One might wonder if the occurrence of means near the beginning of verse 7 (listed above under 2) is an error for small means since otherwise the larger passage has only small means (listed above under 1 and 3). If we accept such an emendation, the subsequent occurrence of very small means later on in verse 7 would then emphasize the very and contrast it with the “small means” that the Lord generally uses “to bring about his great and eternal purposes”).
There are three arguments against emending means to small means here in Alma 37:7. First of all, the original manuscript is basically extant for this whole passage, and it reads just like the current text:
In this passage, the three instances of means read respectively as small means, means, and very small means. In the second instance, Oliver Cowdery wrote mea at the end of line 32, then finished the word by writing -ns at the beginning of the next line. There is some noise above by mea at the end of line 32, but there is no evidence for any supralinearly inserted small. So manuscript evidence supports the current reading in Alma 37:7 of means alone.
The second argument against emending means to small means deals with the issue of whether the very in the third instance should really be considered a case of emphasis. Note that the first and third instances of means (one as small means and the other as very small means) seem to be saying the same thing:
The parallelism between the first and third instances implies that the addition of very in verse 7 is not intended to be contrastive. In fact, when writing down Joseph Smith’s dictation of the third instance of the word means, Oliver Cowdery started to write small means in line 33, but before finishing small (he had only written smal ), he crossed out the word and then wrote inline very (spelled as verry) followed by small means. In other words, Oliver expected small means, not very small means.
But perhaps the most significant argument against emending means to small means in verse 7 is that God does generally work through means (that is, the physical matter and beings of this world) “to bring about his great and eternal purposes”. It is true that there are two other scriptures that refer to the small means of the Lord, both of which specifically refer to the operation of the Liahona:
Yet there are also passages that more generally refer to the means that the Lord provides:
Since means alone will work, the critical text will retain the invariant use of means near the beginning of Alma 37:7.
Summary: Maintain in Alma 37:7 the use of means alone in the sentence “the Lord God doth work by means to bring about his great and eternal purposes”; not only is this the invariant reading in all the textual sources, but there are other passages in the text that generally refer to God using means (and not necessarily small means) to accomplish his purposes.