and ordain appear together only in Alma 13:1, 6, 8, 10; and Doctrine and Covenants 77:11; 107:29.

[3] Another potential connection between Lehi’s and Alma’s words is found in the word great, which appears six times in 2 Nephi 2 and four times in Alma 42. Three of the instances in Alma 42 are used to modify the word plan—Alma speaks of “the great plan of salvation” (verse 5), “the great plan of happiness” (verse 8), and “the great plan of mercy” (verse 31). He also speaks of the “great and eternal purposes of God.” The word great appears nearly seven hundred times in the Book of Mormon, so Alma’s use of it might not be related to Lehi’s. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that Lehi tells Jacob of “the greatness of God” (2 Nephi 2:2); the “great” importance to tell others about “the great Mediator” (verses 8, 27, 28); and “the punishment of the law at the great and last day” (verse 26).

[4] Although Mormon was apparently not aware of the small plates when he began his record (see Words of Mormon 1:3), it is not clear at what point this record might have disappeared from the view of recordkeepers. It does seem that at some point in time, Nephite prophets may not have been fully aware of the material on the small plates. For example, Alma states, “And now we only wait to hear the joyful news declared unto us by the mouth of angels, of his [Christ’s] coming; for the time cometh, we know not how soon. Would to God that it might be in my day; but let it be sooner or later, in it I will rejoice” (Alma 13:25). In contrast, Nephi was clear on the date of Christ’s coming (see 1 Nephi 10:4; 19:8; and 2 Nephi 25:19). At the same time, Alma was somehow familiar enough with the words we have as 1 Nephi 1:8 that he was able to quote them to Helaman in Alma 36:22. Moreover, we know that Nephi “received a commandment that the ministry and the prophecies, the more plain and precious parts of them, should be written upon these plates; and that the things which were written should be kept for the instruction of [his] people, who should possess the land” (1 Nephi 19:3). Thus Nephi explicitly intended for the small plates to remain in circulation. Amaleki expressed his plan to do just that by giving the small plates to King Benjamin (see Omni 1:25), and Benjamin passed on the records to Mosiah₂ (see Mosiah 1:16). Mosiah₂ in turn gave “all the records” in his possession to Alma (Mosiah 28:20). It seems reasonable that in the space of three generations, the small plates would not have been completely lost from view. In addition, although the logic is admittedly circular, the number of complex and convincing textual parallels discussed in this chapter indicate that Alma had access to some form of Lehi’s words.

[5] Misery and its variants occur eight times in 2 Nephi 2; the next highest number of occurrences is found in Alma 40 (four times).

[6] I acknowledge Ben McGuire’s assistance in identifying this connection.

[7] Alma 42:2–3, as quoted in this table, comes from Skousen’s The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009). This comparison shows even tighter connections than the current Book of Mormon—for example, “he was taken” (Earliest Text) versus “they were taken” (2013 text), or “cherubims” (Earliest Text) versus “cherubim” (2013 text).

[8] In this table the scriptural text comes from Skousen’s Earliest Text. This comparison shows even tighter connections than the current Book of Mormon—for example, Alma 42:2 has “drove out” (Earliest Text) versus “drew out” (2013 text), compared with “driven out” (2 Nephi 2:19, Earliest Text and 2013 text). I also note that in these verses Alma also refers to other previous Nephite prophets. For example, compare Alma 42:6 and Mosiah 15:4.

[9] This time to repent was important because, as Alma later explains, “the plan of redemption could not be brought about, only on conditions of repentance of men in this probationary state” (Alma 42:13).

[10] In scripture, the phrase if Adam had, as well as the shorter if Adam, appears only in these two verses.

[11] The words mercy, destroy,and justice collocate only in 2 Nephi 2 and Alma 42.

[12] Note that the phrase justice of God and the word mercy appear together only in 2 Nephi 2 and Alma 42.

[13] A similar series of cause-and-effect statements (although not as lengthy) occurs in 2 Nephi 11:7.

[14] Lehi’s statement “If ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin” is directly paralleled by Alma: “How could he sin if there was no law?” Note that the concepts are reversed, perhaps indicating an instance of Seidel’s law, which refers to how individuals in ancient times would reverse components of a quotation to signal to the audience that it was a quotation. For more information on Seidel’s law, see David E. Bokovoy and John A. Tvedtnes, Testaments: Links between the Book of Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (Tooele, UT: Heritage Press, 2003), 56–60.

[15] Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language, s.v. “Affix,” https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/affix.

[16] As well as two other times in all scripture (see Doctrine and Covenants 82:4; 135:7).

[17] I am indebted to Sheila Taylor for pointing out this connection.

[18] In scripture, the words inflict and punish appear together only in 2 Corinthians 2:6; 2 Nephi 2:10; Alma 42:22; and Doctrine and Covenants 134:10. Law, inflict, and punish collocate only in 2 Nephi 2:10 and Alma 42:22.

[19] It is interesting to note that in 2 Nephi 2:26 it isn’t an individual (God) who acts but another force, “the law,” that does the acting (although Alma 42:26 may suggest that it is God who is the controlling force).

[20] Mercy and claim appear together in ten Book of Mormon verses and once in the Doctrine and Covenants but never in the Bible. In Mosiah 15:27 justice is spoken of as having a claim,and in Alma 42:22 justice claims.

[21] Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language, s.v. “Claim,” https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/claim.

[22] Note again the passive voice: “It shall be restored unto him.”

[23] Boyd K. Packer, “Little Children,” Ensign, November 1986, 17.

[24] Boyd K. Packer, “The Great Plan of Happiness” (address to religious educators at a symposium on the Doctrine and Covenants and Church history, Brigham Young University, August 10, 1993); emphasis in original.

[25] In addition, the word merciful appears one time in Alma 42 and never in 2 Nephi 2.