At this point we begin the insertion of the Matthean text. The set of verses from 3-12 form the Beatitudes, and are a textual unit that repeats multiple phrases in a formulaic way. The Beatitudes are connected through proximity and structure, but the content of each is discrete. They do not build upon each other. There is no rhetorical logic that moves the discourse from one to the next. The presentation of the block of unrelated blessing statements simply portrays the picture of the various ways in which the people may be blessed. It recognizes that there are differences in people, and that there are ways in which the Lord recognizes, accepts, and blesses those differences.
Comparison to the Matthean text: The only difference between this verse and Matthew 5:3 is the addition of the word “yea” to the beginning of the verse. This provides a linkage between the unique Book of Mormon text preceding this verse and the text which follows.
Comments: Jesus blesses a set of people who are defined as “poor in spirit,” with “the kingdom of heaven.” The blessing form sets up a current/future contrast that contains a reversal. Those who are poor in this earth do not have access to the wealth and power of the world. Nevertheless, it is these very people who will have the whole of the kingdom of heaven in the next. That which is denied on earth will be bestowed in heaven.
This analysis requires that we understand that “poor” contrasts with “kingdom,” a position that should not be difficult. Nevertheless, it becomes even more pertinent when we realize that the poor of Jesus’ time were a different type of poor than had existed in previous ages.
“Since the agricultural productivity of the Land of Israel was never exceptionally high even under the most favorable conditions, and since even the slightest reduction in crop yields made it impossible for many peasant families to produce enough for both taxes and family survival, an increasing number of farmers were forced to borrow against future harvests in order to be able to retain enough of their crops and animals to carry then over to the next year. Indeed, the evidence drawn from rabbinic literature and from legal documents of the period suggests that rural indebtedness dramatically increased throughout the Herodian administration and the priestly aristocracy. Yet the stop-gap measure soon had catastrophic consequences: once a peasant farmer pledged away and even greater proportion of the next harvest, it was unlikely that he could avoid sinking even deeper into debt in the following years. And since the only collateral that peasants could use to obtain loans was the land that had been farmed by their families for generations, their inability to repay mounting debts eventually resulted in foreclosure. In many cases, that legal action would have changed once-free villagers working the lands of their ancestors into permanently impoverished sharecroppers eking out a living on vast (and rapidly growing) aristocratic estates.” (Richard A. Horsely and Neil Asher Silberman. The Message and the Kingdom. Grosset/Putnam, New York, 1997, p. 28).
The poor in the New Testament times of the Sermon on the Mount were in desperate need, and were so far from a “kingdom” that many of them no longer owned the land they farmed. It is this massive difference between their current economic state and their promised heavenly economic state that creates the nature of the blessing. They endure a terrible oppression in this earth, but are redeemed in heaven.
When Luke references this same basic beatitude, he does so without the Matthean phrase “in spirit:
Luke 6:20
20 ¶ And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God.
Most commentators on Matthew agree that the phrase “in spirit” is secondary modification to the statement. (Robert Guelich. A Foundation for Understanding the Sermon on the Mount. Word Publishing, Dallas, 1982, pp. 74). Nevertheless, it is an appropriate one, because it is not the economic poverty that will qualify the people for the kingdom of God. The literary contrast is between the poor and the kingdom, but the reason that the poor will achieve the kingdom is not because of their lack of access to the world’s goods, but rather the fact that their poverty will require them to rely upon God rather than the strength of their own hand.
Book of Mormon Context: In the Mesoamerican world, there were certainly poor, but the Book of Mormon descriptions of the poor tend to equate them with the farmers who are in the fields as opposed to the city-dwellers. There is no land ownership noted in the Book of Mormon, and there was none in ancient Mesoamerica. Therefore the entire economic structure that created the type of poverty that formed the massive contrast between “poor” and “kingdom” did not exist in Mesoamerica. In spite of the fact that the nature of the economic problem was not as great, there was still a social hierarchy that was evidenced in much of the Mesoamerican area, and was one of the very things against which the Nephite prophets fought. That social distinction and separation provided a different definition of poverty, but still allowed for the understanding that there was a difference between the access to economic goods in this world, and what might have come later. The ability of the people in the new world to become humble through their poverty, particularly when accentuated by a distinct social hierarchy is demonstrated by the poor among the Zoramites, to whom Alma said:
Alma 32:12-16
12 I say unto you, it is well that ye are cast out of your synagogues, that ye may be humble, and that ye may learn wisdom; for it is necessary that ye should learn wisdom; for it is because that ye are cast out, that ye are despised of your brethren because of your exceeding poverty, that ye are brought to a lowliness of heart; for ye are necessarily brought to be humble.
13 And now, because ye are compelled to be humble blessed are ye; for a man sometimes, if he is compelled to be humble, seeketh repentance; and now surely, whosoever repenteth shall find mercy; and he that findeth mercy and endureth to the end the same shall be saved.
14 And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word?
15 Yea, he that truly humbleth himself, and repenteth of his sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed—yea, much more blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty.
16 Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe.
The position of the poor among the Zoramites was more marked than in other sections of Nephite society precisely because the Zoramites had adopted a marked social hierarchy based upon wealth. Thus the idea of being “poor in spirit” was entirely appropriate for the Mesoamerican audience, and a repetition of a message they had heard before.