Anti-Nephi-Lehies
During a later period of warfare, the young men of the group who had not made the pacifist covenant became a military unit known as the two thousand stripling warriors, and were protected by divine intervention.
[10] Around 92 BC, four sons of the Nephite King, named Ammon, Aaron, Omner, and Himni, went on a mission with a small group of others to the Lamanites to convert them to Christianity.
[8] In the 1920s, LDS Church scholar Janne Sjödahl and author John Henry Evans both used the example of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies complete rejection of violence as a matter of superior moral principle.
"[25] The 1939 manual, on the eve of World War II advocated clearly for pacifism, "There is no place in a Christian life for war....If one should question the wisdom of the decision of the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi made on the occasion of this lesson, let him remember that they did as a nation what Jesus did as an individual when he gave his life for mankind ... there was something 'godlike' in the decision of both Jesus and the Lamanites to sacrifice their mortal existence that the standards of righteousness might be preserved.
[8] In 1950, Professor William E. Berrett wrote a critique of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies as part of his study of the Book of Mormon that would become a dominant narrative for the next several decades, calling their pacifist actions, "an interesting experiment in non-resistance" but ultimately not effective.
[28][8][29] The Anti-Nephi-Lehi vow of non-violence came to be seen as an anomaly, applicable only in rare circumstances, and discussion of the topic in manuals usually included examples that justified armed self-resistance.
[8] Brigham Young University professor Hugh Nibley was representative of the exception, speaking out against war and using the Anti-Nephi-Lehies as pacifist examples worthy of emulating.
Rather than commenting on the political morality of war, the Anti-Nephi-Lehies were used as examples of repentance and deep commitment that should be emulated in individual lives by "burying" sins in an equally permanent way.
[8][35][36] In 1983, the LDS Church commissioned artist Del Parson to paint the story of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies burying their swords, and widely distributed it in educational material.
[37] The painting was at the forefront of the shift towards the metaphorical usage of the story, depicting an Anti-Nephi-Lehi man kneeling and raising his sword toward heaven, as though presenting an offering of his sins to God.
[19] Using the story for its metaphorical applications has today become the dominant approach in the LDS Church, as exemplified by a 2014 Sunday School lesson for children, where students were instructed to mimic the Anti-Nephi-Lehies by writing on paper swords, "a wrong choice ... such as 'fighting with my brother' or 'telling a lie."
"[8][38] In 2016, LDS Church owned newspaper the Deseret News printed an editorial using the story of the Nephites accepting the Anti-Nephi-Lehies into their country to promote the ethic of assisting refugees migrating to Europe.
[21] The missionary Ammon, who plays a major part in the conversion of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies, is used as an example of a larger criticism and theme of the Book of Mormon, that its main characters are often portrayed as extremes of either uncompromisingly good, or unsurpassingly evil.
[49] The conversion and unwavering faith of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies mirrors and is used as a contrast with the wickedness of Nephite dissenters who move in the opposite direction and live with the Lamanites (i.e. Zoramites and Amalickiah).
[50] Several modern day historians believe that later sections of the Book of Mormon clearly indicate that rather than advocating for pacifism, the rejection of violence was more about complete commitment to God at all costs.
[52] Surgeon Robert Patterson observed of the miracle that "the epic tale of the stripling warriors and their miraculous recovery from life-threatening trauma would appear, to the rational mind, highly unlikely or even outright impossible.
[53][55] There is agreement in academia that the characterization within the Book of Mormon of the Anti-Nephi-Lehies before and after their conversion is consistent with a eurocentric viewpoint of Native Americans endemic to 1820s New England.
[56][57][58] In line with prevailing views of Native Americans in the late 1820s, the Book of Mormon portrays Lamanites as, "wild and ferocious, and blood-thirsty people, full of idolatry and filthiness.
[62] "This is a day when civil disobedience seems to be prevalent and even advocated from some pulpits, but the position of this Church and its teachings is clear...There is no conflict between that which is owed to Caesar and the obligation to God."
