Alma’s proof of divine knowledge from “the Spirit of God” is his conversion experience—again, the same proof he had given to Helaman. The difference is that Helaman received a highly literate, structured version, while Shiblon’s version is a terse summary. Why is there such a difference? Perhaps Helaman, the future prophet/keeper of the records, needed a deeper understanding while Shiblon needed only a reminder. Both of them certainly would have known the story well already. A second possibility, however, is that Alma recounted the experience to Shiblon in the same detail, but Mormon condensed it, as he has done on other occasions when he has already made his point. (See commentary accompanying Alma 21:9–10.) I believe the second possibility is more likely. Mormon might slight the account to a son in his editing, but surely a father would not have.