I don't read Alma's words as saying that. I read it as him saying that defending your families is a separate issue and that you always defend your families and that that should not be conflated with forgiving a personal enemy who has only committed an offense against you personally.Ado wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 1:47 pm Alma 43:46-47
And they were doing that which they felt was the duty which they owed to their God; for the Lord has said unto them, and also unto their fathers, that: Inasmuch as ye are not guilty of the first offense, neither the second, ye shall not suffer yourselves to be slain by the hands of your enemies.
And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed...
The Lord to Nephi in 1 Nephi 4:13 - "It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief."
Could it be argued that Nephi was defending his families right to not become a dwindling and ultimately destroyed nation after waiting til after the 2nd offense? According to Alma, Nephi was in the right if we consider that getting the plates was an act of defending his family.
Also, In alma we seem to be told that they could wait until after the second offense to then defend themselves rather than the third. Does that contradict D&C 98?
And yes, it could be and should be argued that Nephi was defending the future existence of the Nephite nation, but was there a better way? Does section 98 imply that he could have chosen a better way? If not, did the Lord waste his time in giving that revelation? What is that section trying to teach us?