Book of Mormon Evidence: Plan of Salvation

Neither the Old nor New Testaments make any mention of the plan of salvation by name, nor is there a detailed description of this plan anywhere in the Bible. Indeed, the word plan never even occurs in the King James Bible.¹ The Book of Mormon, on the other hand, has several detailed outlines of this doctrine.

For example, the plan frequently appears in the book of Alma, where Alma the Younger taught “the plan of redemption” to Zeezrom (see Alma 12), Ammon laid out this “plan” to King Lamoni (Alma 18:39), and Aaron taught “the plan of redemption” to Lamoni’s father (Alma 22:13). Later, Alma’s companion Amulek explained “the great plan of the Eternal God” to the Zoramites (Alma 34:9), and Alma testified of the “plan” to his son Corianton (mentioning the word plan ten times in Alma 39–42).²

While Alma, the High Priest of Zarahamla, made great use of the doctrine of the plan, he was not the first Nephite prophet to do so. The first explicit exposition of the plan was made much earlier by Jacob, Nephi’s younger brother and first priest of the temple in the city of Nephi. Jacob called it “the merciful plan of the great Creator” and “the plan of our God” (2 Nephi 9:6, 13). 

As Jacob described, the plan goes back to the very beginning, centering around “the great Creator” who would allow “himself to become subject unto man in the flesh, and die for all men, that all men might become subject unto him” (2 Nephi 9:5). This would be “an infinite atonement” because “save it should be an infinite atonement this corruption could not put on incorruption” (2 Nephi 9:7). 

Christ’s Atonement is necessary, Jacob explained, because “death hath passed upon all men” and thus, “there must needs be a power of resurrection.” This mortal state came about “by reason of the fall” (2 Nephi 9:6). Without an Atonement, the effects of the Fall would have “remained to an endless duration,” meaning that our “flesh must have laid down to rot and ... to rise no more” (2 Nephi 9:7). Jacob further explained that without a means of redemption, “our spirits must become subject to that angel who fell from before the presence of the Eternal God, and became the devil.” In other words, without the Atonement, we would have become like that fallen angel (2 Nephi 9:8–9). 

But God’s merciful plan of salvation, redemption, and happiness provides “a way for our escape from the grasp of this awful monster; yea, that monster, death and hell” (2 Nephi 9:10).³  That escape is through the Atonement, which forces death and hell to “deliver up their dead … by the power of the resurrection of the Holy One of Israel” (2 Nephi 9:12). After this, “they must appear before the judgment-seat of the Holy One of Israel; and then cometh the judgment, and then must they be judged according to the holy judgment of God” (2 Nephi 9:15). 

As Jacob concluded this part of his covenant speech, he explained that at the judgment, “they who are righteous shall be righteous still, and they who are filthy shall be filthy still.” The filthy “shall go away into everlasting fire, prepared for them” (2 Nephi 9:16). Meanwhile, “the righteous, the saints of the Holy One of Israel, they who have believed in the Holy One of Israel, they who have endured the crosses of the world, and despised the shame of it, they shall inherit the kingdom of God, which was prepared for them from the foundation of the world, and their joy shall be full forever” (2 Nephi 9:18).

Tracing Jacob’s understanding of the plan back one generation earlier, it appears that his inspired summation carried forth the influence of his father’s instructions to him in 2 Nephi 2. Although Lehi never called it a “plan,” he essentially taught these same doctrines in his final blessing to Jacob. In it he declared, “the way is prepared from the fall of man, and salvation is free” (2 Nephi 2:4). He explained the Atonement, that the Holy Messiah “offereth himself a sacrifice for sin” and “layeth down his life according to the flesh, and taketh it again by the power of the Spirit, that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, being the first that should rise” (2 Nephi 2:7–8). 

Lehi further explained the coming judgment, noting that after the resurrection, “all men come unto God; wherefore, they stand in the presence of him, to be judged of him according to the truth and holiness which is in him” (2 Nephi 2:10). Lehi taught that there are ultimately two outcomes, “liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men” or “captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil” (2 Nephi 2:27).⁴

Lehi is also the one who taught Jacob “that an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen from heaven; wherefore, he became a devil, having sought that which was evil before God” (2 Nephi 2:17), and that “he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself” (2 Nephi 2:27).⁵ These, and others, are the same doctrines taught by Jacob as “the merciful plan of the great Creator” (2 Nephi 9:6).⁶

Consistencies and Plausible Developments

Though they taught the same core doctrines, various authors emphasized different parts of the plan to address specific circumstances in their environment.⁷ Lehi, for instance, focused more on the Fall, opposition, and the agency afforded to all to choose between good and evil. This makes some sense, considering that Lehi’s final testament was given in the midst of a brewing division among his sons.⁸  This family strife was surely upsetting and perhaps perplexing to those—like Jacob—who were innocently caught in the middle of it, and who would soon be forced to choose a side (2 Nephi 5:5–6). By highlighting these key aspects of the plan of salvation, Lehi provided a doctrinal context that could help explain the growing rift among his people and inspire them “to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men” (2 Nephi 2:27).  

Jacob then passed this sacred knowledge on, just as his father Lehi had blessed him to (see 2 Nephi 2:8). It should also be remembered that Jacob was a temple priest when he gave his rendition of the plan of salvation, likely as he spoke to his people on the Day of Atonement.⁹ It is therefore only natural that he emphasized the Messiah’s Atonement, the Resurrection, and the eternal outcome from choosing either righteousness or filthiness.

Alma’s explanation of the plan of salvation also reflects the needs of his time, in which counter-doctrines, such as those taught by Nehor, were confusing the people (and even Alma’s own son Corianton) about these essential truths.¹⁰ In order to combat false teachings, Alma emphasized repentance, redemption, justice and mercy, and the resultant happiness that the righteous will enjoy in the rest of the Lord. Adding in the teachings of Amulek, Ammon, Aaron, and others provides even a fuller picture of the Lord’s eternal plan of mercy, justice, redemption, salvation, love, and happiness.¹¹

A Temple-Related Teaching

As made apparent through modern revelation and ancient documents, the portrayal of the plan of salvation is a key feature of the temple endowment and theology.¹² This may help explain the introduction and development of this doctrine in the Book of Mormon.

Lehi’s initial knowledge about the plan of salvation was received in a divine council setting, which was anciently viewed as a temple-like sanctuary where God sat exalted upon his throne surrounded by his angels.¹³ Receiving sacred divine knowledge in this context accords well with numerous ancient apocalyptic documents.¹⁴ In regard to the outpouring of recently discovered Jewish and Christian texts from the ancient world, Hugh Nibley explained,

But in working through the newly found documents, one soon becomes aware of certain themes that receive overwhelming emphasis and appear not only in a few texts but in many or most of them. Such deserve our serious attention. Among the most conspicuous of these is the matter of a certain council held in heaven “at the foundation of the world” where the divine plan of salvation was presented and received with acclamations of joy; joined to this we are presented almost invariably with some account of the opposition to that plan and the results of that opposition. Around these two themes of the plan and the opposition a great deal of the old apocryphal writings revolves.¹⁵

The careful reader may also recall that both Jacob and Alma were responsible for the temples in the cities of Nephi and Zarahemla. Thus, it would be natural for them to closely align their teachings with their high priestly duties.

Conclusion

As mentioned at the beginning, the Book of Mormon’s presentation of the plan of salvation is not biblically derived. It arises in the Book of Mormon as a unique and multi-faceted doctrine, manifesting numerous consistencies as well as understandable developments over time.¹⁶ The Book of Mormon thus invites us to believe that the plan of salvation is one of the “plain and precious” truths that were in some way lost or taken away from the Bible (1 Nephi 13:28).

While this may seem to be a bold and unexpected claim, it is nevertheless supported by the existence of similarly articulated truths in numerous apocryphal and pseudepigraphal texts, often given in temple-related contexts.¹⁷ The development of the plan of salvation in the Book of Mormon is therefore both literarily complex and anciently plausible.