Another parallel between the word of God and the covenant people

14 And it shall come to pass that my people, which are of the house of Israel, shall be gathered home unto the lands of their possessions; and my word also shall be gathered in one. And I will show unto them that fight against my word and against my people, who are of the house of Israel, that I am God, and that I covenanted with Abraham that I would remember his seed forever. (2 Nephi 29)

Writing about the miraculous preservation of a remnant of Joseph of Egypt's coat (see here) got me thinking about the verse above.

The preservation of the coat is a symbol of both the promises made by God about His seed and also about His word. Both would be miraculously preserved by the hand of God until the day comes when they shall be gathered in one. We live in the day when that has begun. The covenant people are the ones who make sacred promises to live by the word of God. Both are miraculously preserved by the Word of God, who came into the world to be a light unto it.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1)

In this post, I will review some of the key verses which detail how these promises are written about in the Book of Mormon.

The Words of Jacob/Israel

Here are the words of Jacob as quoted by Moroni as he rallied an army (by covenant) to defend the liberty of the Nephites:

24 Yea, let us preserve our liberty as a remnant of Joseph; yea, let us remember the words of Jacob, before his death, for behold, he saw that a part of the remnant of the coat of Joseph was preserved and had not decayed. And he said—Even as this remnant of garment of my son hath been preserved, so shall a remnant of the seed of my son be preserved by the hand of God, and be taken unto himself, while the remainder of the seed of Joseph shall perish, even as the remnant of his garment.

25 Now behold, this giveth my soul sorrow; nevertheless, my soul hath joy in my son, because of that part of his seed which shall be taken unto God.

26 Now behold, this was the language of Jacob. (Alma 46)

(The phrase "taken unto himself" in red is interesting and related, but outside the scope of this post, It will be the subject of a post in the next few days.)

Notice how Israel describes the remnant: "preserved and not decayed." He prophesies that the same will happen to a remnant of his son's seed.  What will make the difference between decaying and being preserved?  The word of God, of course. Having it and "keeping" it. In a magnificent and directly relevant sermon to his son Joseph, Lehi teaches this very clearly:

23 Wherefore, because of this covenant thou art blessed; for thy seed shall not be destroyed, for they shall hearken unto the words of the book. (2 Nephi 3)

As I read the words of Joseph of Egypt in Alma 46, I was immediately reminded of two key phrases in the Book of Mormon which revolve around the same theme, which equally apply to the people of God and the word of God and which have been the subject of several previous posts:

• "Kept and Preserved" (see this post)
• "Retain their Brightness" (see this post)

"Kept and Preserved"

Summarizing from the post linked above, we find various contexts in which the phrase "kept and preserved" appears in the Book of Mormon:

• the plates of brass (see Mosiah 1:3-5, Mosiah 28:11, Alma 37:3-4 and 14)
• the plates of Nephi (see 2 Nephi 25:21, Mosiah 28:11)
• righteous leaders (see Mosiah 2:11)
• God's people (see Omni 1:6, Mosiah 2:20, Mosiah 7:20, Alma 9:22, Alma 44:4)
• the Urim and Thummim (Mosiah 28:14)

The express purpose of the word of God is to bring about covenants (see 1 Nephi 13:40-41), thereby creating a covenant people.  Keep in mind that the word of God goes far beyond the written word.  It includes all that is necessary to walk to the tree of life.

"Retain their brightness"

Another phrase/symbol that can be applied to the word of God and the people of God is the concept of brightness. 

• Nephi's brother Jacob knew the things which were written upon plates "must remain" (Jacob 4:1), whereas anything written "upon anything save it be upon plates must perish and vanish away."
• Lehi, upon receiving the plates of brass, states: "these plates of brass should never perish; neither should they be dimmed any more by time." (1 Nephi 5:19)
• King Benjamin says this about the words he was commanded to deliver to his people by an angel: "They shall stand as a bright testimony against this people, at the judgment day" (Mosiah 3:24)
• Alma-2 tells his son Helaman that "if they are kept they must retain their brightness; yea, and they will retain their brightness; yea, and also shall all the plates which do contain that which is holy writ." (Alma 37:5)

Conclusion

This promise given by God to the ancient patriarchs underscores the intimate connection between God's covenant people and His word.  The connection between covenant-making and the scriptures is emphasized in our modern temples, too, in several important ways. I'll close this post with a prophecy of Joseph in Egypt about a Latter-day Joseph who restore this everlasting covenant to the earth and begin the final gathering of Israel:

7 Yea, Joseph truly said: Thus saith the Lord unto me: A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins; and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins. And unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins, his brethren, which shall be of great worth unto them, even to the bringing of them to the knowledge of the covenants which I have made with thy fathers. (2 Nephi 3)

Endowment Narratives in the Book of Mormon, Part 2a -- The (first half of the) Big Picture

This post is a continuation of my previous post on the endowment narrative in the Book of Mormon. This is part 2a. In this part (and part 2b to follow), I'll lay out the evidence I've found so far about the general pattern described in part 1. Before I get to that, I will make a few general comments on the importance of stepping back from our "hyper-factual historical" approach when we study scriptural symbols.  In part 3, I will begin to discuss possible meanings of each element of the pattern and why I believe it belongs in this endowment narrative.

A note about the modern "Hyper-factual historical" mindset 

Our modern worldview is practically obsessed with historical accuracy. There isn't anything inherently wrong with this, and in many ways it is a blessing to be able to discern between things that actually happened and things that didn't.  But in other ways, our laser focus on historical accuracy limits us, in that it causes us to ascribe value to stories only to the extent that we can prove they faithfully recount what actually happened. In this mindset, "myth" takes on a very negative connotation, because it suggests a thing didn't happen precisely as it is told.

The stories of Adam and Eve and Noah are three perfect examples of this.  These accounts are so important they occupy a prime position in the Bible, and yet modern discussions rapidly descend into debates about belly buttons and the plausibility of global floods. 

To be clear, I personally believe in a literal Garden of Eden, a literal Adam and Eve, and a literal Noah who protected his family from a massive flood by obeying God's command to build a ship. But I also believe that the reason we are given these stories has little to do with their historical accuracy.  Rather, we are given these stories as archetypes. These stories embody grand themes relating to the arc of mortality: humanity's fall into carnal sin and their efforts to reclaim God's presence through obedience to His word.

In other words, the ancients were far more concerned with archetypal patterns than historical fact, and if we read an archetypal story with a modern "hyper-factual historical" worldview, we are likely to miss the point entirely. To the ancients, archetypal myth held a higher place of importance in their minds than factual accuracy, because myth conveyed more important information than simply factual recounting of historical events. 

How this relates to the Book of Mormon

I believe the authors of each of the following accounts in the Book of Mormon were following a specific literary tradition of embedding deeper messages within their accounts by conforming their descriptions of these groups of people to specific archetypal patterns. I'll discuss what I believe the meaning of the pattern is in much more detail in part 3 of this series, but it can be summarized as: "this new group of covenant-keeping people accepted God's gift to them and became like Adam and Eve in their efforts to regain God's presence." That is the message that is transmitted without being overtly stated. (It also happens to be one of the central messages of the endowment narrative found in the Book of Moses and in modern temple worship.)

One other note: Please do not just take my word for it as I lay out this pattern. I strongly encourage you to take your time and look up each of these stories on your own and find each of the details listed. As I've been studying these accounts repeatedly, I've gained a deep respect for the deeper message, and I've found more examples and details each time I've taken the time to look. 

As a reminder, here is the list of details:

1. Commanded/warned (often in a dream or vision) to depart
2. The group they leave are involved in secret combinations or intend to kill them.
3. They seek to bring all who will hearken/listen
4. The new covenant people passes through a wilderness on their journey
5. "Many days"
6. Tents (a symbol of the presence of the Lord)
7. A list of animals (sometimes "of every kind")
8. They inherit a land
9. New names are given (see Genesis 2:20)
10. They obey the commandments of the Lord
11. Abundance/Prosper
12. They are usually led by a righteous patriarch/king/royal family member

Examples

I'll begin with a quick recap of the story contained in 1 Nephi of Lehi's family leaving Jerusalem and becoming a new branch of the covenant people as they passed through the wilderness to a land of promise. This was discussed in more detail in part 1, but there is a recap:

	Detail	Lehi
1	Warned to depart	1 Nephi 2:2
2	Escaping from secret combinations/plan to murder	1 Nephi 1:20; 2:13;16:37-38
3	Bring all who would "hearken"/listen	Family, Zoram, Ishmael and Family
4	Pass through a wilderness	1 Nephi 2:2, 4-6
5	"Many days"	1 Nephi 16:15, 17, 33
6	Tents	1 Nephi 2:4, 6, 15; 7:5, 21-22
7	Animals "of every kind"	1 Nephi 18:25
8	Inherit a new land	1 Nephi 2:20
9	New names	1 Nephi 2:8 (Lehi names a river and a valley)
10	Obedience to the commandments of God	1 Nephi 2:3 (many other examples)
11	Abundance/Prosper	1 Nephi 18:24
12	Led by a righteous patriarch/king/royal family member (occasionally specifically the non-eldest son)	Lehi/Nephi (patriarch and non-oldest son)

The second Lehite example

Just after Lehi dies, the separation narrative repeats itself in 2 Nephi 5. This pattern is perhaps the most complete and concise, with all twelve items showing up in verses 2-18, essentially in the order I list them (with the exception of items 1 & 2).

	Detail	Nephi
1	Warned to depart	2 Nephi 5:5
2	Escaping from secret combinations/plan to murder	2 Nephi 5:2-4
3	Bring all who would "hearken"/listen	2 Nephi 5:5-6
4	Pass through a wilderness	2 Nephi 5:6
5	"Many days"	2 Nephi 5:7
6	Tents	2 Nephi 5:7
7	Animals "of every kind"	2 Nephi 5:11 ("of every kind")
8	Inherit a new land	2 Nephi 5:8
9	New names	2 Nephi 5:9
10	Obedience to the commandments of God	2 Nephi 5:10
11	Abundance/Prosper	2 Nephi 5:11
12	Led by a righteous patriarch/king/royal family member	2 Nephi 5:18

Additional notes about this example: This example is also positioned right after the account of Lehi's death/Nephi's psalm and just before Jacob (the anointed priest) gives an important sermon at the temple about "learn[ing]" and "glorify[ing]" the name of God, which echoes the language used to describe Adam and Eve (see Moses 5:8-12).

Mosiah - Benjamin - Mosiah

This example comes next in the text of the Book of Mormon, but it is quite fragmented because of the missing portions of Mormon's abridgement. This one also plays out over three generations of righteous kings. There are some elements not clearly mentioned, yet many parts of the pattern fit pretty cleanly:

	Detail	Mosiah - Benjamin - Mosiah
1	Warned to depart	Omni 1:12
2	Escaping from secret combinations/plan to murder	Implied in Mosiah 1:14
3	Bring all who would "hearken"/listen	Omni 1:12-13
4	Pass through a wilderness	Omni 1:12-13
5	"Many days"	Not specifically found, but we are told in Mosiah 7:4 that it took "many days" to travel back to the land of Nephi from Zarahemla
6	Tents	Mosiah 2:5-6 (In the context of King Benjamin's sermon at the temple)
7	Animals	Mosiah 2:3 ("flocks" are mentioned in the context of sacrifice)
8	Inherit a new land	Omni 1:19 (united with people of Zarahemla)
9	New names	Mosiah 1:10
10	Obedience to the commandments of God	Mosiah 1:11
11	Abundance/Prosper	Mosiah 2: 22, 31
12	Led by a righteous patriarch/king/royal family member	Omni 1:10; Mosiah 1:10

Additional notes about this example: The connection between obedience and prospering is made abundantly clear in this example.  These two elements are mentioned both in the positive context and the negative context in multiple places.

Conclusion (to be continued)

Those were the first three examples of the pattern.  We have five more (generally shorter) examples to go in part 2b. I hope you can see the pattern and how it seems that the authors are following a specific archetypal pattern as the recount the events surrounding the formation of a new covenant group.

The small meal, the grand feast, Adam and Eve, and ancient temple worship -- Part 1

In this post, I mentioned a very interesting presentation on ancient Egyptian priestly rituals. The overall pattern of the rituals share much in common with ancient Israelite temple rituals, and we can also see some fascinating parallels with our modern worship in the church.

This post will discuss one set of rituals in the Egyptian practice that has a clear parallel to Israelite temple worship: the small meal and the grand feast.

Dr. John Thompson explains the connections between the small meal, the sacrament, and grand feast, and the harvest/gathering here (~2.5 minute clip):

The parallels are certainly fascinating.  It seems the essence of the small meal/sacrament is demonstrating a willingness to receive from Christ. In contrast, the essence of the grand feast is demonstrating a willingness to bring forth an offering. First we receive, then we give. This implies transformation. We become a new creation.

I have questions to ponder as I consider these symbols.  Here are some of my initial questions:

• What is the connection between the small meal and the grand feast?
• The connection between the small meal and the sacrament seems obvious, but what part of our worship represents the grand feast?
• How does this symbolism relate to Christ and His doctrine?
• Is this another connection to Noah, the covenant symbolism of the ark, and his obedience to God to bring animals of every kind into the ark with him?

This post will set off a series in which I'll explore these and other questions. I hope to connect some of these ideas in a meaningful way, but I apologize in advance if they seem a bit disjointed. At present I don't see a clear sequence to present these ideas, so I'll simply present them one at a time as best I can.

Connection to Adam and Eve

In pondering about what this grand meal might represent in our modern temple worship, it seems to me that we're talking about consecration. Just as the ancients gave of their possessions (animals, grain, etc.) we are asked to offer all that we have to God:

The law of consecration is that we consecrate our time, our talents, and our money and property to the cause of the Church: such are to be available to the extent they are needed to further the Lord’s interests on earth. (Elder Bruce R. McConkie, source here)

It occurs to me that this grand offering might be a symbolic reflection of obedience to the commandment given to Adam and Eve:

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Genesis 1)

Each of the colored words above directly connects to the doctrine of Christ and will be the discussed in future posts in this series. What better way to demonstrate dominion over the creatures of the creation than to bring them as an offering to God? And of course the devotion does not stop with the bringing of animals as offerings. Ultimately, we make ourselves -- our "bodies" (see Romans 12:1) according to Paul and our "whole souls" (see Omni 1:26) according to Amaleki -- an offering to God. 

This offering is part of the process of spiritual creation and results in at least two things:

1. We fulfill the first commandment God gave to Adam and Eve just after their creation, prior to their transgression. 
2. We transform from hearers of the word into speakers of the word also -- from receivers to givers. 

Perhaps the small meal -- a reminder of the gate by which we entered (see 2 Nephi 31:17) onto the path -- is like manna. It is daily bread -- enough to nourish us as we walk the covenant path, but not enough to "fill" us.  When we are made clean and prepared to participate in the grand feast, we "feast" and are "filled," thereby learning to "speak with the tongue of angels" (see 2 Nephi 31:20; 2 Nephi 32:2-3)

All of this meal/feast symbolism involves the mouth.  Feasting happens through the mouth, as does speaking. That's probably an important part of the symbolism.

I've posted before on Noel Reynolds' observation that one fundamental lesson we can take from Alma 36, with its beautiful chiastic structure, is that Alma's word has become God's word (by the process of conversion). That is a message that fits into this feast/speak symbolism as well.  The process which begins with our willingness to hearken to the word of God ends up teaching us to speak with the tongue of angels. The nose is the symbol of the consecrated offering we must bring to fulfill the commandment God gave Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. That final act of consecration prepares them to be "filled" (see Alma 32:42).

Might this be what James had in mind when he wrote:

17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1)

In the next post, we'll start to look in more depth at Genesis 1:28.

400 year cycle(s) of decline in the Book of Mormon

This short post will set up a concept I am currently studying as part of the "mantic versus sophic worldview" concept I have posted about recently.

Restoration happens through mantic revelation. The prophetic tradition is the essence of the mantic worldview. In other words, a prophet is called by means of heavenly messengers. This involves visions, prophecy, and powerful spiritual experiences. 

By contrast, apostasy typically happens as a people drifts away from the mantic worldview and gradually embrace the sophic (intellectual) worldview. They de-emphasize Christ and His atonement and adopt a more materialist perspective, with a focus on wealth and status.

This is a central theme in the Book of Mormon, presented in various ways. One of these ways involves the concept of a 400 year cycle of decline, which is presented twice in the Nephite history. Recall that Mosiah-1 saved the Nephites from destruction (or at least those who would listen to him and follow him). They escaped the land of their first inheritance (Nephi-Lehi) and made their way to Zarahemla, where Mosiah became king. The second cycle ends with the complete destruction of the Nephites. The parallels between these two cycles are numerous and often subtle, but very interesting. There's a lot of material to cover on this subject, but I want to present one single common detail between the first Nephite cycle and the second.  

320 years after Lehi left Jerusalem, one of his descendants wrote the following on the small plates: 

And now I, Amaron, write the things whatsoever I write, which are few, in the book of my father. Behold, it came to pass that three hundred and twenty years had passed away, and the more wicked part of the Nephites were destroyed. (Omni 1:4-5)

Compare with these verses written about a much later time, when the people had grown very wicked:

48 And it came to pass that when three hundred and twenty years had passed away, Ammaron, being constrained by the Holy Ghost, did hide up the records which were sacred—yea, even all the sacred records which had been handed down from generation to generation, which were sacred—even until the three hundred and twentieth year from the coming of Christ. (4 Nephi 1)

What are we to make of this similarity between name of record-keeper, timing, and condition of the covenant people? Did Joseph Smith simply recycle plot points as he finished the dictation, as some critics might assume?  Or is this a clue intended to point our mind to finding common themes and apply them to our own lives?

In a future post, I'll outline some additional details that cause me to believe the latter.  Each of us is susceptible to allowing our own heavenly worldview to become corrupt and fixated on material wealth, forgetting God and the true purposes of His creation and His covenant. The Book of Mormon offers a powerful formula to help us step out of this cycle of chaos and embrace the way of life.

Internal consistency -- Lamanite cities

We should seek and rely on a personal, spiritual witness of the Book of Mormon, independently of scholarly research and secular approaches. But when critics manage to lure away faithful members with their arguments, countering those also has its place. My assertion is that the Book of Mormon is more complex than most people realize. There are intricate, internally consistent details, that we normally don't think about. Critics do not factor those into their theories of Book of Mormon origins, but they cannot be ignored. We have given numerous examples before on this blog. Each example may not be too convincing on its own, but there are literally hundreds and combined they make it difficult to believe that Joseph Smith could remember so many details without notes or manuscript.

Here is another example. In the "war chapters" in Alma we get a lot of details about the geography of the Nephite lands. Earlier in Alma, where the mission of the sons of Mosiah among the Lamanites is recounted, we also get the names of several Lamanite cities. To make up some strange city names does not have to be too difficult, even when doing it with your face in a hat, unless you have to remember them and bring them up again at some later point and avoid contradictions. But this is exactly the case.

This is what the Book of Mormon tells us about Lamanite lands: It is (ironically) called the land of Nephi. At least, that is what the Nephites call it, perhaps the Lamanites themselves used another name, but the Book of Mormon is written by Nephites. The historical background is found in 2 Nephi 5 and The Book of Omni. An interesting side note is that Joseph Smith had not yet dictated these chapters at the time he gave the information about Lamanite geography in Alma. 

In 2 Nephi 5, Nephi and those who want to come with him, separate from Laman and Lemuel and those who are hostile towards Nephi. They establish themselves in the land of Nephi and live there for 400 years. But Nephi's brother, Jacob, prophesies

And the time speedily cometh, that except ye repent they [the Lamanites] shall possess the land of your inheritance, and the Lord God will lead away the righteous out from among you. (Jacob 3:4)

In Omni, Mosiah-1 is warned and flees the land of Nephi with those who want to follow him. The more wicked part of the Nephites had already been destroyed at that point (Omni 1:5). Later (in the Book of Mormon but earlier in the dictation sequence), in Mosiah 9, we read that Zeniff wants to go back to inherit the land of Nephi, but now there are Lamanites living there. Naturally, they took the land of Nephi in possession when the Nephites had either fled or been destroyed, just like Jacob had prophesied.

When the sons of Mosiah later go on a mission there to preach the gospel to the Lamanites, we learn some of their city names. Some are found at various places in the text. In Alma 23:9-12, we get a list of cities in which Lamanites converted:

9 The people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Ishmael;
10 And also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Middoni;
11 And also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the city of Nephi;
12 And also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Shilom, and who were in the land of Shemlon, and in the city of Lemuel, and in the city of Shimnilom.

7 cities altogether. Most of these are not names that Joseph Smith could have just thrown out there because they have been mentioned before. The first one mentioned is Ishmael. This is where Ammon went in the beginning of the story.

And Ammon went to the land of Ishmael, the land being called after the sons of Ishmael, who also became Lamanites. (Alma 17:19)

The king in Ishmael, Lamoni, became converted along with basically his whole kingdom. So it is natural that this is first on the list.

Middoni is next. This city is mentioned in chapters 19 and 20 as the place where Ammon's brothers were cast into prison. Lamoni was a friend of the king in Middoni and went with Ammon there and set them free. We don't read more details but we know this happened after Lamoni's conversion so perhaps he influenced the king and that later caused much conversion in this city as well. 

Next in the list is the city of Nephi. This is first mentioned in Alma 22:1. 

Now, as Ammon was thus teaching the people of Lamoni continually, we will return to the account of Aaron and his brethren; for after he departed from the land of Middoni he was led by the Spirit to the land of Nephi, even to the house of the king which was over all the land save it were the land of Ishmael; and he was the father of Lamoni.

When Aron preaches to Lamoni's father in the land of Nephi (who probably lives in the city of Nephi, since these "lands" were city states), he is also converted with his whole house. So it is natural that the city of Nephi is also on this list. There is another subtle detail that I highlighted. Why is he king over all the land except the land of Ishmael? Two chapters earlier, an encounter between Ammon and Lamoni's father resulted in him promising this:

I will grant unto you that my son may retain his kingdom from this time and forever; and I will govern him no more (Alma 20:26)

So when we later read about Lamoni's father who is king over all the land, there is now one exception, and the text references back to that detail.

Shilom and Shemlon are next on the list and never mentioned in the account of the mission of the sons of Mosiah. We have to go all the way back to Mosiah 24:1 for the last mention of these lands, where they are presented as Lamanite territory. 

Lemuel and Shimnilom are the only cities we have not read about before and therefore in theory could have been just thrown into the mix without disrupting internal consistency. But all the other 5 lands/cities have already been introduced in the text and had to match the fact that they were Lamanite cities with potential converts.

There are also a few Lamanite cities/lands that have been introduced in the text but are not on the list of Lamanite cities with converts in Alma. For instance, in Alma 21:2, we read about a city called Jerusalem (named after the city of their forefathers). This is a city with many Amulonites and Amalekites and synagogues after the order of Nehor to which they belonged. Since, for the most part, those born as Lamanites converted and not Amulonites and Amalekites, it is not unexpected that this city is excluded from the list.

The point is: Those who say that Joseph Smith just made it all up, need to explain how he could get all these details straight with his face in a hat. It is not trivial.

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.