On the slaying of Laban...

So a classic (ad nauseum) question of theology: does God's immediate command supersede his established, written law? Folks cite Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac as an example (it isn't; the Mosaic law was not for another thousand years). But another, more poignant example is Nephi's killing of Laban...Nephi knew the law...was this not a case of God declaring an exception? Now when and to what degree God can declare exceptions is a can of worms I will not indulge in here. However, I will suggest to you, friendly readers, that we really should stop using the Nephi example. It's far too complicated for easy dissemination. But alas, we insist upon easy, cheap examples, so perhaps my words will be in vain...the life of the misunderstood...:)

Basically, according to John Welch, Nephi's killing did not fit comfortably under the Mosaic law (see Ex. 21:12-14, Deut. 19:4-13, and Num. 35:9-34). "Murder" as they considered it involved two characteristics: premeditation and a lack of divine providence. Nephi's text explicitly declares that it was not premeditated ("not knowing beforehand...") and that God had delivered him into his hands. On the first point, the question is: was Nephi willing? Was he entirely aware of the consequences of his actions? Both the Septuagaint and the Hebrew Bible give us clues--both offer passages that allow a killer an escape clause provided that the killing was done "at unawares." Of course, what made one unawares? The Hebrew text offers a definition that suggests a momentary lack of judgment on the part of the killer or some ignorance of the law. The Greek suggests a more telling word--akousios--lit. "unwillingly"--a word used to described the throwing over of cargo to save passengers. The question was a hot one for ancient jurists, according to Welch. Even Aristotle expresses some angst about fully assigning guilt to those who kill for "some noble purpose," though he ultimately does describe this is a "voluntary act." In either the Hebrew or the Greek context, however, while Nephi may have been indicted as being negligent for believing that his killing of Laban was a good deed, the law may have exhonerated him from the more heinous crime of murder.

Secondly, Nephi could have argued that God had delivered him into his hands, a concept that is drawn almost verbatim from Exodus 21:13. It is fairly significant that this phrase, of all phrases, was what the Spirit whispered to him that night. Indeed, the passage from which this is drawn was memorized by all Jewish students...repeated often and in numerous locales (at breakfast, walking down the street, etc.). The Lord was telling Nephi that there was legal covering for him...and that he would not be held guilty under the law. After all, the texts in question also tell us that those who do commit "involuntary" murder are provided an escape, "a city of refuge." The Lord did just that...indeed, providing him a country of refuge as Nephi was about to leave Israel entirely.

I do not suggest that there is an outright legal covering for all sticky acts (polygamy, murder, etc.). This is merely a question of argumentation--we should stop using the Nephi example to discuss the transcendence of God's immediate will over his written law. The example is messy and introduces more problems than it solves.