As Aaron begins to preach, an Amalekite heckles him. It is unclear how Mormon knew that this was an Amalekite, as there were both Amalekite and Amulonites in the congregation, either of which might have made these comments. It can only be speculation as to how Mormon had a record that particularly noted that it was an Amalekite. Perhaps there is more to the story that Mormon has left out that might have let us know the reason for this particular designation.
Historical: Aaron enters synagogues. This particular designation for a location of worship is at least controversial in the Book of Mormon as many scholars hold that there were no pre-exilic synagogues from which the Lehites could have taken their pattern. In any case, we are faced with the question of what a synagogue is in Book of Mormon terms. As we have seen in other occasions, there is a tenuous relationship between the words on the plates and the English words that are used to give us the information that was on the plates. In the case of synagogue, we have a Greek term that literally meets a meeting place. It is hard to tell given the evident translation of the Book of Mormon whether or not the plate text meant “meeting place” and Joseph translated it into the word with which he was more familiar (synagogue), or whether it actually meant a particular type of structure.
Sorenson notes:
What were synagogues? They are mentioned among both Nephites and the Lamanites under dissident Nephite influence (Alma 21:4-5; 32:1-12; Helaman 3:9, 14; Moroni 7:1). Would they have left ruins that might have been discovered? At first glance the very idea seems to pose a problem for the Book of Mormon. Many historians have maintained that synagogues were not known among the Jews until well after Lehi had left Palestine. Another group of experts, however, now argue that the synagogue predated Lehi’s departure. They propose that when King Josiah carried out his sweeping reforms of Jewish worship in order to clean out pagan intrusions, he closed the old sanctuaries (2 Kings 23). “The centralization of worship in Jerusalem from 621 B.C. onwards, with many Jews thereby denied a share in temple worship, must inevitably have led to the establishment of non-sacrificial places of assembly”—in effect, synagogues. So at least the concept of the synagogue could well have been around for a generation by the time First Nephi begins. Later synagogues served as community centers open to any who wished to worship or speak (compare Alma 26:29). According to the Babylonian Talmud, the Jewish synagogue was normally oriented to face Jerusalem and was also located on the highest place in town and near water. A synagogue was not necessarily a building; it might be only an enclosure.
Structures for seemingly sacred purposes that meet most of the Talmudic criteria existed in early Mesoamerican sites. It remains for some ambitious student to make detailed comparisons. That study should look carefully at names as well as ruins. The term synagogue is difficult to distinguish in concept from related terms used in the Book of Mormon. The “churches” set up by Alma in Zarahemla, and also the “assembly” of the Lamanites (Alma 21:16), were apparently functional parallels to synagogues. Several Old Testament terms signify “congregation” or “assembly” or the meeting place for such a group, the terms overlapping in translation. One of those words has come to be translated “synagogue,” but anciently words like synagogue, ekklesia, kenishta, and ’eda were translated quite freely as though they were equivalent. Thus, we may find that whatever distinguished a synagogue from a local church by Nephite standards was so subtle that we will be unable to tell them apart on the basis of their remains (Sorenson 1985, p. 236).