The practice of hiding up treasures unto the Lord

Samuel the Lamanite Prophesies of a Curse

and behold | a curse shall come upon the land |

saith the lord of hosts |

because of the peoples’ sake | who are upon the land | yea | because of their wickedness and their abominations |

and it shall come to pass |

saith the lord of hosts | yea | our great and true god |

that whoso shall hide up treasures in the earth shall find them again no more | because of the great curse of the land |

save he be a righteous man | and shall hide it up unto the lord |

for i will |

saith the lord |

that they shall hide up their treasures unto me |

and cursed be they | who hide not up their treasures unto me |

for none hideth up their treasures unto me | save it be the righteous |

and he that hideth not up his treasures unto me | cursed is he |

and also the treasure | and none shall redeem it | because of the curse of the land |

and the day shall come | that they shall hide up their treasures | because they have set their hearts upon riches |

and because they have set their hearts upon their riches | and will hide up their treasures | when they shall flee before their enemies | because they will not hide them up unto me | cursed be they and also their treasures | and in that day shall they be smitten |

saith the lord |

behold ye | the people of this great city | and hearken unto my words | yea | hearken unto the words | which the lord saith |

for behold | he saith | that ye are cursed | because of your riches | and also are your riches cursed | because ye have set your hearts upon them | and have not hearkened unto the words of him | who gave them unto you |

ye do not remember the lord | your god | in the things with which he hath blessed you | but ye do always remember your riches | not to thank the lord | your god | for them | yea | your hearts are not drawn out unto the lord | but they do swell with great pride| unto boasting | and unto great swelling | envyings | strifes | malice | persecutions | and murders | and all manner of iniquities |

for this cause hath the lord god caused | that a curse should come upon the land | and also upon your riches | and this because of your iniquities |  (Helaman 13: 17-23)

Surplus and the Law of Consecration

Under the law of consecration, after the first consecration of properties to the church, any surplus afterward obtained (called residue in the scriptures) was also to be consecrated.  In this way, the poor would be taken care of on a continual basis.

Poor and Rich Defined

The scriptural definition of “poor” is “having sufficient for one’s needs without any surplus,” whereas the scriptural definition of “rich” is “having more than is necessary for one’s needs.”  Keep this in mind.  (There is also a third class of individuals who do not even have sufficient for their needs.  These are known as the “needy”.)

Surplus, Rich and Riches

A surplus, then, makes one rich, according to the scriptures.  Riches, then, as described in the scriptures, is anything in surplus.

Result of Obedience to the Law of Consecration

When a people begin to live the law of consecration and continue to live it, they become blessed of the Lord in all things.  Initially, as the poor and needy are provided for by the consecrations of the rich, there is an evening out of the properties.  However, as time goes by, the former needy (who now have sufficient for their needs) start to generate a surplus, too, like the former rich (who are continually consecrating their riches, which are surpluses, to the poor and needy.)  All, then, start to generate surpluses.

As an entire society is converted to the gospel of Jesus Christ and lives the law of consecration (such as what occurred with the Nephites when Jesus visited them), very quickly the poor and needy disappear to be replaced only by people having surpluses.  The question then must be asked, “What is to be done with these surplus properties?”  They cannot be given to the poor, as there is no more poor.

Hiding up treasures unto the Lord, a gospel law

When a people reaches this point, where they can no longer give surpluses to the poor because there are no more poor people (and this is Zion), they begin to live the law of hiding up treasures unto the Lord.  The ancient saints, then, took of their surplus wealth (precious metals, jewels, etc.) and buried them in the earth, consecrating them unto the Lord, to be used as He sees fit for a future day, a future need, a future generation, in which there would again be poor people in the earth in need of these treasures.

This was a standard practice, a law of the Lord.  Hoarding riches was contrary to the gospel.  Riches were always to go to the poor and needy.  Yet, as riches could not be given to the poor (as there were none), riches had to be donated to future people.  A hill was selected, a hole was dug, treasures were laid and a rock was placed.  The treasure was dedicated or consecrated to the Lord and then it was blotted from the mind.  It was no more thought of, whatsoever, nor any record of its location recorded.

If the Lord, in a future day, had a righteous servant or servants in need, even if it turned out to be the very servant who hid up the treasure, He could utilize that consecration for that servant, his family, household, tribe, etc.  As the Lord alone knew where it was—it could only be located through revelation and righteousness on the part of the receiver—the Lord alone would decide of its need and whether someone would be given it.  In other words, the Lord alone would serve as the bishop in charge of its dispersal.  We see by this that in time, under the law of consecration, the role of (mortal) bishops in receiving consecrations was to be phased out, to be replaced by the Immortal Bishop receiving consecrations.

For I will, saith the Lord, that they shall hide up their treasures unto me; (Helaman 13: 19)

Hiding up treasures unto the Lord was not optional; it was an actual commandment, a law of God, that when all needs were taken care of, surpluses were to be hidden up unto the Lord and forgotten about.  This was, in essence, the Lord’s banking provision. The earth itself was to serve as a bank, the Lord would be the banker, and there would be no further withdrawals on the account from the depositor.  It was a consecration, a gift, not a place to hoard one’s wealth.

For none hideth up their treasures unto me save it be the righteous; (Helaman 13: 19)

The wicked can only view this practice as absurd.  Why create wealth, riches and treasures (surpluses), only to bury them in the earth and forget about them?  In their eyes this is the absolute height of folly and no wicked person would ever participate in such a practice.  Only the righteous live this law.  It follows then, that as this was a practice that distinguished between the righteous and the wicked, under the more excellent law of Christ, righteous saints in the future will again perform this rite.

Consequences of Disobedience

Those ancients living under the law of consecration who did not hide up their treasures unto the Lord were accursed:

Cursed be they who hide not up their treasures unto me; (Helaman 13: 19)

There were two ways that this commandment could be broken.  1) A man could keep the surplus to himself (hoarding) and attempt to use it in excessive or riotous living.  2) A man could hide the treasure in the earth and make note of where it was, so that he could come back later and obtain it (using the earth as a safekeeping, a bank.)  Men who hid their treasures in this way would still be accounted as righteous by those who viewed them (as they appeared to be fulfilling the commandment of hiding treasures unto the Lord), but as their intent was selfish, they were accounted hypocrites and sinners by the Lord.

A Modern Parallel

The modern banking practice does not in the least resemble what these ancient saints did.  We open a bank account, deposit some money (often our surplus money) and expect to both receive interest and to be able to withdraw our money at any moment.  We know exactly were our money is and our chief concern is that our money grows and/or is protected from thieves and robbers.

So, as we face the prospect of losing every last penny we have by Summer of 2009, should we consider Samuel’s a double-fulfilling prophecy, first fulfilled upon the ancient inhabitants of this land and secondly to be fulfilled upon the modern inhabitants?

And he that hideth not up his treasures unto me, cursed is he, and also the treasure, and none shall redeem it because of the curse of the land. (Helaman 13: 19)

Our money is no longer redeemable in gold or silver, but at least we can still purchase goods with it.  Soon, however, we won’t be able to do even that.  Is this the reappearance of the ancient curse because we’ve been given the law of consecration and a sneak peek into the law of hiding treasures unto the Lord but have failed to do either?

Disclaimer: This article is not meant to encourage everyone to go out and seek buried Nephite treasure.  Nevertheless, that IS an option for the righteous poor who can obtain revelation from the Lord to that end.  One of the purposes of those consecrated treasures, is, after all, for the needy. Also, in case questions come up regarding the Relief Mine, although I make no claim of its authenticity, there is at least scriptural precedent in the burying of treasure for future, holy purposes.  So, the existence of such a mine is not outside of the gospel framework.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The voice of the people signifies a majority

Because concerns about my use of “51%” in regard to the law of common consent have come up on this blog before, I wanted to address them with this post:

Excerpt of Post

Although the quorum of the twelve vote for the new President of the High Priesthood, the majority of the body of the saints (51%) must sustain the calling by vote, using the law of common consent. If 51% or more raise their hands in approval, the appointment goes through. If, however, 51% or more raise their hands in disapproval, the appointment does not go through and the apostles need to choose another man for the office, which then requires another sustaining vote from the members.  (LDS Anarchist on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

Members can not nominate a candidate and hypothetically the Presiding officer, or body, can also over ride (ignore) the “will of the people”. Incidently the law of Common Consent specifies no percentage. I’d love to know where you got this 51% figure. Having said that any presiding officer conducting business in the Church would hold off setting apart someone or cannonising a revelation even if 5% or even 1% didn’t sustain the decision.  (Comment #609 by Steve on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?, emphasis mine.)

Comment on Post

You are right, there is no specification of 51% in the scriptures. I borrowed the term “51%” from what4anarchy, who uses it all the time. However, I think what4anarchy is right in that the scriptures seem to imply that “the voice of the people” is a majority, or 51%. For example, if you look at the pre-mortal experience, two-thirds (66%) sustained Jesus as the Savior, while one third (33%) didn’t. In this case, “the voice of the people” went with Jesus. The 33% number is far above your 1% or even 5%, yet it wasn’t high enough to stop the election of Jesus. Common sense would indicate, therefore, that the law of common consent works on the majority principle. It does not require a unanimous vote to sustain an appointment, nor can a minority (49% or less) stop an appointment.

You also bring up a fallacy that LDS routinely believe, namely that “the Presiding officer…can…over ride (ignore) the will of the people.” In reality, the presiding officer can only ignore the will of the minority of the people, but if a majority says left, while he says right, it is to be left, as the scriptures indicate that we are “to do [our] business by the voice of the people.” (Mosiah 29: 26.) If the Presiding officer attempts to ignore the will of the majority, he becomes a usurper and a tyrant because in the kingdom of God the governors must govern with the consent of the governed. Any attempt to govern without that consent draws Satan into the picture, as governing without consent is satanic.

As long as LDS hold these views about the law of common consent, it will never function as a means to check tyranny and error, which is its purpose.  (Comment #610 by LDS Anarchist on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?,)

I thought that put an end to the question about the scriptural need for a majority, but then the following was written:

Excerpt of Post

Satan understood that if the vote went his way, if 51% of us voted for him (Lucifer), that the plan of the Father would have been frustrated.  (LDS Anarchist on October 31, 2007 in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

I have a quick comment to the initial question as to the “ramifications of a winning vote by Lucifer”, or “What would have happened had Lucifer won the vote?”

This is what I think would have happened if Lucifer had drawn 51% of us to his side: The scriptures would have said something like, “… and just over half of the hosts of heaven followed Lucifer’s plan.” The plan of salvation would not have been altered, compromised, or destroyed. God would not have ceased to be God. Lucifer would not have “won”.

My point is… why is a “majority” relevant in this situation? I don’t believe it is. Two-thirds of the hosts of heaven could have followed Lucifer and God would still have chosen Jesus and His plan would not have been compromised. I don’t believe this was a “vote”, but rather, a choice.  (Comment #1160 by Jgtrs on June 15, 2008 in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?, emphasis mine.)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

The 51% number has come up before on this blog. See here and here. Also, the heavens splitting into thirds sounds like what4anarchy’s idea of following the leader.  (1/3 under Lucifer, 1/3 under Jehovah and 1/3 under Michael, for example.)

My understanding is “as above, so below” and so what happened in the heavens has its counterpart here on Earth, namely, the law of common consent. So, the following common consent articles may apply to this discussion about percentages: Power of the Law of Common Consent and Is our procedure for sustaining a rubber stamp? and also, perhaps, this one on free agency: The role of free agency in political systems. As God cannot govern without the consent of the governed, I’m not sure what the difference is between a “vote” and a “choice.” There are many ways of voting, not just in raising one’s hand, and each manifestation of a vote is a demonstration of what you are choosing or not choosing.

It doesn’t make sense to me that the principle of “the voice of the people” applies on Earth but not in heaven, as these principles are revealed to us as heavenly principles so that we can pattern our lives according to that standard found in heaven and be empowered to establish Zion, or the kingdom of heaven on Earth.  (Comment #1230 by LDS Anarchist on June 17, 2008, in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?)

The purpose of this post is solely to show that the “voice of the people” means “majority vote.”

Voice of the people defined

Mosiah is the one who defined the expression for us, in the following verse:

Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people.  (Mosiah 29: 26)

Mosiah explains that  “the voice of the people” is not the “lesser part of the people.”  The “lesser part of the people” is otherwise known as a minority. Therefore, as the “voice of the people” is not the minority, it must be the majority. The expression “the voice of the people” is synonymous with “the majority vote of the people.”

Thus, the latter part of the above verse means, “This shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the [majority vote] of the people.”

Book of Mormon scriptures

The expression “the voice of the people” occurs a lot in the scriptures, and in each instance, it means the same thing.  So, here are some examples, with the meaning of the expression rendered in plainer English :

And it came to pass that the [majority vote] of the people came, saying: We are desirous that Aaron thy son should be our king and our ruler.  Therefore, choose you by the [majority vote] of this people, judges, that ye may be judged according to the laws which have been given you by our fathers, which are correct, and which were given them by the hand of the Lord.  Now it is not common that the [majority vote] of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the [majority vote] of the people.  And if the time comes that the [majority vote] of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.  If your higher judges do not judge righteous judgments, ye shall cause that a small number of your lower judges should be gathered together, and they shall judge your higher judges, according to the [majority vote] of the people.  (Mosiah 29: 2, 25-27, 29)

Yea, well did Mosiah say, who was our last king, when he was about to deliver up the kingdom, having no one to confer it upon, causing that this people should be governed by their own voices—yea, well did he say that if the time should come that the [majority vote] of this people should choose iniquity, that is, if the time should come that this people should fall into transgression, they would be ripe for destruction. (Alma 10: 19)

Nevertheless, it came to pass that Pahoran was appointed by the [majority vote] of the people to be chief judge and a governor over the people of Nephi.  And it came to pass that Pacumeni, when he saw that he could not obtain the judgment-seat, he did unite with the [majority vote] of the people.  And it came to pass as he [Paanchi] was about to do this, behold, he was taken, and was tried according to the [majority vote] of the people, and condemned unto death; for he had raised up in rebellion and sought to destroy the liberty of the people.  And now behold, Pacumeni was appointed, according to the [majority vote] of the people, to be a chief judge and a governor over the people, to reign in the stead of his brother Pahoran; and it was according to his right. And all this was done in the fortieth year of the reign of the judges; and it had an end.  (Hel. 1: 5-6, 8, 13)

See also the following Book of Mormon scriptures that use this expression: Mosiah 7: 9; Mosiah 22: 1; Alma 2: 3-4, 7; Alma 4: 16; Alma 27: 21-22; Alma 46: 34; Alma 51: 7, 15-16; Hel. 2: 2; and Hel. 5: 2.

Bible scriptures

Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.  But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord.  And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the [majority vote] of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.  According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.  Now therefore hearken unto their [majority vote]: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.  And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.  And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.  And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.  And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.  And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.  And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.  And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.  He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.  And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.  Nevertheless the people refused to ^aobey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.  And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the Lord.  And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken unto their [majority vote], and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.  (1 Sam. 8: 4-22)

This scripture, in particular, is interesting because Samuel was the prophet of the Lord and the majority vote* was asking for something contrary to the will of the Lord (they were asking to change the tribal anarchy into a monarchical State like the nations around them), yet the Lord told his prophet to listen to and obey the majority vote of the people.  This is otherwise known as the law of common consent.

*Notice verse four where it says “all the elders of Israel.”  This seems to indicate that this wasn’t just a bare majority, but a unanimous majority.

Doctrine and Covenants scriptures

And let all things be done according to the counsel of the order, and united consent or [majority vote] of the order, which dwell in the land of Kirtland.  And it is my will that he should sell the lots that are laid off for the building up of the city of my saints, inasmuch as it shall be made known to him by the voice of the Spirit, and according to the counsel of the order, and by the [majority vote] of the order.  Therefore, you are dissolved as a united order with your brethren, that you are not bound only up to this hour unto them, only on this wise, as I said, by loan as shall be agreed by this order in council, as your circumstances will admit and the [majority vote] of the council direct.  And the avails of the sacred things shall be had in the treasury, and a seal shall be upon it; and it shall not be used or taken out of the treasury by any one, neither shall the seal be loosed which shall be placed upon it, only by the [majority vote] of the order, or by commandment.  And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the [majority vote] and common consent of the order.  And this shall be the [majority vote] and common consent of the order—that any man among you say to the treasurer: I have need of this to help me in my stewardship—but in case of transgression, the treasurer shall be subject unto the council and [majority vote] of the order.  And in case the treasurer is found an unfaithful and an unwise steward, he shall be subject to the council and [majority vote] of the order, and shall be removed out of his place, and another shall be appointed in his stead.  (D&C 104: 21, 36, 53, 64, 71-72, 76-77)

Joseph Smith, Jun., Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams were acknowledged presidents by the [majority vote] of the council; and Joseph Smith, Sen., John Smith, Joseph Coe, John Johnson, Martin Harris, John S. Carter, Jared Carter, Oliver Cowdery, Samuel H. Smith, Orson Hyde, Sylvester Smith, and Luke Johnson, high priests, were chosen to be a standing council for the church, by the unanimous [majority vote] of the council.  Voted: that whenever any vacancy shall occur by the death, removal from office for transgression, or removal from the bounds of this church government, of any one of the above-named councilors, it shall be filled by the nomination of the president or presidents, and sanctioned by the [majority vote] of a general council of high priests, convened for that purpose, to act in the name of the church.  The president of the church, who is also the president of the council, is appointed by revelation, and acknowledged in his administration by the [majority vote] of the church.  (D&C 102: 3, 8-9)

And let my servant Edward Partridge, when he shall appoint a man his portion, give unto him a writing that shall secure unto him his portion, that he shall hold it, even this right and this inheritance in the church, until he transgresses and is not accounted worthy by the [majority vote] of the church, according to the laws and covenants of the church, to belong to the church.  And this shall be done through the bishop or the agent, which shall be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church.  (D&C 51: 4, 12)

And now, I give unto the church in these parts a commandment, that certain men among them shall be appointed, and they shall be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church; and they shall look to the poor and the needy, and administer to their relief that they shall not suffer; and send them forth to the place which I have commanded them; and this shall be their work, to govern the affairs of the property of this church.  (D&C 38: 34-36)

And again, I have called my servant Edward Partridge; and I give a commandment, that he should be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church, and ordained a bishop unto the church, to leave his merchandise and to spend all his time in the labors of the church; to see to all things as it shall be appointed unto him in my laws in the day that I shall give them. (D&C 41: 9-10)

And let there be an agent appointed by the [majority vote] of the church, unto the church in Ohio, to receive moneys to purchase lands in Zion.  (D&C 58: 49)

We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the [majority vote] of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.  (D&C 134: 3)

It becomes plain, then, from these scriptures, that the church functions on the principle of majority vote.

The elders are to receive their licenses from other elders, by vote of the church to which they belong, or from the conferences.  No person is to be ordained to any office in this church, where there is a regularly organized branch of the same, without the vote of that church; but the presiding elders, traveling bishops, high councilors, high priests, and elders, may have the privilege of ordaining, where there is no branch of the church that a vote may be called.  (D&C 20: 63, 65-66)

No need for unanimity unless specified

Unless the voice is specified as having to be “unanimous,” such as in the following scripture, all majority votes (51% or more) are sufficient to decide all issues in the church.

And every decision made by either of these quorums [the First Presidency, the Twelve and the Seventy] must be by the unanimous [majority vote] of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other—a majority may form a quorum when circumstances render it impossible to be otherwise—unless this is the case, their decisions are not entitled to the same blessings which the decisions of a quorum of three presidents were anciently, who were ordained after the order of Melchizedek, and were righteous and holy men.  (D&C 107: 27-29)

Next Common Consent article: We are not doing our business by the voice of the people

Previous Common Consent article: Apathy is not a problem, it’s a symptom and a solution

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The prophetic counsel against having kings (rulers)

King Nephi didn’t want the people to have a king (a ruler)
From the time Lehi and his family left Jerusalem down to the time that Nephi and company split from Laman and Lemuel and company in the promised land, the Lehites had lived in tribal anarchy using the law of Moses as the tribal, customary law.

And it came to pass that they would that I should be their king. But I, Nephi, was desirous that they should have no king; nevertheless, I did for them according to that which was in my power. (2 Ne. 5: 18 )

The Nephites, though, sought to change that tribal anarchy into a monarchy and despite his protests, he hearkened unto the voice of the people and became their first king. In fact, when he was about to die, he anointed another king in his stead, too, thus perpetuating the reign of Nephite kings among the people.

Now Nephi began to be old, and he saw that he must soon die; wherefore, he anointed a man to be a king and a ruler over his people now, according to the reigns of the kings. The people having loved Nephi exceedingly, he having been a great protector for them, having wielded the sword of Laban in their defence, and having labored in all his days for their welfare-wherefore, the people were desirous to retain in remembrance his name. And whoso should reign in his stead were called by the people, second Nephi, third Nephi, and so forth, according to the reigns of the kings; and thus they were called by the people, let them be of whatever name they would. And it came to pass that Nephi died. (Jacob 1: 9-12)

Alma didn’t want the people to have a king (a ruler)
During the reign of the Nephite kings Noah, Limhi and Mosiah and the lamanitish king Laman, Alma and his people (see The Anarchy of Alma) escaped (see Mosiah 18 ) from king Noah and founded the city of Helam, in the land of Helam, where they lived in tribal anarchy using the law of Moses as the customary, tribal law. Like the people of the first king Nephi, Alma’s people wanted a king to rule over them, and they asked him to become their king. Again like the first king Nephi, Alma counseled against having kings. Remarkably, these people actually listened to his counsel and remained in anarchy, unlike their ancestors.

And the people were desirous that Alma should be their king, for he was beloved by his people. But he said unto them: Behold, it is not expedient that we should have a king; for thus saith the Lord: Ye shall not esteem one flesh above another, or one man shall not think himself above another; therefore I say unto you it is not expedient that ye should have a king. Nevertheless, if it were possible that ye could always have just men to be your kings it would be well for you to have a king. But remember the iniquity of king Noah and his priests; and I myself was caught in a snare, and did many things which were abominable in the sight of the Lord, which caused me sore repentance; nevertheless, after much tribulation, the Lord did hear my cries, and did answer my prayers, and has made me an instrument in his hands in bringing so many of you to a knowledge of his truth. Nevertheless, in this I do not glory, for I am unworthy to glory of myself. And now I say unto you, ye have been oppressed by king Noah, and have been in bondage to him and his priests, and have been brought into iniquity by them; therefore ye were bound with the bands of iniquity. And now as ye have been delivered by the power of God out of these bonds; yea, even out of the hands of king Noah and his people, and also from the bonds of iniquity, even so I desire that ye should stand fast in this liberty wherewith ye have been made free, and that ye trust no man to be a king over you. And also trust no one to be your teacher nor your minister, except he be a man of God, walking in his ways and keeping his commandments. Thus did Alma teach his people, that every man should love his neighbor as himself, that there should be no contention among them. (Mosiah 23: 6-15)

King Mosiah didn’t want the people to have a king (a ruler)
The Nephite monarchy lasted until king Mosiah, who proposed that monarchies be done away in favor of a popularly elected governmental system of higher and lower judges, who would not legislate, judge and execute like kings, but merely serve as adjudicators using the law of Moses.

And I command you to do these things in the fear of the Lord; and I command you to do these things, and that ye have no king; that if these people commit sins and iniquities they shall be answered upon their own heads. (Mosiah 29: 30)

The system of judicial government, set up by Mosiah, lasted until 3 Nephi 7, when it was dissolved and the people naturally fell back into tribal anarchy, each tribe having their own set of laws and tribal chiefs and leaders, with inter-tribal agreements securing the peace between tribes. From this point on to the end of the Nephite civilization, the Book of Mormon is silent concerning any other form of government established among the people. For all we know, anarchy remained to the end, a period of over 300 years. (See 300 + years of Nephite anarchy.)

Jared and his brother didn’t want the people to have a king (a ruler)
From the time that Jared, his brother and their tribes left the Tower of Babel to the time that they were nearing death in the promised land, the Jaredite tribes lived in tribal anarchy, using whatever customary laws they had among them. However, the last thing asked of them by their people was that they anoint a king for them, which they reluctantly did, after protesting to the people.

And it came to pass that the people desired of them that they should anoint one of their sons to be a king over them. And now behold, this was grievous unto them. And the brother of Jared said unto them: Surely this thing leadeth into captivity. But Jared said unto his brother: Suffer them that they may have a king. And therefore he said unto them: Choose ye out from among our sons a king, even whom ye will. And it came to pass that they chose even the firstborn of the brother of Jared; and his name was Pagag. And it came to pass that he refused and would not be their king. And the people would that his father should constrain him, but his father would not; and he commanded them that they should constrain no man to be their king. And it came to pass that they chose all the brothers of Pagag, and they would not. And it came to pass that neither would the sons of Jared, even all save it were one; and Orihah was anointed to be king over the people. (Ether 6: 22-27)

From king Orihah to the end of the Jaredite civilization, they remained under monarchies.

The Lord doesn’t want the people to have a king (a ruler)
In a couple of the revelations given to Joseph Smith, Jun., the Lord prophesies that in time there will be no kings, rulers or laws, at all, only his laws, with him as our king.

But, verily I say unto you that in time ye shall have no king nor ruler, for I will be your king and watch over you. Wherefore, hear my voice and follow me, and you shall be a free people, and ye shall have no laws but my laws when I come, for I am your lawgiver, and what can stay my hand? (D&C 38: 21-22)

And at that day, when I shall come in my glory, shall the parable be fulfilled which I spake concerning the ten virgins. For they that are wise and have received the truth, and have taken the Holy Spirit for their guide, and have not been deceived—verily I say unto you, they shall not be hewn down and cast into the fire, but shall abide the day. And the earth shall be given unto them for an inheritance; and they shall multiply and wax strong, and their children shall grow up without sin unto salvation. For the Lord shall be in their midst, and his glory shall be upon them, and he will be their king and their lawgiver. (D&C 45: 56-59)

Samuel didn’t want the people to have a king
Moving on to the Bible, from the time the Israelites were led from Egypt by Moses to their promised land, down to the time of the prophet Samuel, they lived in tribal anarchy, using the law of Moses as the customary, tribal law.

In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. (Judges 21: 25)

Then, as always, the people wanted a king and asked Samuel to anoint one. He protested and explained to them the horrors a human king would bring them, but they still wanted one and he ended up anointing Saul. From that point on the Israelites always had kings or other rulers ruling over them.

And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.

But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD. And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king. And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles. And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the LORD. And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city. (1 Samuel 8: 5-22)

And thus we see that whenever faced with the choice of establishing a state government of rulers (kings) or remaining in tribal anarchy, the prophets among the people always counseled the people to remain in anarchy.

Next Anarchism/Anarchy article: A basic right denied

Previous Anarchism/Anarchy article: 300 + years of Nephite anarchy

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist