Operations of the Spirit: Part 3 of 12, Metaphors and Meaning, the Still Small Voice

Operations of the Spirit: Part 3 of 12, Metaphors and Meaning, the Still Small Voice

 

This is the third of twelve parts to an essay entitled
"Operations of the Spirit." The entire essay is 
just over one hundred pages if printed out, so it is 
presented serially in this blog. These parts should 
be read sequentially, because each builds on the previous 
parts. Hopefully, readers will have comments, suggestions 
and criticisms. The twelve parts are as follows: 
I. Introduction, Part I 
II. Confusing Terms, Part II 
III. Metaphors and Meaning, Parts III through VI 
     A. The still small voice, Part III 
     B. The heart and reins, Part IV 
     C. Light and burning, as in a burning in the bosom, Part V 
     D. Extracting meaning from metaphors,, Part VI 
IV. The Scriptures and the Spirit, Parts VII through X 
     A. The Oliver Cowdery revelations: D&C 6, 8 and 9, Part VII 
     B. Other modern-day scriptures, Part VIII 
     C. Ancient scriptures about the Spirit, Part IX 
     D. Extraordinary events, Part X 
V. The Spirit and Individual Affectations, Part XI 
VI. Conclusion, Part XII 

There are footnotes in this work. You can read the footnotes 
by hovering your cursor over the note, or you can click 
on the note to read it as text. There is a symbol at the end 
of each footnote that allows you to return to the text 
by clicking on it.

 

III. METAPHORS AND MEANING

A metaphor is “[a]n analogy identifying one object with another and ascribing to the first object one or more qualities of the second. . . . The tenor is the idea being expressed or the subject of the comparison; the vehicle is the image by which this idea is conveyed or the subject communicated.”¹ Metaphors have been described by such luminaries as Aristotle as the hallmark of genius, providing insight into difficult subjects.⁴ Metaphors use familiar concepts to express complex ideas—the esoteric or what is otherwise ineffable or unfamiliar—and often provide a short way of saying something that would take more words.

Metaphors, however, are analogies, so they fail if they are taken too far or too literally. “All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances.⁵ There is a certain appeal to this metaphor, but the appeal is superficial because life and what mankind does is not scripted or directed or played before an audience. One must always be careful not to take the metaphor’s vehicle or figure of speech too literally. It is, after all, only a device in aid of understanding the intended tenor, so metaphors must be closely watched to make sure they elucidate rather than enslave.

Justice (then Judge) Cardozo warned in circumstances similar to those presented here against permitting worn epithets to substitute for rigorous analysis. “The whole problem . . . is still enveloped in the mists of metaphor. Metaphors . . . are to be narrowly watched, for starting as devices to liberate thought, they end often by enslaving it.”⁶

Most members of the Church think of the Spirit as some feeling they get and that one that one will just know this feeling when he or she has it.⁷ The description of this feeling often involves three metaphors: the still, small voice; the burning bosom; and the heart. Each metaphor attempts to describe the Spirit using a different vehicle. The tenor of these metaphors is what is important, but too often the focus is on the vehicle because the individual does not understand why this vehicle is apropos, but, too often, one attaches literal meaning to the vehicle.⁸ So this essay addresses metaphors that are too often given a literal meaning rather than the actual meaning intended..

A. The Still Small Voice

The still-small-voice metaphor originates in the Old Testament,⁹ but it, also, appears in the Book of Mormon¹⁰ and the Doctrine and Covenants.¹¹ the Old Testament is the archetype for the phrase’s usage in the Book of Mormon, and there is a hint at the same tenor where the term is usage in the Doctrine and Covenants.

Before comparing the usage of this phrase in the three books where it is found, it is important to understand both the Hebrew philosophical paradigm and the Hebrew words that are translated into this hapax legomenon in the King James Version of the bible.

Unlike the Greek paradigm, which has been adopted in the West, the Hebrews did not separate the idea of something from the object itself. They were one and the same. Under this paradigm, a wise man’s thoughts about what the Lord has said or likely would say are the same as the voice of the Lord.

[T]he biblical authors appeal to arguments based on experience that is available to all Israel and to all men, whereas fools are consistently said to be those who pay no heed to the counsel of experience, and so proceed in the direction of their own ruin and that of their nation. [Footnote citing as examples 1 Kings 12:3–17 and Proverbs 1:22, 32 omitted.] Here the distinction between the biblical search for truth and that of the philosopher becomes exceedingly vague, bordering on non-existent.

No wonder, then, that in the orations of the prophets of Israel, wisdom gained from experience, and from reasoning based on experience, at times becomes interchangeable with having heard God’s voice. Consider, for example, the following passage from Jeremiah [reformatted to show poetic structure]:

And I will make Jerusalem a ruin,

a lair of jackals, and

I will make the cities of Judah a desolation,

without inhabitant.

Who is the man so wise that he can understand this, and

to whom the mouth of the Lord has spoken,

that he may explain it:

On what account is the land lost,

withered like a desert,

without anyone to pass through it?

[Footnote: Jeremiah 9:10–11 (TANAK), Jeremiah 9:11–12 (KJV).]

Here, “the man so wise that he can understand this” is invoked in parallel with the man “to whom the mouth of the Lord has spoken,” as if the appearance of understanding in the mind of the individual is the same as God’s speech. [Explanatory footnote about poetic style omitted here but discussed infra at 84.] We find a similar construction in Isaiah, who looks forward to the coming of the future king, upon whom will rest the spirit of God. And yet this “spirit of God,” as Isaiah understands it, is itself indistinguishable from the wisdom, understanding, and the ability to judge wisely and with justice.¹²

Simply put, the Hebrew metaphysical paradigm does not separate the idea of another’s voice from hearing that voice. With this understanding, the Hebrew words, קל דּממה, translated into still small voice can be analyzed and understood.

Still small voice comes from, transliterating קל דּממה, dmamah (a feminine¹³ word for calm, silence, still, quiet) daq (small)¹⁴ and qowl (voice of) The sense, explained below, to be gathered is that the witnesses of the Lord in the natural phenomenon awakened Elijah to the strength of the Lord, so his still small voice—his thoughts—told him what he ought to do, and the witness of the Lord’s power gave him the confidence to overcome his fear of losing his life.

The still-small-voice hapax legomenon in the King James Version is an idiomatic translation. This phrase is rendered a soft murmuring sound in the Tanak. The NIV translates the words as a gentle whisper. The LXX uses the term a gentle breeze, which seems more consonant with what happened after the storm and fury preceding Elijah’s experience. The JB uses the sound of a gentle breeze. The NJB translates the words as a light murmuring sound. And the NRSV translates them as a sound of sheer silence.¹⁵

The Hebrew word דּממה appears in two other places in the Hebrew bible. But it is translated differently—more accurately—in these other instances. In Psalm 107 the word דּממה is translated as a calm following a storm where the waves are still and people can be glad because of the quiet that takes them to their desired haven.¹⁶ The word is translated as there was silence in Job,¹⁷ where it is used by Eliphaz to add gravitas to his friendly condemnation of Job. The self-righteous, condescending Eliphaz describes a vision that caused him to tremble and shake in witness of his condemnation; he says, “Then a spirit passed before my face; the hair of my flesh stood up: It stood still . . . there was silence, and I heard a voice . . . .’¹⁸

The gooseflesh-raising vision Eliphaz had, of course, was not divine. Rather, the author of Job has Eliphaz allude to Elijah’s experience to add patina to his judgment of Job, a judgment based on what Eliphaz personal judgment that he dressed in the penumbra of Elijah’s experience by the use of the word דּממה.

The use of this key word found in both 1 Kings 19 and Psalm 107 was not lost on the Hebrew. The same effect is at work today. Although still small voice appears only once in the Bible, once in Book of Mormon,¹⁹ and once in Doctrine and Covenants, it is difficult to imagine anyone in the Church who has not heard of and attaches an amorphous, know-it-when-you-experience-it meaning to this phrase.²⁰

Unfortunately, most attaching meaning to this phrase do not understand the two important things just discussed. First, reasoning based on experience and knowledge is “interchangeable with having heard God’s voice” in the Hebrew paradigm. Second, he actual meaning of the words from which this idiomatic translation was rendered in the uncertain words adopted by the translators, and intended uncertainty.²¹ But there is a third matter not often considered by those attaching meaning to the narrow pericope where the phrase is found: they exclude the context.

Here is the context. Elijah hid himself in a cave after he fled for his life from Jezebel. He was anxious and depressed. He wanted to die. He dithered as he hid. But he was awed by the power of the Lord as he witnessed it in the natural phenomena of wind, earthquake, and fire.²² Naturally, Elijah’s thoughts were turned to the Lord’s power, and he was fortified. He knew he should be fearless and confront his nemeses rather than hide from them because he had the support of the Lord.²⁴ Finally, there is the calm after the storm. Elijah ponders the power he has just witnessed, realizes the protection that is his because of the Lord’s power, and re-asks himself what he is doing in this cave. It is, then, in the quiet after the storm. that the scripture says “and after the fire a still small voice.” It is this still small voice—Elijah’s own thoughts—that provokes Elijah to action.

The reaction to this story from Elijah’s life by many if not most members of the Church is to be literal,²⁵ presume Elijah heard a voice. Not a regular voice. One so small—like a whisper?—that one has to be very still to hear it. Of course, this notion has been confirmed so often in the Church that there is a strong confirmation bias in favor of this interpretation. This view has assumed a quasi-canonical status, like the world being flat in Galilleo’s day. If asked to parse the meaning of the words, the confirmed bias requires one to attach meaning to the vehicle rather than understanding the tenor of the metaphor. But, again, this literal meaning is wrong because God’s voice is indistinguishable from a wise man’s thoughts under the Hebrew paradigm. Indeed, one must understand that reading the word of the Lord is the same as hearing the Lord’s voice.²⁶

Gordon B. Hinckley described the revelatory process he enjoyed as the president, prophet, seer, and revelator of the Church in terms of Elijah’s still small voice, but he said it was the consensus of thought native to him and his counselors, not a voice. When asked what revelation was, “how that works. How . . . you receive divine revelation,” he said, “Now, if a problem should arise on which we [the leadership of the Church] don’t have an answer, we pray about it, we may fast about it, and it comes. Quietly. Usually no voice of any kind, but just a perception in the mind. I liken it to Elijah’s experience.”²⁷

A few months later, Gordon B. Hinckley was asked the same question by an Australian television interviewer, and he gave the same answer, using the metaphor but not explaining it. He said,

Now we don’t need a lot for continuing revelation. We have a great, basic reservoir of revelation. But if a problem arises, as it does occasionally, a vexatious thing with which we have to deal, we go to the Lord in prayer. We discuss it as a First Presidency and as a Council of the Twelve Apostles. We pray about it and then comes the whisperings of a still small voice. And we know the direction we should proceed. . . . This is revelation. . . . I feel satisfied that in some circumstances we’ve had such a revelation.²⁸

The context of Elijah’s metaphor, his still small voice, shows it is just what was described by Gordon B. Hinckley, a construct of and construction in the mind. This is consistent with the Hebrew philosophical construct which allows the still small voice heard by Elijah to be Elijah’s own contemplation. The tenor of this metaphor makes Elijah’s own thoughts, his quiet contemplations, equivalent to the Spirit. The Spirit was present in this contemplative setting that allowed reflection and decision-making. In other words, Elijah’s inspiration, the voice of the Spirit, came from within. His own native thoughts—his quiet or still contemplations—were what he characterized as the still small voice he heard.

Still small voice is used in the Book of Mormon, but there is a debate, of sorts, over the nature and source of the idioms, figures of speech, and language in the English Book of Mormon,²⁹ but there is no reason to think Nephi did not use this metaphor as part of his reproof of his brothers for their unbelief, “Ye have seen an angel, and he spake unto you, and he hath spoken unto you in a still small voice, but you were past feeling, that ye could not feel his words; wherefore, he has spoken unto like unto the voice of thunder, which did cause the earth to shake as if it were to divide asunder.”³⁰ This statement by Nephi should not, perhaps, be taken literally. First, it was made some thirty years after the fact,³²

Nephi’s use of still small voice alludes to Elijah’s experience because Nephi conjoins still small voice with “the voice of thunder, which did cause the earth to shake.” Elijah, who witnessed similar natural phenomenon with effect, realizing that the Lord who can control natural phenomenon could protect him from Jezebel, was different than Nephi’s brothers: Elijah was provoked to action by the calm resulting from the realization of the Lord’s power to protect him. He knew what he had to do in the face of Jezebel’s animus, so he did it notwithstanding the threat she was to his well-being.

Using the pattern of Elijah’s revelatory experience to underscore Nephi’s own is typical of the Hebrew/Nephite approach to writing. Patterns are repeated in the scriptures as a comparative figure of speech. Nephi’s still-small-voice experience is like Elijah’s, which adds the patina of Elijah’s experience to Nephi’s. This employment of typology is part of biblical literature.³³

The Book of Mormon contains two more allusions to Elijah’s still-small-voice experience. The second allusion involves the missionary efforts of Nephi and Lehi circa 30 BC.³⁴ Nephi gave up the judgment seat to preach, so it can be inferred that these were well-educated men. Indeed, both Nephi and his brother were well-instructed by their father Helaman and able to “preach with great power [knowledge] . . . confound[ing] many of [Nephite] dissenters.” Moreover, they spoke to the great “astonishment of the Lamanites, to the convincing of them . . . of the wickedness of the traditions of their fathers.” They were not so well received, however, in the land of Nephi. So they were thrown into jail without food and water because the Lamanites intended to kill them. But things changed when their captors went to get them. There is this fire that does not burn them,³⁵ the Lamanites are “struck dumb with amazement,” and there is something like a volcanic eruption with associated earthquakes and darkness from the ash, resulting in “an awful solemn fear.” This fear is followed by

a voice as if it were above the cloud of darkness, saying: Repent ye, repent ye, and seek no more to destroy my servants whom I have sent unto you to declare good tidings.

And it came to pass when they heard this voice, and beheld that it was not a voice of thunder, neither was it a voice of a great tumultuous noise, but behold, it was a still voice of perfect mildness, as if it had been a whisper, and it did pierce even to the very soul—And notwithstanding the mildness of the voice, behold the earth shook exceedingly, and the walls of the prison trembled again, as if it were about to tumble to the earth; and behold the cloud of darkness, which had overshadowed them, did not disperse—And behold the voice came again, saying: Repent ye, repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand; and seek no more to destroy my servants. And it came to pass that the earth shook again, and the walls trembled. And also again the third time the voice came, and did speak unto them marvelous words which cannot be uttered by man; and the walls did tremble again, and the earth shook as if it were about to divide asunder.

And it came to pass that the Lamanites could not flee because of the cloud of darkness which did overshadow them; yea, and also they were immovable because of the fear which did come upon them.³⁶

The natural events when the Lamanites went to retrieve Nephi and Lehi for execution and the resulting fear of the people militates against concluding that there was an actual, audible voice in the midst of this tumult, “a still voice of perfect mildness, as if it had been a whisper.” The motif is a recension of Elijah’s story. The natural phenomenon—if there actually was such phenomenon—resulted in the frightened group of Lamanites who were thinking the gods were displeased with their bad intentions, so they had a change of mind or change of heart that spared Nephi and Lehi.³⁷

The third Book of Mormon allusion to the still small voice is when the Savior appears to the Nephites after the three days of destruction paradigmatic of another volcanic eruptions.³⁸ The story is a second-hand, after-the-fact account,³⁹ so there may be a gloss on the facts to align them with the truth to which the story-teller testifies. Perhaps, though, the modern-day reader of the story misinterprets what the facts are because today’s reader, imbued with the Greek philosophical dichotomy between thoughts and things, thinks of a thought as something other than a voice, which is not the case from a Hebrew perspective.⁴⁰

Indeed, modern revelation makes it clear that there is no difference between “the will of the Lord . . . the mind of the Lord . . . the word of the Lord [and] the voice of the Lord.”⁴¹ Thus, references to the voice from heaven repeatedly heard by the people during the three days of darkness are more likely and make sense only if they are references to the thoughts occurring to the people during this calamity. The allusion to the still small voice reflects ratiocination, a thought process, before the Savior appears to the people:

And now it came to pass that there were a great multitude gathered together, of the people of Nephi, round about the temple which was in the land Bountiful; and they were marveling and wondering one with another, and were showing one to another the great and marvelous change which had taken place. And they were also conversing about this Jesus Christ, of whom the sign had been given concerning his death. And it came to pass that while they were thus conversing one with another, they heard a voice as if it came out of heaven; and they cast their eyes round about, for they understood not the voice which they heard; and it was not a harsh voice, neither was it a loud voice; nevertheless, and notwithstanding it being a small voice it did pierce them that did hear to the center, insomuch that there was no part of their frame that it did not cause to quake; yea, it did pierce them to the very soul, and did cause their hearts to burn.

And it came to pass that again they heard the voice, and they understood it not.

And again the third time they did hear the voice, and did open their ears to hear it; and their eyes were towards the sound thereof; and they did look steadfastly towards heaven, from whence the sound came. And behold, the third time they did understand the voice which they heard; and it said unto them: Behold my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name—hear ye him.

And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.

And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying: Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the world. And behold, I am the light and the life of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the world, in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning.

And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension into heaven.⁴²

This scripture is at once elucidating and difficult. People had gathered around the temple, which means they were faithful followers of Christ, and they were conversing about Him, knowing that His sign had been given. It was while they were conversing that they heard this small voice, which they did not understand because they were in the process of figuring out what was happening. It was a small voice that was “as if it came out of heaven,” which means their focus was on heavenly things. It was not until they had heard this voice three times that they understood that the voice said. This series of events is elucidating because it reflects discussion followed by a conclusion, a consensus, that the meaning of the voice was, “Behold my Beloved Son,” which must be taken, and this is the difficult part, to mean that these people recognized the Lord in the natural phenomenon occurring around them. The reference to a voice, therefore, must be equated, as is typical of the philosophical approach in Hebrew, to the thoughts these people were having as they contemplated what was happening. After all, these same people thought it was an angel who appeared when they saw a “Man descending out of heaven.” But why would they think that if the small voice told them to behold the Savior, and why would the people remain confused until this Man said or they remembered that it had been said the he would say, “Behold I am Jesus Christ”?

The answer is simple. The people thought that God, meaning the Son, was in the natural phenomenon they had witnessed and survived, the same conclusion reached by Elijah that the Lord of Hosts was in the wind and the earthquakes and the fire that Elijah witnessed.⁴⁵ expressing “things . . . which are lying with great weight on my mind”; indeed, he tells Phelps “I will proceed to unfold to you some of the feelings of my heart.”⁴⁷

The context of the foregoing is usually not understood or even known. Joseph Smith heard something—learned something—that made him angry, his thoughts being his still small voice, so he dashed off this venting diatribe.⁴⁸

The words still small voice, in other words, do not refer to a feeling that signals a revelatory experience. Both Joseph Smith and Elijah use it to describe their own thoughts. Joseph Smith borrowed this phrase from the Old Testament and used it in both the Book of Mormon and his letter-turned-revelation recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants. These thoughts were followed by an emotional response by Joseph Smith in the situation involving Edward Partridge’s misfeasance, anger, but there is no reported emotion when this term is used in the Book of Mormon. Likewise, Elijah’s response, taking action, is devoid of any described feeling—determination, perhaps, but no feeling.

Endnotes

1. Harmon, William and Holman C. Hugh, A Handbook to Literature, 2^nd ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1996), at 315 s.v. metaphor.
4. Id.[/² Abstractions—like what happens when a person realizes something—can often be best handled by metaphors, because the metaphor makes the abstract concrete.³Id. at 316.
5. Shakespeare, “As You Like It,” act II, scene 7.
6. First National City Bank v. Banco Pura El Comercio Exterior De Cuba, (462 U.S. 611, 623 (1983)(Justice O’Connor).

7. The following quote from an Ensign article speaks to the confusion of knowing something because it is felt.

   It is clear that each of us may hear and feel the communication of the Holy Ghost in a variety of ways.　.　.　.Elder Jay E. Jensen .　.　. related this story about a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.　.　.　. this Apostle turned to the member of the Seventy who had spoken at the previous [missionary zone conference meeting] and said, “I wonder if you might have left an impression in the missionaries’ minds that has created more problems than you can resolve. As I have traveled through the Church, I’ve found relatively few people who have experienced a burning of the bosom. In fact, I’ve had many people tell me that they’ve become frustrated because they have never experienced that feeling even though they have prayed or fasted for long periods of time.”

   Merrilee Browne Boyack, “Helping Children Recognize the Holy Ghost,” Ensign (December 2013). https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2013/12/helping-children-recognize-the-holy-ghost?lang=eng. The Apostle quoted in the foregoing is not identified in Bolyack’s article nor the one publshied in the Ensign by Jay E. Jensen, from which the foregoing was quoted, Jay E. Jensen, “Have I Received an Answer from the Spirit?”, Ensign (April 1989). https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1989/04/have-i-received-an-answer-from-the-spirit?lang=eng

8. Two examples of a literal construction with resulting lost meaning illustrate the problem. What does it mean when someone says he is as happy as a clam? The hearer who does not understand this metaphor is likely to ask whether clams are happy instead of saying, “I don’t get it.” The full simile, not the shortened version, is happy as a clam at high tide, but this does not help the inland dweller who has never been to the seaside. The seaside dweller understands how seagulls feed on clams at low tide: they fly down to the clams exposed when the water goes out, pick up clams, fly them up above the rocks and drop them on the rocks to break them open so they can fly down and eat them. Another example is the cow that ate the cabbage, as in “Let me tell you how the cow ate the cabbage.” Not understanding, the listener will visualize a cow eating a cabbage without bothering to Google the metaphor to understand its source. A homeowner called the police in the middle of the night to complain that a cow—actually a circus elephant—was in the cabbage patch eating her cabbages a whole cabbage at a time. When asked how a cow could do that, she told the policeman how the cow at the cabbage, she explained that the cow used its tail to stuff the cabbage in.
9. 1 Kings 19:12.  As developed, infra, the still small voice is something of an unintended metaphor because these words are used rather than a more literal and accurate translation of the Hebrew from which this phrase comes.
10. 1 Nephi 17:45–46a; the Bo0k of 3 Nephi uses the term small voice at 3 Nephi 11:3.
11. D&C 85:6I
12. Yoram Hazony, The Philosophy of Hebrew Scriptures (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2012), at 231–232. Hazony’s discussion of the inseparability of thought from object or spoken words is at 206–211. Hazony is Provost of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem and a Senior Fellow in the Department of Philosophy Political Theory and Religion. The Isaiah scripture quoted by Hazony to show the unity between a wise man’s thoughts and the voice of the Lord is the same scripture Moroni quoted to Joseph Smith, Isaiah 11, when he first visited him. This scripture discussed at length, infra at , explains how the operation of the Spirit is an exercise of the wise mind.
13. The feminine word used for this calm contemplation is consistent with the peace of the feminine wisdom described in the first nine chapters of Proverbs, a description that makes her indistinguishable from the Holy Ghost.
14. Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon. Accord, Interlinear Scripture Analyzer (ISA basic 2.1.5, 2011) (www.scripture4all.org). The feminine term, dmamah is from a root, damam, that means “to be dumb; by implication, to be astonished, to stop; also to perish.” Id. The literal translation of this scripture, according to the Interlinear Scripture Analyzer, would something like “and after the earthquake fire not in the fire Yahweh and·after the·fire voice-of stillness thin and·he-is-becoming as·to-hear-of Elijah.”
15. The sound of the Spirit may be reflected in the use of the Greek letter eta, which is either H or η, the upper and lower case versions. The Greek spelling of this letter is ητα, and the sound is as the same as the e in fête, a sound involves a push or rush of air from the back of the mouth, like the sound of moving air. A mosaic was discover during the summer of 2012 at Huqoq, Israel. The lead archeologist was Jodi Magness. On the team was a BYU graduate who had done dissertation work under Magness, Matthew Grey. The mosaic was actually uncovered by a 2012 graduate of BYU, Bryan R. Bozung (BS, 2012). This is a late Fourth Century or early Fifth Century synagogue where soldiers are arrayed against individuals wearing ceremonial robes with the Greek letter eta or H on each robe. They synagogue at Huqoq dates from about the same time as the synagogue at Dura Europas, where individuals are wearing similar robes in what can be viewed as a terrestial sphere, and the robes appear to have the top half of eta on the robes. The discovery at Huqoq is the cover story on “Biblical Archeology Review,” vol. 49, no. 3 (May–June, 2019). “BYU Magazine” (Provo, UT, Brigham Young University, 2019). https://magazine.byu.edu/article/tile-tales-from-galilee/.
16. Psalm 107:26–30.
17. Job 4:16.

18. Job 4:15–16 (the words there was are italicized in the KJV, the word silence being the actual translation of the Hebrew word.

19. It appears twice if small voice found in 3 Nephi 11:3 is counted.
20. The only possible problem with saying Eliphaz’ use of the word as an allusion to Elijah is the date the book of Job was written: no one knows, but there are speculations based on language in the book that some argue militate in favor of a date in the second millennium bc, which would confound the idea that Eliphaz was being allusive. Saying that the words of Eliphaz are an allusion to Elijah’s experience, though, means Job had to have been written in the middle to late ninth century bc. The date the author of this essay prefers.
21. The King James translators were, perhaps, a little confused by their bias affecting the notion of revelation, so they left the Elijah experience a little confused. Indeed, the translators had a policy of leaving confused what they found confused rather than color the translation with the translator’s thoughts. As a result, the introduction the King James translation justifies the different sense of words set in the margin of the King James bible because, the translators posited, doubtful phrasing should be left to the exercise of the reader’s minds and to keep the “curious from loathing of them [like the Puritans, who sought black and white answers] for their every-where plainness”:

    Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be so sound in this point.　.　.　. Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to exercise and whet our wits, partly to wean the curious from loathing of them for their every-where plainness, partly also to stir up our devotion to crave the assistance of God’s spirit by prayer, and lastly, that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren by conference, and never scorn those that be not in all respects so complete as they should be, being to seek in many things ourselves, it hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness .　.　. that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence, and if we will resolve, to resolve upon modesty with S. Augustine, (though not in this same case altogether, yet upon the same ground) Melius est dubitare de occultis, quam litigare de incertis, it is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, than to strive about those things that are uncertain. There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, (having neither brother nor neighbor, as the Hebrews speak) so that we cannot be holpen by conference of places.

22. It was de regueur to think of the Lord controlling the elements. For example, Nephi uses what Laman and Lemuel accept as a manifestation of the Lord’s power in th natural phenomena to chasten them for their nescience:

    And ye also know that by the power of his almighty word he can cause the earth that it shall pass away;yea, and ye know that by his word he can cause the rough places to be made smooth, and smooth places shall be broken up.1 Nephi 17:46a.

24. This story, 1 Kings 19 , is replete with gematria and figures of speech: forty days, forty nights, the word of the Lord to Elijah, a great and strong wind, an earthquake, fire, the still small voice, the seven thousand faithful in Israel, Elijah’s mantle cast on Elisha, and the twelve yoke of oxen Elisha used to plow.[/efh_note]

    So the elements of Elijah’s story are this. Elijah flees for his life. He hides in a cave. There, he asks himself what he is doing. He uses his well-founded fear of death justify hiding. The story, then, has Elijah standing at the mouth of his immurement as the Lord passes by—using figures of speech—in a wind, and then in an earthquake and then in a fire, but the Lord, who we have just been told was in these things, “was not in” these phenomenon.²³It is important to understand the nature of a devise typical of Hebrew scriptures, exergasia. Exergasia is the repetition of any idea multiple times, so it is somewhat different than an hendiadys, which is also a stylistic element of Old Testament (and scriptures found in both the Book of Mormon (e.g., Jarom 1:8 ) and the Doctrine and Covenants (e.g., D&C 11:12–13 ). There have been canons extant describing the exergasia found in the Old Testament since Christian Schoettgen published them in 1733. Lundbom, Jack R. Jeremiah, A Study in Ancient Hebrew Rhetoric, 2d ed. (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1997). One of the canons applies to the repetition used in 1 Kings 19:11–12 to describe the natural phenomenon when the passes by, “Examples appear, where in the repeated line of the exergasia, the predicate is omitted.” Id. at 159. The omitted predicate is, “And, behold, the Lord passed by” with respect to not only the wind, but also the earthquake and the fire before Elijah retreated into the cave and heard the still, small voice of his own thoughts.

25. In this predisposition, members of the Church are like the Puritans who opposed the marginal notes in the King James translation because they thought things should be black and white.  The effect of this attitude is, paraphrasing the King James translators, loathing of the intellectually curious who, as a result, can become disaffected. Id.
26. The last general conference address give by Bruce R. McConkie in April 1985 made this very statement.

    In speaking of these wondrous things I shall use my own words, though you may think they are the words of scripture, words spoken by other Apostles and prophets.True it is they were first proclaimed by others, but they are now mine, for the Holy Spirit of God has borne witness to me that they are true, and it is now as though the Lord had revealed them to me in the first instance. I have thereby heard his voice and know his word.

    Bruce R. McConkie, “The Purifying Power of Gethsemane”(April General Conferencem 1985)(bolding added).. https://www.lds.org/study/general-conference/1985/04/the-purifying-power-of-gethsemane?lang=eng.

27. Don Lattin, “Musings of the Main Man,” San Francisco Chronicle (April 13, 1997). http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/SUNDAY-INTERVIEW-Musings-of-the-Main-Mormon-2846138.php.
28. Compass” interview (ABC News) with President Gordon B. Hinckley conducted by David Ranson. Aired November 9, 1997. http://www.abc.net.au/compass/intervs/hinckley.htm (accessed February 3, 2016) “Compass” is an ABC TV program in Australia that explores faith, belief and values in Australia and around the world.
29. Gardner, op cit. at 183–195, 279–280, proposes that most of the translation of the Book of Mormon is a functional or conceptual equivalent, what he calls functionalist. Gardner devotes chapter eighteen of his book to “Joseph’s Translations Involving Biblical Texts.”  There can be no question that Joseph Smith relied on his knowledge of the text of the King James Version as an aid to his translation and imported idioms and literary features of the Bible into his translation, so Joseph Smith, no doubt, imported still small voice into the Book of Mormon from the Bible.
30. 1 Nephi 17:43.
32. See 2 Nephi 5:28–34.[/efn_n0te] so there may be a gloss on this experience. The experience, perhaps, was like Elijah’s experience, so the angel was manifest in some natural phenomenon that occurred during the beating, just as the Lord was in the wind, fire, and earthquake at the mouth of Elijah’s cave. Second, one should not quickly conclude that the brothers actually spurned an audible voice; rather, it is more plausible that they had thought about the Lord and even witnessed dramatic events—the voice of Elijah’s thunder and wind but still chose a different path, which resulted in Nephi’s incredulity.³¹Nephi’s incredulity is reminiscent of Jeremiah’s when he describes the simplicity of observing for one’s self the right path: just stand on the street and look, following the watchmen or prophets who point out what is best, “Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein .　.　.　. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also, I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken.” Jeremiah 6:16–1 7. Cf. Proverbs 8 (wisdom—who’s office is indistinguishable from the Holy Ghost—stands at the high places, in the streets, at the gates and doors making knowledge and understanding plain, thereby giving life to those who will hear).
33. There are other examples in the scriptures of such patterns. The destruction of the city of Ammonihah told in Alma 8–ch. 1 6 is consistent with the Mosaic Law calling for the destruction of wicked cities, Deuteronomy 13:12–17 . Moreover Alma’s preaching was in three cities: Gideon, Alma 7 ; Melek, Alma 8 ; and Ammonihah. A third part of those rejected his words, which is analogous to the third part of the host of heaven who rejected the Father’s plan in the pre-existence. Abraham’s near sacrifice of Isaac, Genesis 22 , is a type for the death of the Savior. There is an article in BYU Studies, vol. 32, no. 4 (1992) by Jackson, Bernard S., “The Trials of Jesus and Jeremiah.” The thesis of this article is that the accounts of the Savior’s trial in the Synoptic Gospels uses the trial of Jeremiah as a literary paradigm; hence, the record in the gospels is as literary as it is historical because the trail is presented to conform to a paradigm the readers would expect and knew well.
34. Helaman 5.
35. This is similar to the experience of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, Daniel  3, except this was an natural phenomenon, probably St. Elmo’s fire associated with volcanic activity. See Wikipedia s.v. St. Elmo’s Fire.
36. Helaman 5:29–34.
37. The Lamanites are characterized as having an “evil nature that they became wild, and ferocious, and a blood-thirsty people, full of idolatry and filthiness.” Enos 1:20 ; Mosiah 10:12–17 . “[T]hey were a very indolent people, many of who did worship idols.” Alma 17:15. This sort of people were likely superstitious; hence, their thoughts—a still small voice—in the midst of the volcanic eruptions, associated earthquakes, and darkness caused by the ash, they would have concluded the gods were against them and their intentions and, instead, in favor of Nephi/Lehi and their intentions.
38. 3 Nephi 8–ch. 11.
40. Yoram Hazony, The Philosophy of Hebrew Scriptures (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2012), at 206–211. Hazony is Provost of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem and a Senior Fellow in the Department of Philosophy Political Theory and Religion; he makes a compelling argument that God’s voice is indistinguishable from a wise man’s thoughts:

    No wonder, then, that in the orations of the prophets of Israel, wisdom gained from experience, and from reasoning based on experience, at times becomes interchangeable with having heard God’s voice. Consider, for example, the following passage from Jeremiah:And I will make Jerusalem a ruin, a lair of jackals, and I will make the cities of Judah a desolation, without inhabitant. Who is the man so wise that he can understand this, and to whom the mouth of the Lord has spoken, that he may explain it: On what account is the land lost, withered like a desert, without anyone to pass through it? [Jeremiah 9:10–11 (TANAK), Jeremiah 9:11–12 (KJV).]Here, “the man so wise that he can understand this” is invoked in parallel with the man “to whom the mouth of the Lord has spoken,” as if the appearance of understanding the mind of the individual is the same as God’s speech. [Explanatory footnote omitted.] We find a similar construction in Isaiah, who looks forward to the coming of the future king, upon whom will rest the spirit of God. And yet this “spirit of God,” as Isaiah understands it, is itself indistinguishable from the wisdom, understanding, and the ability to judge wisely and with justice:

     

    And the spirt of the Lord will rest upon him: The spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of good counsel and bravery, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord, and his delight shall be in the fear of the Lord. [Isaiah 11:2–3; many other examples are cited in the omitted footnote.]

41. D&C 68:3–4 ; cp D&C 1:38 (“whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same”).
42. 3 Nephi 11:11:1–10.
45. The Lord, of course, was not in the natural phenomenon in the literal sense any more than the author of a book is literally in his book. But, the author is there. In his Areopagitica John Milton wrote:

    For books are not absolutely dead things, but . . . do preserve as in a vial the purest efficacy and extraction of that living intellect that bred them. . . . Many a man lives a burden to the Earth; but a good Book is the precious life-blood of a master-spirit, embalmed and treasured up on purpose to a life beyond life.[/⁴³

    It was only after the Savior appeared to the people and told him who He was that the people remembered that “it had been prophesied . . . that Christ should show himself” to these people. The still-small-voice thoughts or conclusions were followed by an unexpected witness, the physical appearance of the Savior, which provoked the people to recall the prophecy of His appearance. The Lord was not in those thoughts and conclusions, but He was in propria persona when he appeared.

    Still small voice was used by Joseph Smith to refer to other than just sublime, peaceful, or prophecy-fulfilling events. He got so angry with Bishop Edward Partridge that he was shaking after he received reports that Partridge was not dividing property among the saints. Paraphrasing the small voice experience of the Nephites at the Savior’s, Joseph Smith’s still small voice did pierce him to his center so his frame shook. Joseph Smith vented his feelings by writing a letter to W. W. Phelps ⁴⁴Part of which is now ID&C 85I.

47. History of the Church, vol. 1 at 298.[/efn_n0te] During the course of unburdening, Joseph Smith writes about his reaction to the report of Partridge’s misfeasance,

    Yea, thus saith the still small voice, which whispereth through and pierceth all things, and often times it maketh my bones to quake while it maketh manifest, saying: And it shall come to pass that I, the Lord God, will send one mighty and strong [to replace Edward Partridge who will] set in order the house of God. . . . While that man [Edward Partridge], who was called of God and appointed, that putteth forth his hand to steady the ark of God, shall fall by the shaft of death, like as a tree that is smitten by the vivid shaft of lightning. 9And all they who are not found written in the book of remembrance shall find none inheritance in that day, but they shall be cut asunder . . . . Therefore, it shall be done unto them as unto the children of the priest, as will be found recorded in the second chapter and sixty-first and second verses of Ezra.⁴⁶D&C 85:6–12

48. Cp. Psalms 32:3–4. David describes the effects covering up sins, not repenting, “When I kept silence, my bones waxed old through my roaring all the day long. For day and night they hand was heavy upon me: my moisture is turned into the drought of summer.”