Evidence #342 | May 23, 2022

Book of Mormon Evidence: The Two Ways

Post contributed by

 

Scripture Central

Abstract

The ancient doctrine of the Two Ways is prevalent throughout the Book of Mormon. It’s course of development among the Nephites is both historically plausible and literarily complex.

Many ancient texts evoke a doctrinal concept that has come to be known as the Two Ways. At its core, it involves opposite consequences for opposing sets of choices, which are represented by different metaphorical ways or paths. One path leads to goodness, truth, light, happiness, life, and ultimately God. The other path leads to lies, darkness, misery, death, and eventually the devil.

While some features of the Two Ways doctrine can be found in biblical texts, according to Noel Reynolds, “the doctrine of the Two Ways is fully articulated in only a few biblical passages.”1 In the early chapters of Genesis, for example, Adam and Eve were presented with a choice between keeping God’s commands or following the enticements of a serpent. Interestingly, embedded in the choice itself (whether to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil) is the very dualism that the choice represented. After they partook, they were cast out of the garden, which was thereafter protected by “Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life” (Genesis 3:24; emphasis added).2

Cherubim and a flaming sword blocking the path back to Eden. Attribution unknown. 

While the Eden narrative certainly evokes the way to everlasting life, it lacks any sort of opposing path. The same imbalance is present in many other biblical texts. The large majority “point to one or the other of the two ways—either the ways of God or of men—assuming that the hearer is aware of the other, which will make the meaning clear.”3

Around the time of the Jewish exile into Babylon, a more developed doctrine of Two Ways began to take shape.4 This can be seen in a variety of documents from the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as numerous early Christian texts, such as the Didache.5 In a comprehensive study of this textual phenomenon, Margaret McKenna found that the Two Ways doctrine came to be “characterized by a unity of antithetical structure and thematic content composed of five elements: way imagery, guides, ethical content, ends, and turns which appear in a great variety of expressions.”6 The purpose of such discourse was almost always to encourage repentance and righteous living.

A good example of this formula can be seen in a Dead Sea Scrolls text called the Damascus Document. It speaks of the need to “avoid the ways of evil” and “live blamelessly in the proper way.” Because Israel abandoned God, God “turned away from Israel.” The “Man of Mockery … led them to wander in the trackless wasteland. He brought down the lofty heights of old, turned aside from paths of righteousness.” The reader is warned that eventually “destruction shall come against all who rebel against the proper way.”7 Similar themes are touched upon throughout.       

A fragment of the Damascus Document . Image via Wikimedia Commons. 

As summarized by Reynolds,

McKenna recognized that this identifiable, recurring form obviously developed over time, and the handful of preexilic examples are not nearly so complete or well-defined as are those from the second- and third-century Christians. While [later] Two Ways texts bear obvious similarities with older covenant-making and renewal texts, she argues that even though these two text-types clearly share some form and terminology, they each have their consistently distinct elements and functions.8

Two Ways in the Book of Mormon

The fact that the shift towards more developed and formulaic expressions of the Two Ways occurred around the Jewish exile into Babylon may be significant. It suggests that a heightened interest in this doctrine was already in the air, so to speak, when Lehi and his family departed from Jerusalem. It should not be too surprising, therefore, to learn that the doctrine of the Two Ways is featured prominently in the Book of Mormon (see Appendix). 

Throughout his prolific career, Hugh Nibley frequently drew attention to this fact, but he never approached the Two Ways in a focused or systematic way to tease out its particular formulations in the Nephite record.9 The first study of this nature was published in 1997 by Mack Stirling, who charted the development of the Two Ways in nine Book of Mormon texts.10

In 2017 Noel Reynolds conducted a second study.11 He discovered that the Book of Mormon “refers to the gospel of Jesus Christ as ‘the way’ or ‘the path’ 108 times—even more frequently than the 67 times it uses the terms ‘doctrine’ or ‘gospel.’”12 While Stirling’s objective was primarily to discover the text’s internal development of this doctrine, Reynolds surveyed “about a dozen exemplary passages in the Book of Mormon that explicitly refer to two paths or ways to assess the extent to which these follow or vary from each other or from the Jewish and Christian models.”13

Attribution Unknown

Reynolds concluded that in a number of ways, the presentation of the Two Ways in the Book of Mormon mirrors its usage in pre-exilic Hebrew texts.14 Yet, at the same time, the doctrine developed in a manner peculiar to the Nephite tradition.

[Later authors] relied mostly on the great revelations given to the early Nephite prophets, and especially on the visions in which they were taught about the coming Atonement of Jesus Christ and his gospel. The Nephite prophets continued to add new insights and vocabulary in their adaptations of the Two Ways doctrine as they taught their people—almost always in the mode of calling them to repentance. But even though their biblical sources were largely the same as the ones the Qumran writers and the early Christians drew on, they do not exhibit the developed rhetorical form or themes that Margaret McKenna identified in the Jewish and Christian texts from the Greco-Roman period. … Rather, successive authors tended to assume the contributions of their predecessors, while they felt free to add and extend that discourse as influenced by their own experience and inspiration.15

Conclusion

It is plausible that Lehi, situated in Jerusalem around 600 BC, would have been exposed to various pre-exilic developments of the Two Ways tradition.16 The manner in which the Two Ways doctrine evolves in the Book of Mormon, independent from its development in the Old World, is also quite believable. The similarities and dissimilarities are indicative of two separate traditions that sprang from the same literary source.

Joseph Smith, however, couldn’t have known in 1829 that the rich tradition of the Two Ways developed among the Nephites would find a distant cousin among the extra-biblical Jewish and Christian corpora of the Greco-Roman period. Most of the relevant texts needed to make such a connection hadn’t yet been discovered, nor had biblical scholars yet fully recognized the Two Ways as a distinctive doctrine in early Jewish and Christian texts.17

In addition to its status as a genuinely ancient religious concept, the doctrine of the Two Ways in the Book of Mormon demonstrates one aspect of its literary complexity and theological persuasiveness. As assessed by Reynolds, “The Nephite prophets created a far richer and more highly developed language and system of explanations of the Doctrine of the Two Ways” than can be found in post-exilic texts of the Old World.18

Further Reading
Appendix
Endnotes
Complexity
Doctrine
Two Ways
Book of Mormon

© 2024 Scripture Central: A Non-Profit Organization. All rights reserved. Registered 501(c)(3). EIN: 20-5294264