Gold and the Two Ways -- part 4a

Gold and the Two Ways in the Book of Mormon

Parts 1, 2, and 3 are found here: Part 1. Part 2. Part 3. We're looking at references to gold and riches and the like in the scriptures in the context of the doctrine of the two ways. In this post, we'll look at some of the references found in the Book of Mormon. This is a big topic, so I will break this into two parts. In this first part, we'll review scriptures from the Book of Mormon just as we've done for the Bible in the first three sections of this series. In the next part we'll take a slight detour and discuss the specific Book of Mormon theme related to treasures becoming slippery during ties of covenant rebellion.

Gold and treasure in the Book of Mormon

The Book of Mormon gives us numerous references to gold (59), treasure (15), and riches (43).  I'm sure there are additional terms with a meaning close enough to add to that tally. Since this is not meant to be a comprehensive review of all references, but just a cursory overview of some of the references which also make reference to the doctrine of the Two Ways, I'll focus on those references which best fit the theme.

For the following list, I'll forego quoting the verses to leave room for more total references in this post:

• 2 Nephi 9:42 -- God despises the prideful and rich unless "they shall cast these things away, and consider themselves fools before God, and come down in the depths of humility."
• Jacob 2:13, 18-19 -- Obtaining riches has led to pride, stiff necks, and high heads. Seek for the kingdom of God before seeking riches. Then seek riches for the intent to do good.
• Mosiah 2:12 -- "I ... have not sought gold nor silver nor and manner of riches of you."
• Mosiah 4:19 -- "Are we not all beggars?" We all depend on God for all the substance we have, including gold, silver, and riches.
• Alma 1:16, 29-30 -- Priestcrafts are associated with a love of the vain things of the world, riches, honor. Meanwhile the righteous cared for the poor and "did not set their hearts upon riches" but were "liberal to all." The "steadiness of the church" brought about exceeding riches.
• Alma 4:6, 8 -- The people wax proud because of their riches, gold, and silver. The church began to be lifted up in the pride of their eyes, and to "set their hearts upon riches" and "they began to be scornful, one towards another."
• Alma 7:6 -- (Alma to the righteous people of Gideon) "I trust that ye are not lifted up in the pride of your hearts; yea, I trust that ye have not set your hearts upon riches and the vain things of the world."
• Alma 15:16 -- Amulek forsook all his riches for the word of God and was rejected by his friends and kindred.
• Alma 39:14 -- "Seek not after riches nor the vain things of this world."
• Alma 45:24 -- Pride because of "exceedingly great riches" leads the people to not give heed to the word or walk uprightly before God.
• Helaman 4:12 -- Pride of the heart and riches lead to "oppression to the poor"
• Helaman 5:7-8 -- Do that which is good, not to boast, but to lay up for yourselves a treasure in heaven (the "precious gift of eternal").
• Helaman 6:17 -- Prosperity leads to setting their hearts upon riches, leading the people to commit secret murders to get gain, rob, and plunder. (Cain is directly mentioned in verse 27.)
• Helaman 7:21, 26: Wo comes to the wicked unless they repent. They seek to "get gain, to be praised of men, yea, and [to] get gold and silver." Pride enters the heart and "has lifted you up beyond that which is good because of your exceedingly great riches!"
• 3 Nephi 6: 10, 12, 15 -- Riches lead to pride and classes, differing chances for learning. Satan had great power, tempting the people "to seek for power, and authority, and riches, and the vain things of the world."
• 3 Nephi 13:19-21 -- Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven.
• 4 Nephi 1:43 -- Riches lead to pride and vanity.

A few thoughts about these verses:

There is a direct connection between riches and having a heart set upon the things of the world. Compare this to the command given to Joseph Smith by Moroni to obtain the plates (which were hidden in the ground) only to further God's work on earth, not for worldly gain. We'll talk about that in the next part in more depth.

Notice the contrasting symbolism between Jacob 2:13 and Alma 45:24 -- riches lead to "stiff necks" and high heads" and also causes the people to refuse to "walk uprightly before God."

Notice also how Amulek is described in Alma 15:16.  It's a perfect analog to the description Jacob gives in 2 Nephi 9:42.

It strikes me how clearly Jesus' words in 3 Nephi 13 fulfill the prophecy of slippery treasure from Helaman 13. This is a foreshadowing of the Nephites brought upon themselves by their covenant rebellion. Their record, also hidden in the ground, has come forth to us in order to gather God's people throughout the earth in the latter days.  Will we be wiser than they and lay up treasure in heaven rather than setting our hearts upon riches?

Scriptural repetition -- An introduction

In this paper, Alan Goff makes a good case for intentional repetition in ancient Hebrew scripture (including the Book of Mormon whose writers have Hebrew heritage). The modern notion among historicist biblical scholars is that many repetitive elements in the Old Testament are clumsy, narrative failures and often evidence of various origins and textual development over time. However, recent pushback against these ideas, including Goff's article, present ancient writers who used repetition deliberately as a literary style, not a defect. The article starts out by giving many examples

Hagar is twice expelled from Abraham’s household (Genesis 16:4–14; 21:9–19), thrice a patriarch endangers his wife in a foreign country by passing her off as his sister (Genesis 12:10–19; 20:1–16; 26:6–11), and multiple times a patriarch or prophet travels to a foreign country to meet a nubile girl at a well to secure a wife (Genesis 24:10–60; 29:1–16; Exodus 2:15–21). Pharaoh slaughters the infants as does Herod the Great (Exodus 1:15– 22; Matthew 2:16–18), and a prophetic figure — whether Moses or Jesus [Page 264]— miraculously provides food in the wilderness (Exodus 16:4–16; Matthew 15:32–38). I could cite many more examples of repeated biblical stories: conflicts as the younger brother supersedes the older (Joseph and his brothers, Genesis 37, 42–45; Esau and Jacob, Genesis 27; Laman and Lemuel against Nephi, 1 Nephi 3:28–31 and elsewhere), threats against out- of-towners appealing for hospitality (Genesis 19; Judges 19); twice Nephites send their attractive young women out to charm marauding Lamanites so the vulnerable group isn’t killed (Mosiah 19:12–15; Mosiah 23:33–34). Such doublets, as they are frequently called, are fundamental to the working of Hebraic narrative: two creation stories, two instances of animals boarding the ark (seven of each kind once and two of each animal the second time), two narratives of water provided in the wilderness during the exodus. To the modern mind these examples are historical problems in the text — duplications, narrative inconsistencies, failures, plagiarisms; biblical critics have in the past few decades rehabilitated these recurrences, noting their sophistication, revealing modern incapacities in scorning them. Sternberg notes of biblical repetitions that “the dismissal of its redundancies in terms of ‘noise’ is the reader’s last resort rather than first resort” and more likely the result of readerly failure than writerly shortcoming.

These ancient writers held a worldview where time ran in cycles and God's dealings with his children followed established recurring patterns. The ancient rabbis highlighted the repeating elements in biblical narrative, noting that “what happens to the fathers, happens to the sons.”

This worldview is clearly held by Nephi

...as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the course of the Lord is one eternal round. (1 Nephi 10:19)

Therefore, we should not be surprised to find recurring events and patterns in the Book of Mormon just as we see in the Old Testament. This is something we have touched upon on this blog before, without necessarily fitting it into the framework that this paper provides. I want to highlight some of the recurring patterns or repetition previously discussed as well as demonstrate some new examples of this. The paper I linked to is quite long, so I will just highlight some of the important paragraphs here for convenience. The paper quotes Robert Alter saying

There are many kinds of ambiguity and contradiction, and abundant varieties of repetition, that are entirely purposeful and that are essential features of the distinctive vehicle of literary experience.

Goff himself notes

The biblical composers and editors used duplicate narrative devices to shape their narratives and provide meaning. Those approaches were built into the text from the beginnings and became a dominant feature of the collection of documents that became the Bible. The textual history is firmly marked by the feature.

He also argues that "to call repetitions “merely” metaphorical is to misunderstand both scripture and metaphor" and goes on to explain the concept of metaphors or types in scripture.

Old Testament priests “who serve unto the example [upodeigmati] and shadow [skia] of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern [typon] shewed to thee in the mount.” The Latin figura is the word most commonly used to translate the Greek typos. The secondary pattern matches the original. For the believer in the scripture and its ontology “a scriptural figure, in Christian theology, is not a literary metaphor that brings to the intellect some deeper meaning when attached to another image. A figure is a form that God actually makes historical experience fit, like some providential mold.” This scriptural view of time and history should never be condescended to by the modern reader who sees time in a fundamentally different, linear way. The type establishes a model that later events are going to repeat, which gives us recurrence in time and history; the analogous relationship may or may not be perceived by the reader of any given epoch, but the pattern is nevertheless manifest in the divine creative act. The modern reader needs to grasp and concede the sophistication of this view even if modern temporal notions obstruct adhering to it... Modern condescension toward ancient worldviews is too often framed after only a cursory (if that) examination of antiquity. If that modern condescension of the Bible’s textual assumptions slips over to the Book of Mormon, one can hardly be surprised if either book is read in a superficial way.

He also explains the concept of metalepsis

a mere reference to another text that reverberates with much stronger connection to the earlier text’s context by referring to only one small part but obliquely invoking the entire previous story...just by using a key word or citing a phrase, the later writer can evoke the larger context and storyline of the earlier text.

Learning about this, many Book of Mormon examples of metalepsis immediately comes to mind. This can come in many forms

The analogous element can be embedded in plot, character, word sound, word meaning, or theme. The repetitive component just needs to remind the reader of the earlier type.

There are many examples given in the paper. In addition to the ones given in the opening quote, the paper brings up several other examples that are discussed at various length.

Jonah and Exodus

In Jonah 4:2 we read

for I knew that thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness

This is likely an allusion to Exodus 34:6-7

6 And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin

This is more obvious in the original Hebrew where e.g. "slow to anger" in Jonah and "longsuffering" in Exodus are the same word. This example is part of a discussion in the paper about the nature of relationships between two texts. In general, it is much easier to show that a relationship exists than to prove which one came first, especially in the Old Testament when sometimes little is known about original authorship. But some cases are easier than others. This example has all the specificity on the side of Exodus being the predecessor text. According to Goff

By citing just one detail from God’s previous mercy, grace, and longsuffering in the foundational event of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt and receipt of the law of Moses, the Jonah passage evokes God’s previous works of salvation for Israel, extending mercy for thousands and forgiving Israel’s sins. God granted Israel mercy, grace, and longsuffering by sending Moses down the mountain with the tablets of the law after 40 days to find the children of Israel engaging in idolatry at the base of the mountain. The irony is that God is willing to extend the same mercy, grace, and longsuffering to the people of Nineveh that Jonah wants reserved only for Israel with the Israelite ancestors knowingly idolatrous while the Ninevites don’t know their moral right hands from their left (Jonah 4:11). The reader needs to know the larger story of granting the law of Moses to see what the book of Jonah is doing in the allusion, whereas one doesn’t have to know the book of Jonah to get the message from Exodus 34.

Alma's and Lehi's visions

In Alma 36:22, Alma sees a vision very similar to Lehi's vision. He explicitly refers to it and the verse contains a verbatim quote of 1 Nephi 1:8. Goff uses this example to challenge Brent Metcalfe's assertion that Joseph Smith is the author of the Book of Mormon and that the order of composition (Mosiah-Moroni -> 1 Nephi-WoM) points to the "real" author. This Alma-Lehi example is but one example to challenge that idea. It establishes the original and the reference even more clearly than the previous Jonah-Exodus example. Alma refers to Lehi by name, Lehi never mentions Alma. If Lehi's writings came first, Joseph Smith was not the author (unless you can make a good case for Joseph Smith hiding a manuscript in his hat and secretly reading from it, which you can't).

Helaman 6

There are some verses in these chapters that exemplify metaleptic allusion to evoke the larger context and storyline of earlier texts. 

25 Now behold, it is these secret oaths and covenants which Alma commanded his son should not go forth unto the world, lest they should be a means of bringing down the people unto destruction.

26 Now behold, those secret oaths and covenants did not come forth unto Gadianton from the records which were delivered unto Helaman; but behold, they were put into the heart of Gadianton by that same being who did entice our first parents to partake of the forbidden fruit—

27 Yea, that same being who did plot with Cain, that if he would murder his brother Abel it should not be known unto the world. And he did plot with Cain and his followers from that time forth.

28 And also it is that same being who put it into the hearts of the people to build a tower sufficiently high that they might get to heaven. And it was that same being who led on the people who came from that tower into this land; who spread the works of darkness and abominations over all the face of the land, until he dragged the people down to an entire destruction, and to an everlasting hell.

Helaman 6:25 refers to Alma 37 which in turn refers to Jaredite secret oaths in the Book of Ether. Verses 26-27 refer to Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel in the early chapters of Genesis and verse 28 refers to the Tower of Babel and the Jaredite exodus. It is clear from all these examples that they refer to past events. Again, this challenges the idea that Joseph Smith is the author because at this point in the dictation, the Book of Ether did not yet exist. Turning the logical order around and considering Ether a reference to an original text in Helaman 6 is like saying that the Garden of Eden story in Genesis is referring to Helaman.

Isaiah 40:3-4

This is a well-known verse

The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain

Goff uses this example to demonstrate that "the very notion of repetitions runs against the historicist assertion that a text means only what the original author intended. Repetitions by nature imply the existence of multiple meanings and symphonic reverberations within a single text, even when read in different historical contexts.

The historical setting for Isaiah 40 is clearly the preparation for a latter-day gathering of Israel. In 1 Nephi 10:3, Lehi talks about this context without referring to Isaiah 40 or its language. But only a few verses later, he ties this into a message about the coming of the Messiah and uses the Isaiah language.

even six hundred years from the time that my father left Jerusalem, a prophet would the Lord God raise up among the Jews — even a Messiah, or, in other words, a Savior of the world … And he spake also concerning a prophet who should come before the Messiah, to prepare the way of the Lord — Yea, even he should go forth and cry in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight; for there standeth one among you whom ye know not; and he is mightier than I, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose. And much spake my father concerning this thing (1 Nephi 10:5,7-8)

We see something similar done in Matthew 3:3. In fact, many New Testament quotations of the Old Testament represent what modern historicist bible scholars would consider misinterpretations. But Nephi goes out of his way to recommend Isaiah more generally (2 Nephi 25:1-6). In Alma we see further examples of this passage applied differently. This language is used both in an uplifting message to the righteous people in Gideon in Alma 7 and the wicked people in Ammonihah in Alma 9.

But behold, the Spirit hath said this much unto me, saying: Cry unto this people, saying—Repent ye, and prepare the way of the Lord, and walk in his paths, which are straight; for behold, the kingdom of heaven is at hand, and the Son of God cometh upon the face of the earth. (Alma 7:9)

Therefore, prepare ye the way of the Lord, for the time is at hand that all men shall reap a reward of their works, according to that which they have been—if they have been righteous they shall reap the salvation of their souls, according to the power and deliverance of Jesus Christ; and if they have been evil they shall reap the damnation of their souls, according to the power and captivation of the devil. (Alma 9:28) 

A conclusive note

There are even more examples brought up and discussed in Goff's paper but I will let this suffice for now. I want to spend future posts on identifying other examples from the Book of Mormon. There are plenty of them. Before going into that, I will share some general thoughts. 

One observation is the uniqueness of this scriptural feature. Perhaps others would disagree, but when reading novels or other literature, you would normally encounter events along a timeline without much repetition. Initial events establishing a blueprint for later events to follow is just not something we expect to find in literature other than the scriptures. 

Another point I would make relates to the good old debate about Book of Mormon origin. When we see similar patterns and literary devices in the Old Testament and in the Book of Mormon, I see that as yet another affirmation that the authors held similar worldviews and followed similar scribal traditions. If Joseph Smith authored the Book of Mormon as some people claim, similar patterns in the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon require entirely different explanations. I don't want to be accused of creating a straw-man argument, so I concede that the most likely explanations by critics would be that Joseph Smith simply mimicked features of the Bible that he was familiar with. Still, I think that identifying and mimicking ancient literary styles is a lot to expect from a young farmhand.

When viewed as intentional characteristics of the word of God, scriptural repetitions become gateways to additional learning and insight. In his book "Beholding the tree of life", Bradley J. Kramer suggests that we have something to learn from the rabbis who arguably spend more time with their text than the average Latter-Day Saint Book of Mormon reader. They pay particular attention when there is repetition and seeming redundancies. They believe that the learning lies in the differences between similar texts as well as in the similarities between different texts. That is, repetitions are rarely verbatim and if they are, the contexts are not identical. Once the allusion has been established, the learning points lies in the differences between the reference and the referred text.

I will spend the next posts presenting further examples from the Book of Mormon.

"Touch not that which is unclean"

Often we read about a physical, concrete concept in the Old Testament that has an abstract or spiritual counterpart. This counterpart is typically more prevalent in other scripture. The Law of Moses is one example. It is easy to get hung up on the rituals and rules that are found in Numbers and Leviticus and miss the fact that it all points to the Savior. A couple of other examples are found here and here.

We see the same trend reading about the concept of uncleanliness. The Book of Leviticus is obsessed with it. In Leviticus 11-15, words related to (un)cleanliness and (im)purity show up almost once per verse on average. These are instructions to Moses and Aron, primarily to ensure that no one enters into the Tabernacle unclean.

Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness; that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them. (Leviticus 15:31)

The Priests of the tabernacle had a special duty to ensure that nothing unclean entered in and defiled it. There is much emphasis on separating the clean and holy from the unclean and unholy.

And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean (Leviticus 10:10)

God's word to Ezekiel just before the destruction of Jerusalem contains accusations of the priests not fulfilling this duty 

Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean (Ezekiel 22:26)

When they do not manage to separate between the clean and unclean and when the people do not manage to rid themselves of the unclean, God needs to do the separation instead and it is much less pleasant than a ritual bath. 

18 Son of man, the house of Israel is to me become dross: all they are brass, and tin, and iron, and lead, in the midst of the furnace; they are even the dross of silver.

19 Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Because ye are all become dross, behold, therefore I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.

20 As they gather silver, and brass, and iron, and lead, and tin, into the midst of the furnace, to blow the fire upon it, to melt it; so will I gather you in mine anger and in my fury, and I will leave you there, and melt you. (Ezekiel 22)

Our equivalent of the Jewish ritual bath, mikveh, is baptism by water. This is followed by baptism by fire, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. The fire symbolism has been discussed on this blog before (see here and here). The idea is that fire can purge us by removing the dross in us. This is the second step after being cleansed with water. But if we have indulged in the unclean without washing, we are the dross, and then the purging looks very different.

Why all this emphasis on separating the clean and unclean? Avoiding to defile the tabernacle/temple could perhaps be reason enough. Israelites believed that it was the House of God in a very real sense. But perhaps there also was a spiritual counterpart to this concept that the Israelites missed? Isaiah hints on that and the Book of Mormon expands on it. Let's have a look at Isaiah first. "Unclean" is brought up twice in chapter 52

Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean. (Isaiah 52:1)

In this case, it is not only the temple where the unclean cannot enter, but the whole city of Jerusalem. This is describing a future state of Zion/Jerusalem, but still a place on earth (although perhaps in its millennial stage). Still speaking about this future time, Isaiah goes on to invite us to depart from Babylon in a second future exodus to Zion/the promised land.

Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the Lord.

Jesus also talks about the latter-day gathering of Israel to the Nephites and quotes this verse in 3 Nephi 20:41. It also seems to be alluded to in at least two other Book of Mormon verses.

And now I say unto you, all you that are desirous to follow the voice of the good shepherd, come ye out from the wicked, and be ye separate, and touch not their unclean things; and behold, their names shall be blotted out, that the names of the wicked shall not be numbered among the names of the righteous, that the word of God may be fulfilled, which saith: The names of the wicked shall not be mingled with the names of my people (Alma 5:57)

Hinting at the admonition by Isaiah, Alma adds "be ye separate" and goes on to explain that God wants to separate the names of the wicked and the names of his people. This idea is also rooted in ancient Jewish culture. The Law of Moses contained prohibitions to mingle certain types of grain or fabric, for example. Certain things had to be separated and kept separate. See Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:9-11. I am not sure if I understand the reason or symbolism behind the prohibition to plow with an ox and ass together or plant two different kinds of seeds in a field, but Alma applies this idea of separation on a more spiritual level. 

Moroni 10:30 is another Book of Mormon verse alluding to Isaiah 52:11

And again I would exhort you that ye would come unto Christ, and lay hold upon every good gift, and touch not the evil gift, nor the unclean thing.

He connects it with coming unto Christ, which is the symbolic equivalent of temple entrance for ancient Israelites. 

But most Book of Mormon verses using the word "unclean", connect it with entering into the kingdom of God. The separation between the wicked and the righteous on that last day is the spiritual counterpart of all the separation issues and cleanliness before entering into the temple that we find in the Old Testament. Notice the temple reference in Alma 7:21, linking to us and our entrance into the kingdom of God 

And he doth not dwell in unholy temples; neither can filthiness or anything which is unclean be received into the kingdom of God; therefore I say unto you the time shall come, yea, and it shall be at the last day, that he who is filthy shall remain in his filthiness.

As a final example, Nephi lays it out very plainly: 

if their works have been filthiness they must needs be filthy; and if they be filthy it must needs be that they cannot dwell in the kingdom of God; if so, the kingdom of God must be filthy also. But behold, I say unto you, the kingdom of God is not filthy, and there cannot any unclean thing enter into the kingdom of God; wherefore there must needs be a place of filthiness prepared for that which is filthy. (1 Nephi 15:33-34)

Faith, hope and charity leading to good works

My last post is more or less an introduction to this one. I have tried to figure out what to make of some connections between Moroni 7 and Moroni 10 and will try to organize my thoughts in this post. My thoughts build on several previous posts. For instance, a lot has been written already on this blog about Moroni 7. See here, here, here and here, for instance. I know I usually link too many previous posts so the reader will have to read five when they are supposed to read one:) But this is optional. I think we can capture the essence briefly with a few points:

• Mormon admonishes to lay hold upon every good thing through faith
• My last post shows that the ancient understanding of faith is more related to covenant fidelity than our modern understanding
• "Every good thing", a term that Mormon repeats multiple times in Moroni 7, is related to covenants, miracles and the creation

In addition, Mormon makes it absolutely clear that:

• Christ is the source of all that is good
• Faith, hope and charity are inseparably connected. You cannot really have one without the other two

These preceding bullet points are useful as backdrop. This post will elaborate on the following two additional points.

• Faith, hope and charity is the gateway to every good thing, because it binds us to the source of all good (Christ). In this union with Christ, good works flow from us naturally. 
• This is also related to the gifts of the Spirit

Lord Wilmore has previously shown here, here and here that good works, holy works and works of righteousness are used interchangeably (Yes, I know, even more links) and postulated that they describe covenant making. I think this is correct but I also think that they describe covenant keeping or the good that naturally flows from us when we are in a covenant union with Christ. In my previous post I quoted Ether 12:4

Wherefore, whoso believeth in God might with surety hope for a better world, yea, even a place at the right hand of God, which hope cometh of faith, maketh an anchor to the souls of men, which would make them sure and steadfast, always abounding in good works, being led to glorify God.

A very similar verse is found in Alma 7:24

And see that ye have faith, hope, and charity, and then ye will always abound in good works.

Coupled with Mormon's reasoning in Moroni 7, this is very clear. All that is good comes from God. We need to lay hold upon it by faith, hope and charity. Doing so, we link to the source and the good naturally flows from us, or rather from Him through us. Later in Ether 12, we read

Behold, I will show unto the Gentiles their weakness, and I will show unto them that faith, hope and charity bringeth unto me—the fountain of all righteousness.

This is why faith, hope and charity makes us abound in good works or works of righteousness; it leads to the source. But what do these works look like? "Good" and "righteous" are very general terms and when "all things which are good cometh of God" (Moroni 7:12) that encompasses a great deal. Still, it seems that Moroni has a specific interpretation of his father's admonition to "lay hold upon every good thing". In Moroni 10, he discusses the gifts of the Spirit. After having mentioned several of them, he concludes

18 And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that every good gift cometh of Christ.
19 And I would exhort you, my beloved brethren, that ye remember that he is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and that all these gifts of which I have spoken, which are spiritual, never will be done away, even as long as the world shall stand, only according to the unbelief of the children of men.
20 Wherefore, there must be faith; and if there must be faith there must also be hope; and if there must be hope there must also be charity.

We get a sense here that Moroni is linking the gifts of the Spirit to his father's sermon in Moroni 7, discussing how we can lay hold upon every good thing through faith, hope and charity. This becomes even more clear in the following verses:

24 And now I speak unto all the ends of the earth—that if the day cometh that the power and gifts of God shall be done away among you, it shall be because of unbelief.
25 And wo be unto the children of men if this be the case; for there shall be none that doeth good among you, no not one. For if there be one among you that doeth good, he shall work by the power and gifts of God...
30 And again I would exhort you that ye would come unto Christ, and lay hold upon every good gift, and touch not the evil gift, nor the unclean thing.

The message is clear and consistent with the other quotes. Through faith, hope and charity we have access to every good gift. We can lay hold upon it by coming unto Christ (the source of all good and righteous). When there is unbelief, these gifts are taken away and we are unable to do good. Moroni replaces "every good thing" with "every good gift" after having discussed the gifts of the Spirit. I am not sure if Moroni is clarifying what his father really meant by "every good thing" or if he is just using the gifts of the Spirit that he just discussed as an example that fits into a broader term.

In any case, the gifts of the spirit also fit into the covenant context discussed before. We know these are special gifts for baptized members who have received the gift of the Holy Ghost and entered into a covenant. When Paul writes about the gifts of the Spirit to the Corinthians, he compares it with "the body of Christ" (1 Cor 12:27). Becoming the body of Christ with various body parts/gifts is Paul's version of Moroni's "come unto Christ and lay hold upon every good gift". Paul also links this to faith, hope and charity. At the end of 1 Corinthians 12, after discussing the gifts of the Spirit, he writes:

But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way. (1 Cor 12:31)

Bible commentaries who understand the underlying Greek interpret this as a way of introducing charity in the next chapter as the means to attain these gifts.

And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity. Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts (1 Cor 13:13-14:1)

I hope this is not getting too messy yet, so let me try to summarize: Faith, hope and charity lead to the source of all good and righteous. In a covenant union with Him, good naturally and abundantly flows from us in the form of various spiritual gifts that we can use to build "the body of Christ".

We think of the gifts of the Spirit as something belonging to New Testament times. The Book of Mormon verses I have quoted so far almost exclusively come from Mormon and Moroni living 300-400 AD. But they seem to be expanding on more ancient and perhaps partly lost teachings. I already quoted Alma 7:24, being proclaimed more than 80 years BC. Several decades earlier, Amaleki in the Book of Omni is

exhorting all men to come unto God, the Holy One of Israel, and believe in prophesying, and in revelations, and in the ministering of angels, and in the gift of speaking with tongues, and in the gift of interpreting languages, and in all things which are good; for there is nothing which is good save it comes from the Lord: and that which is evil cometh from the devil.

After a great destruction among the Nephites, Amaleki fled the land of Nephi under Mosiah-1's lead to Zarahemla. Mormon and Moroni had also witnessed great destruction among the Nephites. I believe that this circumstance is related to their admonitions to believe in and lay hold upon spiritual gifts. Moroni was clear about this: When these gifts are gone, it is because of unbelief and then there is none that "doeth good". What follows is destruction. Amaleki and Moroni do not want their readers to make the same mistakes as their people. 

The order of the Son of God

Many biblical scholars claim that the priesthood with its formal duties started with Aaron and his sons. The term, priest, is used in passing on a few occasions before that time, but there is little information from reading the Bible alone. What was the nature of the authority and duties of a priesthood holder before Moses? I have tried to find out what those of other faiths believe and there is little to be found on this topic. Many would say that they are "priests" only in the sense that they are first-born with some privileges, but have not formally been conferred the priesthood because it didn't exist until Aaron and his sons. Of course, modern revelation, including the Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrine and Covenants, tell us otherwise and provide much valuable information.

I also think that the Book of Mormon can teach us a great deal. I base that on the fact that Lehi, a prophet from the tribe of Manasseh, made an altar and sacrificed and that his son, Nephi, built a temple. The Aaronic priesthood was strictly following a line of priesthood holders from the tribe of Levi. That is why I believe that Lehi and Nephi and their decendants in the Book of Mormon had a more ancient priesthood authority after the order of the Son of God or Mechizedek ("the king of righteousness"). Lord Wilmore makes the same case here with additional arguments.

In the Book of Mormon, the term "priesthood" exists but is not that common. It is more commonly referred to as the "(holy) order of (the Son of) God". I have noticed something that the Book of Mormon teaches us about the priesthood in ancient times. Notice the similarities between these three verses.

Helaman 8:18

Yea, and behold I say unto you, that Abraham not only knew of these things, but there were many before the days of Abraham who were called by the order of God; yea, even after the order of his Son; and this that it should be shown unto the people, a great many thousand years before his coming, that even redemption should come unto them.

Alma 13:2

And those priests were ordained after the order of his Son, in a manner that thereby the people might know in what manner to look forward to his Son for redemption.

Alma 13:16

Now these ordinances were given after this manner, that thereby the people might look forward on the Son of God, it being a type of his order, or it being his order, and this that they might look forward to him for a remission of their sins, that they might enter into the rest of the Lord.

The common denominator is clear: One of the main functions of the priesthood ordination, ordinances and the priesthood itself was to help people look forward to Christ for redemption. How exactly was that done? What was it about the priesthood itself that pointed people to Christ? I have more questions than answers here, but I might have some speculative ideas.

First of all, according to Alma 13:2, the ordination itself was pointing people towards the redemption through Christ. I am not sure how, but my guess is that the ancient priest-king tradition and the anointing with oil and laying on of hands, symbolizes the coming of the Messiah (the anointed one).

When it comes to the priesthood duties and how they might point people to Christ, I think that happened in both a direct and in an indirect manner. 

The priesthood directly pointing to Christ

When reading about the "order of God" in the Book of Mormon, it is clear that one of the main priesthood duties was simply to teach and testify of Christ. Alma 5:44 is one example.

For I am called to speak after this manner, according to the holy order of God, which is in Christ Jesus; yea, I am commanded to stand and testify unto this people the things which have been spoken by our fathers concerning the things which are to come.

Another one in Alma 13:1

I would that ye should remember that the Lord God ordained priests, after his holy order, which was after the order of his Son, to teach these things unto the people.

"These things" refer to the plan of redemption that Alma had just spoken about in Alma 12.

The priesthood indirectly pointing to Christ

In addition to teaching and prophesying of Christ, an important priesthood duty was to officiate in temple rites and other ordinances. There are few detailed descriptions about this, perhaps because of their sacred nature, but we get some hints.

And now my beloved brethren, I have said these things unto you that I might awaken you to a sense of your duty to God, that ye may walk blameless before him, that ye may walk after the holy order of God, after which ye have been received. (Alma 7:22)

The holy order (priesthood) was used to "receive" people who could then "walk" after that order. My interpretation is that this is describing temple covenants. Speaking about temple characteristics in the Book of Mormon, LeGrand Baker writes:

In Isaiah and the Psalms, and elsewhere in the scriptures, our movement through the events of this drama is symbolized as climbing a mountain. There, the code words “path,” “way,” and “highway,” “walk,” and “run,” all represent the ordinances and covenants we must do and keep in order to make that ascent

The ancient temple rites were pointing towards Christ through a lot of symbolism. The high priest himself served as a type of Christ. Thus, the priesthood and its ordinances were presented in a way "that [the people] might look forward to [Christ] for a remission of their sins".

The Melchizedek Priesthood today

Today, when we are ordained to and exercise the Melchizedek Priesthood, we think about ordinances and blessings, but perhaps not how it might point us to Christ and the atonement. But I wonder if we should learn from the Book of Mormon, rather than just saying that it doesn't apply since the priesthood organisation and temple ordinances are different today.

As the Book of Mormon describes, one of the main duties of the priesthood is still to teach and testify of Christ. In that sense, there is not much difference between the "order of the Son of God" as described in the Book of Mormon and the responsibility of the Melchizedek Priesthood today.

What about the ordinances? Some of them are very different today. We don't kill animals and sprinkle their blood, for instance. Still, perhaps we need to learn from the Book of Mormon and see how ordinances today help us look to Christ and his atonement? For instance...

• All ordinances are done in the name of Jesus Christ.
• Baptism symbolizes Christ's burial and resurrection, the sacrament is the token of his flesh and blood, etc.
• In the temple, there is much symbolism pointing us to Christ. For instance, the word for atonement in Hebrew is based on the triliteral root, 'kpr', which means "to cover" and has to do with clothing. 
• I also love Lord Wilmore's idea of miracles pointing us to the greatest miracle of salvation. Adinistering to the sick, for instance, should point our minds to the greatest Healer and the spiritual healing that He offers.

With all this in mind, perhaps the priesthood being exercised in a way that points us to Christ is just as applicable today as in Book of Mormon times. We just need to recognize the symbols and let them point us to Him.