This Is Where People Get It Wrong
Let’s slow this down, because this is where people start reading what they want the text to say instead of what it actually says.
The Book of Mormon is not vague on this. It presents a people who believed in Christ, taught Christ, prophesied of Christ — and still kept the Law of Moses for centuries. So the question is not whether they kept it.
The question is: what did they understand about obedience that many today are trying to explain away?
They Kept the Law Because God Commanded It
Nephi removes all ambiguity:
“We keep the law of Moses… because of the commandments.”
That’s the foundation. Not tradition. Not interpretation. Commandment. Abinadi confirms:
“It is expedient that ye should keep the law of Moses as yet.”
And Alma echoes it:
“It was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses as yet.”
They didn’t assume release. They waited for it. “As yet” is not a casual phrase — it means the command was still in force and they knew it.
“Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire.”
— Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 256
“When the Lord gives a commandment, we should obey it.”
— Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 31
They Knew the Law Pointed to Christ
Jacob explains the purpose of the whole system:
“For this intent we keep the law of Moses, it pointing our souls to him.”
The Law was not the destination. It was the direction. Nephi put it in teaching terms:
“We talk of Christ… that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins.”
And Amulek identified the sacrificial thread:
“Those sacrifices… were types of that great and last sacrifice.”
Torah was not a burden. It was a prophetic system — every sacrifice, every feast, every commandment pointing forward. The Nephites kept the Law because they understood Christ, not in spite of it.
They Remained Faithful Right Up to Christ
This is where modern assumptions collapse. Even just before the Savior’s appearance in the Americas:
“They did observe to keep the law of Moses… notwithstanding they had become exceeding firm in the faith of Christ.”
The text explicitly connects firm Christological faith with Torah observance in the same sentence. This is not a contradiction — it’s the whole point. No early abandonment. No progressive reinterpretation. Faithfulness to the commandment until the commandment reached its purpose.
Christ Fulfilled — He Did Not Abolish
Christ declares plainly in the New World:
“I am he that gave the law, and I am he that covenanted with my people Israel; therefore, the law in me is fulfilled.”
But He had already warned against misreading this:
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”
We don’t get to redefine “fulfilled” as “abolished.” That’s not interpretation — it’s contradiction. The same mouth that fulfilled it warned against treating fulfillment as destruction.
“Fulfilled” means brought to its full purpose. A prophecy fulfilled does not disappear from the record. A type fulfilled does not lose its meaning. It is completed — which is different from being cancelled.
What Was Fulfilled: The Sacrificial System
Christ is precise about what changes at His coming:
“Ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.”
What was fulfilled? The sacrificial system — the system of animal offerings that pointed forward to the Lamb of God. The reality had come. The Lamb had fulfilled what the sacrifices signified. The type had met the antitype.
This is specific. It is not a blanket removal of God’s commandments. It is the completion of the sacrificial structure — exactly what Jacob, Amulek, and Alma all said the sacrifices were pointing toward.
What Did Not End: Covenant Obedience
After the sacrificial system is fulfilled, Christ immediately turns to deeper obedience, not less of it. The Sermon at the Temple in 3 Nephi 12–14 raises the standard — it does not lower it. Heart-level righteousness. Covenant living. Commandment-keeping that goes beyond the surface.
The New Testament confirms the same trajectory:
“If ye love me, keep my commandments.”
“Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.”
The end-times saints are defined by two things: commandment-keeping and faith in Jesus. Not one or the other. Both. Together. The text does not let you choose.
Restoration Clarification
The Restoration does not blur this — it sharpens it.
“Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.”
— Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 276
“Some portions of the law… were fulfilled… while others remain in force.”
— Journal of Discourses, Vol. 18, p. 224
“We are under law to Christ…”
— Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 144
Early Restoration leaders understood the distinction: the sacrificial system was fulfilled, but law-keeping — covenant obedience — continued under Christ. That is not a novel interpretation. It is what the Nephite record showed.
The Real Issue Today
Let’s be direct about what is driving the confusion.
This isn’t about exegetical difficulty. People read “fulfilled” and hear permission: I don’t have to obey. And then they reach for any proof-text that will support that conclusion.
But the text never says that. Not once. Not in the Torah. Not in the Prophets. Not in the New Testament. Not in the Book of Mormon. Not in the Doctrine & Covenants.
The Nephites had every reason to arrive at that conclusion before we did — they knew Christ was coming, they had prophets explaining the purpose of the Law, they lived under the sacrificial system for centuries. If “fulfilled” meant “abolished,” one of them would have said so. They didn’t. They waited. They obeyed. They kept the commandments until the Messiah said precisely what had changed — and even then they continued in covenant faithfulness under Him.