Nephi, Scrooge, and Knowing the Future

January 28, 2012 By 12 Comments

There I was, sitting in my usual seat in Sunday school, watching the instructor faithfully proceed through the lesson plan and observing, as I always do, the various comments made by fellow ward members.  The topic was Nephi’s Vision and the Great Apostasy.

I was bothered by the apathy to know and appreciate Christian history by a few of my fellow congregants, and even though I flirted with the idea of expending my social capital in the ward by vocally lamenting the problems with what others had shared, I continued to sit in quiet meditation.  My thoughts turned elsewhere.

Why was Nephi getting this vision?  He asked to see the vision his father saw.  The spiritual tour guide did in fact show him his father’s vision.  Yet, his vision did not stop there.  The Spirit, or the the angel, continued to show Nephi futures beyond his immediate concerns, and apparently beyond what Lehi saw.   Nephi is shown not only interpretations of his father’s dream, but the Incarnation, the mortal ministry of the Savior, but more importantly the ultimate destruction of his people by those descended from his wicked brothers.

Science fiction and popular culture are replete with warnings and cautions about knowing the future.  As a child I remember watching an episode of the Smurfs.  In the episode, the Smurfs obtain a mirror that shows the future.  After Smurfette gets captured by Gargamel, they quickly consult the mirror to see whether she will live.  They see a vision of Smurfette walking out from the forest and returning to the village and immediately decide to cancel the rescue operation.  It was no longer necessary.  While the Smurfs may not be laden with philosophical complexity, this episode suggested to my young mind that knowing the future can cause one to abandon actions they would have taken otherwise.

Remember this scene from the 1980’s movie “Back to the Future”?

Marty: Listen, Doc, you know there’s something I haven’t told you about the night we made that tape.
Doc: Please, Marty, don’t tell me, no man should know too much about their own destiny.
Marty: You don’t understand.
Doc: I do understand. If I know too much about my own future I could endanger my own existence, just as you endangered yours.
***
Doc: What’s the meaning of this?
Marty: You’ll find out in 30 years.
Doc: It’s about the future, isn’t it?
Marty: Wait a minute!
Doc: It’s information about the future, isn’t it! I warned you about this kid. The consequences could be disastrous!
Marty: Now that’s a risk you’ll have to take! Your life depends on it!

Doc believed that no man should know too much about his own destiny.  Marty believed that Doc needed knowledge of the future to prevent his own demise.  In fact, the only reason to give that knowledge to Doc was so that Doc could take some action to change what would happen.  In the Back to the Future universe, human decision can change the course of events.

Less optimistic philosophies of the future could be found in let’s say the Time Traveler’s Wife.  There, Henry is unable to change any events of the future.

Clare: But you get to see people from the past, people who are gone. Like your mom.
Henry: Yeah, but the thing is you can’t change what happens to them. I’ve tried, it just happens anyway.

Being so close to the Christmas season, my mind turned towards Charles Dicken’s beloved A Christmas Carol. Scrooge was yet another individual who was shown a vision of his future by a Spirit.

The Spirit stood among the graves, and pointed down to One.

“Before I draw nearer to that stone to which you point, answer me one question. Are these the shadows of the things that Will be, or are they shadows of the things that May be only?”

Still the Ghost pointed downward to the grave by which it stood.

“Men’s courses will foreshadow certain ends, to which, if persevered in, they must lead. But if the courses be departed from, the ends will change. Say it is thus with what you show me!”

The Spirit was immovable as ever.

Scrooge crept towards it, trembling as he went; and, following the finger, read upon the stone of the neglected grave his own name, EBENEZER SCROOGE.

“Am I that man who lay upon the bed? No, Spirit! O no, no! Spirit! hear me! I am not the man I was. I will not be the man I must have been but for this intercourse. Why show me this, if I am past all hope? Assure me that I yet may change these shadows you have shown me by an altered life.”

Scrooge did not want to accept the vision of the future. Pleading with the Spirit, “Why show me this, if I am past all hope?”

My mind turned once again to what I was reading silently, partly listening and partly ignoring the controversy taking place among my fellow ward members about how to view the Apostasy.

“And now I Nephi was grieved because of the hardness of their hearts, and also because of the things which I had seen, and knew they must unavoidably come to pass because of the great wickedness of the children of men.  And it came to pass that I was overcome because of my afflictions, for I considered that mine affliction was great above all because of the description of my people, for I had beheld their fall.”

But Nephi’s people had not fallen—Nephi would never even experience this during his lifetime.  Was Nephi right that this must “unavoidably come to pass”?  How can we have this scripture in a religious tradition that touts human agency uber alles?  Is human history unavoidable as Nephi is convinced?  What does that do to the concept of agency?  Does not the bible give us examples of times when choice can change the course of human events?

“Why doesn’t Nephi question the Spirit, as did Scrooge?” I wondered. Where was Nephi’s cry, “Why show me this, if [everything is] past all hope?”  Granted, the Spirit tells Nephi that “if the Gentiles repent, it shall be well with them.”  But why does the Spirit only suggest a conditional future as applied to the Gentiles?  Why is the fall of Laman and Lemuel unavoidable?  How can Mormonism tolerate such a determinist and fatalist view of human agency?

Lehi apparently did not see the same vision.  He is troubled for completely different reasons.  Nephi reports that “[B]ecause of these things which he saw in a vision, he exceedingly feared for Laman and Lemuel. Yea, he feared lest they should be cast off from the presence of the Lord. And he did exhort them with all the feeling of a tender parent.”  (Or, if Lehi did see the same vision of the destruction of his family, did he fight against it in his heart?)

This is a far cry from Nephi’s absolute certainly that “the things which I had seen . . . must unavoidably come to pass … for I had beheld their fall.”  This vision given to Nephi by the God who Nephi knows “loveth his children” caused Nephi to accept the vision as if it had already happened, to be burdened by something that had not even occurred and would not occur during Nephi’s mortal sojourn.  In addition, Nephi became angry with his brothers for something that they had not even done yet.  After his vision, Nephi tells his brothers “How is it that ye will perish because of the hardness of your hearts?”

Is it possible that the Book of Mormon tells a story of what happens when people are shown the future?  Does it provide lessons on the perils of knowing the future?  Although Nephi claims he tried to reach his brothers “with all the energies” of his soul, I can’t help but feel that Nephi’s belief that he saw their unavoidable and inevitable fall had to have influenced his behavior and his relationship with them.

I returned to the lesson where ward members were pointing out that Nephi saw Christopher Columbus.  I wasn’t interested in that.  Is there a kind of cruelty with God giving Nephi a vision of the destruction of his people, leaving him helpless in the face of an overwhelming view of his own future.  Nephi never asked to see a vision of the destruction of his people.  How did this benefit Nephi?  I’m sure God had his reasons.  On the other hand, perhaps it’s true that no one should know too much about their own future.

As we ended the lesson and said the closing prayer, the thought came to my mind that we need to make our own future.  We should never let anyone tell us who we are, not even a revelation.  Visions are not absolute and are not unavoidable.  We can’t let our relationships with our family and friends be held hostage by what we think will happen, or else we relinquish our agency.  I believe in a future that is open.

I admire the Spirit of Scrooge, and despite his flaws, I see him in that moment as a more heroic figure than Nephi.  Scrooge was willing to challenge the dim future, and to desperately question the Spirit even when the Spirit was pointing to his grave.  To me, Nephi’s response symbolically represents the tendency in human nature to accept what we are told, to resign ourselves to fate, to assume things are unavoidable, and to become depressed about things that haven’t even happened, and probably will not even happen in our own lives.

Filed Under: Book of Mormon, Theology 12 Comments
  • http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com Clean Cut

    Nice post, aquinas. I’m on your wave length. And I totally get what you say about admiring more Scrooge not wanting to accept a fixed future, because then hope is lost.

    I wish I knew just how much of Joseph’s knowledge of the “past” got into Nephi’s vision of the “future” (during the “translation” process), because if we accept such detailed prophecy, then we apparently have other problems, not the least of which is a murky “open future” in which despite our claim on agency, we’re powerless to change the future. Nephi (and us) would naturally lose some hope and feel more despair.

    I can’t accept that.

    BTW, this post reminds me of some similar questions I raised this summer on a post entitled “History and an Open Future–According to Plan?”

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/ Chris H.

    Dickens and the Smurfs! aquinas, I love you!

  • mogget

    I think perhaps this is another unconditional prophecy, from Mosiah:

    And now when the flames began to scorch him, [Abinadi] cried unto them, saying: Behold, even as ye have done unto me, so shall it come to pass that thy seed shall cause that many shall suffer the pains that I do suffer, even the pains of death by fire; and this because they believe in the salvation of the Lord their God.

    And it will come to pass that ye shall be afflicted with all manner of diseases because of your iniquities. Yea, and ye shall be smitten on every hand, and shall be driven and scattered to and fro, even as a wild flock is driven by wild and ferocious beasts. And in that day ye shall be hunted, and ye shall be taken by the hand of your enemies, and then ye shall suffer, as I suffer, the pains of death by fire.

    Thus God executeth vengeance upon those that destroy his people. O God, receive my soul.

    Anyway, good post,

    Mogs

  • DavidH

    I am not so sure about Nephi’s reliability as a narrator. I do not agree with the concept of unavoidability of the future.

  • aquinas

    Clean Cut ~ Thanks for your comment. There are other options besides accepting Nephi is accurately describing what the revelation told him, or positing that Joseph’s knowledge of the past is skewing the text. I would prefer to look at Nephi’s goals and motivations. He may have motivations for believing that, no matter what he does, his brothers will fall. He may have motivations for offering up that explanation to his posterity.

    Chris H. ~ Thanks for the shout-out.

    mogget ~ Thanks for the reference. Do you sense that there are more conditional prophecies than unconditional?

    DavidH ~ In other words, does Nephi have any motivation for describing his vision the way he does? Are there ways this vision serves him?

    Lastly, just to clarify for general readers, I recognize many problems with how I have outlined things. This is by no means a carefully crafted argument or thesis. These are merely musings and thoughts I had about what Nephi experienced. I’m simply trying to explore the narrative from a fresh perspective.

    Grant Hardy suggests approaching the text looking at what isn’t there but what should be there, or what we expect to find. There is a part of me that expects Nephi to emotionally reject the idea that his people will be destroyed. For example, when God shows Enoch the destruction of people, he weeps and says “I refuse to be comforted.” (Moses 7). And when Enoch sees God weep, he asks “How is it that you can weep?” Enoch is more emotionally transparent. Nephi is not. We don’t really get a sense of Nephi’s internal dialogue. Nephi does not tell the Spirit that the vision is unbearable. I don’t think Nephi would reject the notion that his brothers would reject the Gospel. He is already expecting to see this. Maybe he doesn’t expect to see his people destroyed, but we never hear Nephi telling us that. He accepts it. Every recipient of a vision is going to react differently. But if the destruction of Nephi’s people is unavoidable then he is not responsible. Does Nephi have a motive for not wanting to be responsible for fall of his people? These are the kinds of questions I’m exploring.

  • mogget

    At one point, like several decades ago, I did go looking for unconditional prophecies. I think there is one more. So, as far as I know conditional prophecies do outnumber the unconditional variety.

    What I’m wondering about at the moment is my perception that long term prophecies are more common in the BoM than in the OT/NT. I would have guessed that short term prophecies were more likely to be couched in unconditional language than those with a longer horizon. And of course, Abinadi’s prophecy is of the short term variety, while Nephi’s is quite long.

    As for your final question, it does seem to me that acceptance of prophecy can relieve the hearer of a sense of responsibility for what happens, or more positively confer a sense of peace about a decision to avoid more futile interventions. That sort of thing is common among those with the apocalyptic world view. And acceptance of prophetic authority in, say, organizational decisions also relieves the hearer of a sense of responsibility.

    Mogs

  • http://randommormonmusings.wordpress.com/ Frank Pellett

    It is interesting to note, that even though Nephi seems resigned to the destiny of his seed, Lehi does not feel as much so. Even though his dream showed him that two of his sons did not partake of the fruit, this does not prevent him from trying to change that future by telling it to them and trying to convince them to change as their journey continued.

    For me, I’m in the camp of people who don’t believe that knowledge of the future removes choice.

    Oh, and the Back to the Future example works because Marty didn’t actually know what happened after Doc was shot. Writing the letter in the past did not necessarily change the outcome.

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor Bored in Vernal

    I believe in an open future, too. But not all prophecies provoke the kinds of feelings and actions described in the OP. How about Helaman 14:15:

    For behold, he surely must die that salvation may come; yea, it behooveth him and becometh expedient that he dieth, to bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord.

    Here’s an unconditional one that seems to me would encourage, excite, and motivate.

  • http://ldsanarchy.wordpress.com/ LDS Anarchist

    The “destruction of my people” referred to the Nephites, not the Lamanites. Also, “i had beheld their fall” referred to the fall of the Nephites, not the Lamanites.

    Was Nephi right that this must “unavoidably come to pass”?

    Yes, he was right.

    How can we have this scripture in a religious tradition that touts human agency uber alles? Is human history unavoidable as Nephi is convinced? What does that do to the concept of agency? Does not the bible give us examples of times when choice can change the course of human events?

    This comes to mind:

    I must admit, I do not see determinism implied in the omniscience of God. My understanding is that God sees all things, past, present and future, both things that happened (past), happen (present) and will happen (future), as well as things that could have happened (past), could happen (present), and might happen (future), as well as things that never could have happened (past), never could happen (present) and never will happen (future.) God sees it all. Therefore, it is correct to say that God knows what you will do, as he sees all the infinite future possibilities of you and every other bit of matter and spirit in this created universe, as well as all the impossibilities. The possibilities, impossibilities, probabilities and improbabilities are all known and calculated by the mind of God to infinity for each infinite bit of matter and spirit. As He sees all of it together, all the various movements of these created things, meaning He’s got the BIG PICTURE, He can exercise faith and make a prediction (prophecy) as to certain future occurrences in which He has absolute confidence or belief that will happen as He has said. He doesn’t cause (force) these things to happen, as He operates solely on agency and through the medium of free agents, but as He sees everything (and thus knows everything), there is nothing left to chance and He can influence His servants (who voluntarily obey His words, as they are free agents) to modify the future in ways that benefit His children and tip the scales in favor of them being saved and gaining even greater free agency.

    There is another quote, which I can’t seem to find, that says that agency choices can take us closer or farther away from God, but repentance is almost always available. However, the further we get from God, the harder it gets to repent and release ourselves from the chains of hell in which the devil binds us. This is consistent with the scripture which says,

    and he leadeth them by the neck with a flaxen cord until he bindeth them with his strong cords forever

    The devil starts out with a flaxen cord, and then makes the chain stronger and stronger. Eventually there comes a point of no return, in which the impenitent man or woman can no longer repent, and this is where the “forever” part of the above scripture comes into play, for they are completely overpowered by the devil.

    Many prophecies are conditional, because God sees that if things continue as they are going, the future will be as shown in the vision or as explained in the prophecy, and so He tries to get the people to repent to change the prophesied bad future, or to remain steady to obtain the prophesied good future. However, other prophecies are without conditions, or are “unavoidable,” because agency choices have already been made past the point of no return, which guarantee the future given.

    Why is the fall of Laman and Lemuel unavoidable?

    Nephi never says that their fall is unavoidable. You will notice that after his vision, and after talking to Laman and Lemuel, Nephi writes:

    and it came to pass that i nephi did exhort my brethren with all diligence to keep the commandments of the lord and it came to pass that they did humble themselves before the lord insomuch that i had joy and great hopes of them that they would walk in the paths of righteousness

    This comment is too long as it is and I don’t want to address every point in the OP, so I’ll just address this final point you made:

    In addition, Nephi became angry with his brothers for something that they had not even done yet. After his vision, Nephi tells his brothers “How is it that ye will perish because of the hardness of your hearts?”

    Nephi was not “angry with his brothers for something that they had not even done yet.” The question you quote is found in 1 Nephi 15:10. It does not read, “How is it that ye shall perish because of the [future]hardness of your hearts?” The word used is “will,” not “shall.” Shall, in scripture, refers to the future, or is a prophecy of the future. The word “will” refers to current conditions. In other words, Nephi is stating that Laman and Lemuel were right then in a state of hardness of hearts. Not a future state, but a current state, and as a result of their current hardness of hearts, they would perish unless they repented. Read the chapter again and pay close attention to verse 3.

    So, both Lehi and Nephi were on the same page. They both hoped that Laman and Lemuel would repent and and tried to help them on that endeavor.

  • larryco_

    “What I’m wondering about at the moment is my perception that long term prophecies are more common in the BoM than in the OT/NT.”

    Certainly the BoM is filled with much more “specific”, long-term prophecies, i.e. names, places, dates, etc. This, or course, has it’s own inherant problems. I’m sure Grant Palmer was not the first to recognize that the specific prophecies end prior to the printing of the BOM and then take on more of the general nature, much like OT prophecies.

    For me personally, I prefer looking at prophecy from the “types and shadows/nothing new under the sun” viewpoint. From this standpoint, we see prophets receiving inspiration/warnings for their own time and we are able to “liken it” to our own time. This approach certainly is not as entertaining as a half hour watching Jack Van Impe show how every major event that happened the past week was foretold with precision in the bible, it still gives credence to the concept of the “living prophet” receiving guidance for his particular stewardship while providing valuable lessons for future generations.

  • aquinas

    mogget ~ Thanks for the reply.

    Frank ~ Thanks for the comment. I think it is interesting to contrast Lehi with Nephi. It doesn’t appear to me that Lehi sees the same vision that Nephi does. At the very least, they do not respond the same way.

    Bored in Vernal ~ The prophecy of the Messiah definitely seems to be something that is described as guaranteed. It may be the case that we would rather see conditional prophecies regarding bad things that could happen, and more guaranteed prophecies where good things will happen.

    LDSA ~ I do appreciate the comment and critique. You’ve raised some issues that I too thought were problems with what I’ve written. To be honest, there are other problems with what I’ve written that no one raised yet. I also do not read the “destruction of my people” and “beheld [my people's] fall” to mean Laman and Lemuel. If you notice, I don’t actually say I’m interpreting these verses that way. I do, however, couch Laman and Lemuel’s future in similar language, but its not because I think those verses are speaking about Laman and Lemuel.

    It’s reasonable to me to think that if Nephi sees that ultimately his brothers posterity and his posterity are going to war, that this isn’t a sign that the Lehi family lives happily ever after or that the family will be reconciled. This sounds to me to be saying that Nephi’s worst suspicions are confirmed and that Laman and Lemuel will separate from the Lehite clan. There will never be one group of unified Lehites, only two warring factions of Lamanites and Nephites. Would that not influence Nephi in any way? Family unity and salvation status seem to be intertwined in both Lehi’s and Nephi’s worldview.

    Yes, I considered those verses (1 Ne 1:16) where Nephi says he has great hopes in his brothers which is a good verse and does give us indication of how Nephi feels about his brothers.

    We probably disagree on the relationship between divine foreknowledge and human free will. To view them as compatible is certainly one approach. I’m more interested here in looking how Nephi and others are influenced by a vision of the future, rather than exploring the more abstract arguments surrounding foreknowledge and free will. The topic is very germane to the discussion, but admittedly beyond the scope of this limited inquiry.

  • http://ldsanarchy.wordpress.com/ LDS Anarchist

    aquinas, Nephi’s vision of the land of promise begins, apparently, (assuming that Nephi isn’t giving a truncated version), with seeing multitudes of people, “even as it were as many as the sands of the sea,” and these people were his seed and that of his brethren. So, he isn’t given any clear indication that such warfare among the seeds of this and that brother, is a result of Laman and Lemuel’s apostate state. Based upon his apparent hope that his older brothers would “walk in the paths of righteousness,” there doesn’t seem to be any indication that he assumed that all of this future iniquity was the result of Laman and Lemuel’s spiritual state. Everything the Lord had revealed to Nephi concerning his brothers was always conditional, (see 1 Nephi 2:19-24.) So, he had hope for Laman and Lemuel, but no hope for the future wicked posterity he had seen in vision among his seed and that of his brothers.

    There will never be one group of unified Lehites…

    Nephi actually sees one group of unified Lehites, after the minitry of Christ, which consisted of three generations of righteousness. But then he saw that they separated again. Surely such separation after such an extended unification, and at such a late date, could not be blamed upon Laman and Lemuel. So, Nephi doesn’t know for sure what causes the initial warfare among the various seeds, but I think it is fair to assume that he suspected that it might be due to the future rebellions of his brothers. But Nephi’s actions and words do not carry any sense of fatality in regard to his brothers, so we can’t say that such suspicions that he might have entertained, colored him in his relation to them.

    In fact, everything Nephi does, says, and writes is so that his brothers might repent, and also so that the future posterity, both of his own posterity, as well as that of his brothers, might also come unto repentance. In other words, chief in Nephi’s mind was, “What can I do or say or write to help save those who will hear me, see me, or read my words?” And this was the whole point of the Lord showing Nephi the vision, so that he would see the people of the future and be aware of their state, that he might write a record and ask the Lord in faith to preserve it. In other words, the solution of all prophets of God to every problem is always the same: preach the word of God in purity.

    So, we see Enos praying to the Lord to preserve a record and we learn that “thy fathers have also required of me this thing; and it shall be done unto them according to their faith; for their faith was like unto thine.” So, Jacob, Nephi, Sam, Joseph, Lehi and Enos all asked for this same thing. And this was the reason why they got these panoramic visions of the future, so that the Lord would have them participate in the salvation of future generations, through the writing of their words and their prayers of faith, as well as in the salvation of the people who lived in their time, for their faith was exceedingly great, like that of the brother of Jared.

    I’m not sure I can be clearer on this point, but I’ll try. The Lord works through agents. Someone, somewhere has to show faith, otherwise the Lord cannot work his miracles in behalf of the children of men, to save them. So, this record, the Book of Mormon, could not have been preserved by the hand of the Lord from the wicked Lamanites who attempted to destroy the records, unless someone asked Him in faith for such a thing, and the record could not have been brought forth to the Gentiles, unless someone asked in faith for such a thing, and the record itself could not have been written to the Lamanites of the future, and to the Gentiles, unless someone asked for such a thing, etc. So, the Lord shows these visions of the future to His faithful servants, knowing that upon seeing the future, they would want to save the people of the future, and would ask Him in faith for this, that and the other, thus allowing Him to perform His marvelous works. Etc.