This part of the record continues to provide evidence of order, if not formal law. Rather than a summary execution, Abinadi is granted a hearing. But why? I hypothesize that, even though the people themselves turned him over to the king, showing a certain lack of popular support, Abinadi likely had some sympathizers among the people, even if they were a minority. The conflict between religious systems (meaning politico-religious systems) means that Abinadi’s claims to speak for Yahweh in denouncing the political rulers are appropriately heard by the court priests.
Abinadi is posing a religious challenge. The priests must “cross him” or show the incorrectness of Abinadi’s ideas, thus discrediting him with his sympathizers. This victory will consolidate the rule of the new order over all of the people. Discrediting him will be a public relations victory that could not be achieved by simply killing him in a private dungeon.
This tactic backfires, however, as Abinadi “did withstand them in all their questions, and did confound them in all their words.” Granted, this praise of Abinadi’s skill may reflect primarily Mormon’s sympathy, since the priests consider him to have condemned himself and declare themselves the victors of the debate.