One of the most distinctive teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the belief that we lived with God before being born on earth. But does this teaching actually appear in the Church’s foundational scripture, the Book of Mormon?
While there are a few passages that Latter-day Saints cite in support of a premortal existence, none are clear or decisive. In fact, several key verses align more naturally with the traditional Christian view—that God creates each person individually, and that human spirits do not eternally coexist with God in the same way He exists.
The Book of Mormon does not contradict LDS doctrine on the preexistence as directly as it does other teachings like vicarious ordinances or temple work, but on this question it is, at best, ambiguous. And that should lead us to ask: Why doesn’t “the most correct book on earth” clearly teach such a central doctrine?
Verses Supporting a Traditional Christian View of Creation
There are two sets of Book of Mormon verses that support a more traditional Christian view of creation.
The first is Alma 40:11, which says:
“The spirits of all men, whether they be good or evil, are taken home to that God who gave them life.”
This suggests that God is the source of life itself—not merely the organizer of preexistent matter or intelligences. It fits better with the biblical view of God creating us (body and soul), rather than us having always existed as eternal spirit beings. That said, a Latter-day Saint could plausibly interpret this metaphorically or harmonize it with their belief in organized intelligences, so the verse doesn’t decisively settle the issue.
The second set of verses—what I believe are the most compelling—are the “dust of the earth” passages. Jacob 2:21 says,
“God created all men… and all flesh is of the dust,”
which is slightly ambiguous since it emphasizes the physical body. But Mosiah 2:25 goes further:
“Ye cannot say that ye are even as much as the dust of the earth; yet ye were created of the dust of the earth; but behold, it belongeth to him who created you.”
This mirrors the language of Genesis 2:7, where God forms Adam from dust and breathes life into him, but Mosiah goes beyond it in three key ways.
First, it plainly states that “ye were created of the dust of the earth,” with no caveats or dualistic division between body and spirit—implying the whole person is created by God.
Second, it underscores our utter dependence: “ye cannot say that ye are even as much as the dust.” This affirms the Christian view of humanity’s created finitude and need for divine grace.
Third, it emphasizes God’s ownership even over the dust itself: “it belongeth to him who created you.” This line pushes back against the LDS view of eternally self-existent intelligences by highlighting that both matter and mankind are entirely derivative of God’s creative act.
While not conclusive, these verses align far more naturally with the biblical doctrine of creatio ex nihilo than with the later LDS doctrine of co-eternal intelligences.
Ambiguous Verses
There are some other Book of Mormon verses that are largely ambiguous. For instance Alma 18:34 and Ether 3:14–16 both teach that “man in the beginning was created after the image of God.” This echoes the Genesis creation account but doesn’t clearly address the timing or nature of human existence.
Probably the strongest verse that could support the LDS view is Alma 42:9 which says that “the soul could never die,” and which some might take as support for a pre-mortal soul. But again, this could easily refer to the immortality of the soul after death rather than a preexistent state especially since this verse is part of Alma’s same discourse where he emphasizes the fact that on death our soul returns to “that God who gave them life.”
What about Alma 13?
The biggest passage Latter-day Saints often point to in favor of a preexistence is Alma 13. When I was a Latter-day Saint, I assumed this chapter taught the preexistence because that was the framework I had been given.
But when read in context—and especially in light of 19th-century debates over Calvinism and Arminianism—it seems more likely that Alma is emphasizing God’s foreknowledge, not actions in a premortal realm.
Foreknowledge v. Predestination
One of the key theologican debates that was prominent in Joseph Smith’s day was that between the Calvinist theology of churches like the Presbyterian Church and the Arminian theology of the Methodist Church. Indeed, these are two of the Churches that members of Joseph Smith’s own family were most strongly drawn to. Calvinists and Arminians both came from the reformed tradition of John Calvin, but split over the doctrines of salvation and especially over the topic of whether people are saved as a result of God’s sovereign presdination without regard to our actions, or whether they are saved as a result of God’s foreknowledge of the good that we would do in light of the offer of the Gospel.
As Pastor Mathew Gilbert explained,
“An Arminian understanding of election can be described briefly as follows: Before the foundation of the world, God looked into time and saw all of mankind… he foreknew the free choices of those who would wisely put their faith in Jesus Christ for their salvation. Based on this condition of faith, God then elects those individuals unto eternal life.”
In contrast, Calvinism teaches that God’s election is unconditional, not based on any foreseen virtue or faith in individuals. God chooses whom to save solely based on His sovereign will.
“Calvinism… teaches that those who are chosen are chosen out of the sovereign grace of God and not as a result of any good or bad that is in them… Election is not dependent on any good will or act in man, even that of faith.”
Alma 13 is about God’s Foreknowledge not the Prexistence
Alma 13 situates itself perfectly into this debate. It addresses the question of why certain individuals (and not others) are chosen by God and ordained to the priesthood.
Alma speaks of men being “called and prepared from the foundation of the world according to the foreknowledge of God,” and says they were chosen because of their “exceeding faith and good works” (Alma 13:3). This accords with the Arminian position that callings omce as a result of God’s foreknowledge of the good works they would do.
The rest of this verse only amplifies this point. It emphasizes that “in the first place” people were “left to choose good or evil” and that those who were ordained had “chosen good and exerci[sed] exceedingly great faith.”
This calling comes as a result of a “preparatory redemption,” which fits with the key Arminian concept of “prevenient grace” or “preparatory grace”
Verse 4 emphasizes that God’s choice is based on how individuals would respond to God’s callling. Some are chosen “on account of their faith” and others would “have had as great privilege as their brethren” if it were not the case that they “would reject the Spirit of God on account of the hardness of their hearts and blindness of their minds.” This contrasts with the Calvinist notion of limited/specific atonement where God predestines only certain individuals for salvation.
Verse 5 similarly notes that “in the first place” those not chosen “were on the same standing with their brethren” and that the “holy calling” of God was open to “such as would not harden their hearts.” The emphasis of equal standing and the choice to respond to God’s call is once again perfectly congruent with Arminism.
Verse 7 reinforces once again that this was based on God’s “foreknowledge of all things”
Finally, verse 10 again reiterates that this calling “was on account of their exceeding faith and repentance, and their righteousness before God, they choosing to repent and work righteousness rather than to perish.” Once again, this sides with Arminianism over Calvinism by emphasizing the ideat that God’s callings comes as a result of the choice to repent.
On the other hand, Alma 13 is a poor fit for a text about a doctrine of a preexistence. The emphasis is on Gods foreknowledge of what individuals would choose rather than something that an individual has already done before birth. (v4)
On the other hand there are also no mentions of a premortal realm, a war in heaven, a proposed plan of salvation, or any of the other concepts typically associated with the Mormon doctrine of the prexistence.
Moreover, if this text is about the preexistence then it is in tension with LDS teaching. In LDS theology, every person who came to earth sided with Jesus in the war in heaven. We all qualified to come to earth becuase we “kept our first estate” and overcame Satan. But according to Alma 13, only some individuals are chosen becuase of their “exceeding faith and good works.” This is bizzare fit for LDS theology where everyone followed Jesus. It has also lended support for some dangerous and heretical ideas like the idea that certain races were elected to the priesthood on account of premortal righteousness.
Alma 13 is therefore more compatible with the Arminian view where God chooses individuals based on what He foresees about their future responses—not with a mass of preexistent spirits all having made the same righteous choice. It is much more compatible with a worldview shaped by individual election or foreseen response to grace in mortality.
Conclusion
While the doctirne of the pre-mortal existence is fundamental to LDS doctrine, it is not found in the Book of Mormon. And indeed, the Book of Mormon contains several verses that seem to contradict it.