In section 57 the Lord identified the site for his temple in Zion. That was the first reference to a specific latter-day temple in the Doctrine and Covenants. There is not another one until section 84, which tells the Saints to build the temple and forges the gospel links between their missionary work, the gathering of scattered Israel, the fulfillment of ancient prophecies, and the building of New Jerusalem, crowned with its holy temple.
Joseph’s history designates section 84 as a “Revelation . . . On Priesthood.”1 That is worth considering. It could be described as a revelation on temple ordinances, covenants, the gathering of Israel, missionary work, the law of consecration, and the imminent coming of the Savior to “reign with my people” in Zion, as He says in closing (D&C 84:119). So why “priesthood?” What was Joseph seeing? What difference will it make to our understanding when we see it too?
The answer may be in a long digression between verses 7 and 31. It seems, at first, to be a tangent from the point of the revelation, which began with a prophecy about building the temple. It turns out, however, that the digression becomes an explanation of priesthood and the relationship between priesthood, ordinances, and the endowment of power we need to transcend the Fall and regain God’s presence. In short, priesthood validates the ordinances to be performed in the prophesied temple.
Moses understood this principle, the revelation says, and tried to teach it plainly, but the Israelites of his day did not generally want the endowment of priesthood power. They could not, therefore, endure God’s presence. Angry, God gave them less priesthood than he had to offer but as much as they were willing to receive. Joseph later taught about this strange human tendency to “set up stakes and say thus far will we go and no farther.” By contrast, Moses and Joseph were like Peter and the others who, Joseph said, received “the fullness of priesthood or the law of God” when the Savior was transfigured before them.2
I remember a Sunday School class discussion in which the consensus was that God does not get angry. It was an example of wresting the scriptures, which testify in section 84 and elsewhere that the Lord’s “anger was kindled against them,” and justifiably so. They rejected him, his plan, his sacrifice, his redeeming love, his fullness. The misguided class was trying to articulate truth about God’s character. It was a little like the process by which the creeds of Christianity eventually determined that God had no passions or emotions like anger. Section 84 does a better job. The Lord is justifiably angry, it says. There is nothing wrong with justified anger. The problem is the choice to express it badly. God does not express his anger the way a fallen mortal might. Section 84 says that when God is angry at his children for rejecting his blessings, he responds by offering as much as they are presently willing to receive, preparatory to their receiving more (D&C 84:23–26).
Having concluded his digression, the Lord returns to his main theme, namely, how priesthood holders will serve in the temple to be built on the consecrated spot in Independence, Missouri. Saints who are full of priesthood power—figurative descendants of Moses and Aaron—will be filled with the Lord’s glory in the temple. One would think this revelation would provide the Saints enough incentive to begin building a temple on the dedicated site in Independence, Missouri—Zion. They did not, however. There are several complicated reasons why, and later revelations will cover these.
The Saints obeyed section 84 in other specific ways. A council of high priests assigned Orson Hyde and Hyrum Smith to write a rebuke of the Church leaders in Missouri, as verse 76 commanded.3 As instructed in verses 112–114, Bishop Whitney and Joseph Smith left Kirtland “to fulfill the Revelation,” making important contacts in New York City, visiting Albany, and prophesying in Boston.4 The gospel continues to be preached to “all who have not received it” (D&C 84:75). Many people have made the covenant to receive, obtain, and magnify the priesthood as outlined in section 84. Many people have obeyed the law of consecration as instructed in verses 103–110.
Perhaps the most important result of section 84 is that it raised Joseph’s consciousness of the fundamental importance of priesthood and, inseparably, the temple. He had listened attentively all night at age seventeen while Moroni explained the imperative need to obtain restored priesthood in order to seal the human family together before the Savior’s coming, but the doctrine of the priesthood distilled on Joseph like dew from heaven (D&C 121:45). Considerable dew condensed during the night nine years later, when section 84 explained the priesthood’s past and projected its future use in temples.5
1. “History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834],” p. 229, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 7, 2020.
2. “Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by James Burgess,” p. [12], The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 7, 2020.
3. Joseph Smith, Letterbook, 1829–1835, pages 20–25; Kirtland Minute Book, January 13, 1833, Church History Library, Salt Lake City. See Section 82.
4. Newel K. Whitney, undated statement, Newel K. Whitney Collection, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University; Samuel H. Smith, Journal, November 26, 1832, Church History Library, Salt Lake City; Joseph to Emma Smith, July 13, 1832, Community of Christ Archives, Independence, Missouri.
5. Richard Lyman Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 202–05.
In section 57 the Lord identified the site for his temple in Zion. That was the first reference to a specific latter-day temple in the Doctrine and Covenants. There is not another one until section 84, which tells the Saints to build the temple and forges the gospel links between their missionary work, the gathering of scattered Israel, the fulfillment of ancient prophecies, and the building of New Jerusalem, crowned with its holy temple.
Joseph’s history designates section 84 as a “Revelation . . . On Priesthood.”1 That is worth considering. It could be described as a revelation on temple ordinances, covenants, the gathering of Israel, missionary work, the law of consecration, and the imminent coming of the Savior to “reign with my people” in Zion, as He says in closing (D&C 84:119). So why “priesthood?” What was Joseph seeing? What difference will it make to our understanding when we see it too?
The answer may be in a long digression between verses 7 and 31. It seems, at first, to be a tangent from the point of the revelation, which began with a prophecy about building the temple. It turns out, however, that the digression becomes an explanation of priesthood and the relationship between priesthood, ordinances, and the endowment of power we need to transcend the Fall and regain God’s presence. In short, priesthood validates the ordinances to be performed in the prophesied temple.
Moses understood this principle, the revelation says, and tried to teach it plainly, but the Israelites of his day did not generally want the endowment of priesthood power. They could not, therefore, endure God’s presence. Angry, God gave them less priesthood than he had to offer but as much as they were willing to receive. Joseph later taught about this strange human tendency to “set up stakes and say thus far will we go and no farther.” By contrast, Moses and Joseph were like Peter and the others who, Joseph said, received “the fullness of priesthood or the law of God” when the Savior was transfigured before them.2
I remember a Sunday School class discussion in which the consensus was that God does not get angry. It was an example of wresting the scriptures, which testify in section 84 and elsewhere that the Lord’s “anger was kindled against them,” and justifiably so. They rejected him, his plan, his sacrifice, his redeeming love, his fullness. The misguided class was trying to articulate truth about God’s character. It was a little like the process by which the creeds of Christianity eventually determined that God had no passions or emotions like anger. Section 84 does a better job. The Lord is justifiably angry, it says. There is nothing wrong with justified anger. The problem is the choice to express it badly. God does not express his anger the way a fallen mortal might. Section 84 says that when God is angry at his children for rejecting his blessings, he responds by offering as much as they are presently willing to receive, preparatory to their receiving more (D&C 84:23–26).
Having concluded his digression, the Lord returns to his main theme, namely, how priesthood holders will serve in the temple to be built on the consecrated spot in Independence, Missouri. Saints who are full of priesthood power—figurative descendants of Moses and Aaron—will be filled with the Lord’s glory in the temple. One would think this revelation would provide the Saints enough incentive to begin building a temple on the dedicated site in Independence, Missouri—Zion. They did not, however. There are several complicated reasons why, and later revelations will cover these.
The Saints obeyed section 84 in other specific ways. A council of high priests assigned Orson Hyde and Hyrum Smith to write a rebuke of the Church leaders in Missouri, as verse 76 commanded.3 As instructed in verses 112–114, Bishop Whitney and Joseph Smith left Kirtland “to fulfill the Revelation,” making important contacts in New York City, visiting Albany, and prophesying in Boston.4 The gospel continues to be preached to “all who have not received it” (D&C 84:75). Many people have made the covenant to receive, obtain, and magnify the priesthood as outlined in section 84. Many people have obeyed the law of consecration as instructed in verses 103–110.
Perhaps the most important result of section 84 is that it raised Joseph’s consciousness of the fundamental importance of priesthood and, inseparably, the temple. He had listened attentively all night at age seventeen while Moroni explained the imperative need to obtain restored priesthood in order to seal the human family together before the Savior’s coming, but the doctrine of the priesthood distilled on Joseph like dew from heaven (D&C 121:45). Considerable dew condensed during the night nine years later, when section 84 explained the priesthood’s past and projected its future use in temples.5
1. “History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834],” p. 229, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 7, 2020.
2. “Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by James Burgess,” p. [12], The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 7, 2020.
3. Joseph Smith, Letterbook, 1829–1835, pages 20–25; Kirtland Minute Book, January 13, 1833, Church History Library, Salt Lake City. See Section 82.
4. Newel K. Whitney, undated statement, Newel K. Whitney Collection, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University; Samuel H. Smith, Journal, November 26, 1832, Church History Library, Salt Lake City; Joseph to Emma Smith, July 13, 1832, Community of Christ Archives, Independence, Missouri.
5. Richard Lyman Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Knopf, 2005), 202–05.
From Doctrine and Covenants Minute
While we know the exact date, relative location, and close wording of the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood, we have very little information about the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. Doctrine and Covenants 84 is a landmark in our understanding of priesthood in general, but especially of the powers and promises associated with the Melchizedek Priesthood. This revelation came at the end of several months of great challenges for Joseph Smith. A mob attacked Joseph and Sidney Rigdon at the John Johnson Farm on March 24, 1832. The beating was painful for both men, but it especially affected Sidney, whose head was badly lacerated as they dragged him across the frozen ground. Joseph seemed to recover more quickly, while Sidney was confined to bed for several days. Joseph visited Sidney a few days after the attack and later remembered, “I went to see Elder Rigdon, and found him crazy, and his head highly inflamed, for they had dragged him by his heels, and those, too, so high from the earth he could not raise his head from the rough frozen surface.”1
Sidney recovered sufficiently to travel to Missouri in the spring of 1832 with Joseph Smith and other Church leaders. Their conversations with the Church leaders in Missouri were difficult, but Joseph managed to bring some harmony to the discussions before he left. On the way home, another hardship struck the travelers when the horses pulling their stagecoach had a runaway. Bishop Newel K. Whitney attempted to jump from the coach but caught his foot in the wheel and broke his leg in several places. Bishop Whitney was unable to travel, so Joseph elected to stay with him while the rest of the party journeyed home to Kirtland.2
Joseph spent a stressful four weeks at an inn in Greenville, Indiana, while Bishop Whitney recovered. He wrote in a letter to Emma Smith,
My Situation is a very unpleasant one although I will endeavor to be contented. The Lord assisting me I have visited a grove which is just back of the town almost every day where I can be secluded from the eyes of any mortal and there give vent to all the feelings of my heart. In meditation and prayer I have called to mind all the past moments of my life and am left to mourn and Shed tears of sorrow for my folly in suffering the adversary of my Soul to have so much power over me as he has had in times past.3
However, in the midst of his trials Joseph also remembered the goodness of God in his life. “But God is merciful and has forgiven my sins,” he wrote to Emma. “I rejoice that he sendeth forth the Comforter to as many as believe and humbleth themselves before him.”4
On one occasion Joseph believed he had been poisoned. “I rose from the dinner-table, I walked directly to the door and commenced vomiting most profusely,” he later wrote. “I raised large quantities of blood and poisonous matter, and so great were the muscular contortions of my system that my jaw was dislocated in a few moments.”5 Joseph later recovered through a priesthood blessing, and he and Bishop Whitney left the inn the following day. By the time they returned to Kirtland they had been gone nearly three months.
More trouble greeted Joseph when he arrived home. A letter from John Corrill, a counselor to Bishop Edward Partridge in Missouri, raised some points of conflict and animosity toward Joseph Smith and other Church leaders in Kirtland. Shortly after hearing these accusations, Sidney Rigdon suffered an episode where he became frantic and declared in public that “the keys are rent from this people.”6 Joseph was forced to travel to Kirtland from where he was staying in Hiram, Ohio, to remedy the situation. For a time, he was forced to remove Sidney from the First Presidency and revoke his priesthood.7
During these challenging months, Joseph Smith began to reflect on his experiences and record his history for the first time. He wrote an account of the First Vision and documented the appearance of angels who had given him his authority to minister. In this history, he suggested that he had received two different kinds of authority, noting that “the ministering of Angels” gave him an authority that allowed him “to administer the letter of the Gospel.” He also wrote of receiving “the high Priesthood after the holy order of the son of the living God,” giving him “power and ordinance from on high to preach the Gospel in the administration and demonstration of the spirit.”8
Writing this history and enduring the tumultuous events surrounding the government of the Church were likely factors in the Prophet seeking further guidance on the nature of the priesthood. The revelation in section 84 traced the lineage of the two orders of the priesthood and explained the blessings associated with each. In a later history, Joseph Smith designated this revelation as simply “On Priesthood” and gave the following context for it: “The elders began to return from their Missions to the eastern states, and present the histories of their several stewardships in the Lord’s vineyard; and while together in these seasons of joy, I inquired of the Lord and received the following: [D&C 84].”9
The Prophet received the revelation over two days, the 22nd and 23rd of September, 1832. Evidence from the earliest copies of the revelation suggests that the revelation was received in two parts. We do not know exactly where the first part ends and the second part begins; however, several of the early scribes of the revelation, including Frederick G. Williams and John Whitmer, left a break after the phrase “for he is full of mercy, justice, grace and truth, and peace, forever and ever, Amen” (D&C 84:102). This break suggests that Doctrine and Covenants 84:103–120 were received on September 23rd.10
See “Historical Introduction,” Revelation, 22–23 September 1832 [D&C 84]
1. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 208, JSP.
2. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 214, JSP.
3. Letter to Emma Smith, 6 June 1832, p. 1, spelling corrected and punctuation added, JSP.
4. Letter to Emma Smith, 6 June 1832, pp. 1-2, spelling corrected and punctuation added, JSP.
5. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 215.
6. Lucy Mack Smith, History, 1844-1845, p. 5, book 13, JSP.
7. See “Historical Introduction,” Letter to William W. Phelps, 31 July 1832, JSP.
.8. Joseph Smith—History, circa Summer 1832, p. 1, JSP.
9. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 229, JSP.
10. See Revelation Book 1, p. 155, JSP. In this copy of the revelation, John Whitmer actually wrote “Received on the 23 day of September 1832” before the rest of the revelation.
While we know the exact date, relative location, and close wording of the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood, we have very little information about the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. Doctrine and Covenants 84 is a landmark in our understanding of priesthood in general, but especially of the powers and promises associated with the Melchizedek Priesthood. This revelation came at the end of several months of great challenges for Joseph Smith. A mob attacked Joseph and Sidney Rigdon at the John Johnson Farm on March 24, 1832. The beating was painful for both men, but it especially affected Sidney, whose head was badly lacerated as they dragged him across the frozen ground. Joseph seemed to recover more quickly, while Sidney was confined to bed for several days. Joseph visited Sidney a few days after the attack and later remembered, “I went to see Elder Rigdon, and found him crazy, and his head highly inflamed, for they had dragged him by his heels, and those, too, so high from the earth he could not raise his head from the rough frozen surface.”1
Sidney recovered sufficiently to travel to Missouri in the spring of 1832 with Joseph Smith and other Church leaders. Their conversations with the Church leaders in Missouri were difficult, but Joseph managed to bring some harmony to the discussions before he left. On the way home, another hardship struck the travelers when the horses pulling their stagecoach had a runaway. Bishop Newel K. Whitney attempted to jump from the coach but caught his foot in the wheel and broke his leg in several places. Bishop Whitney was unable to travel, so Joseph elected to stay with him while the rest of the party journeyed home to Kirtland.2
Joseph spent a stressful four weeks at an inn in Greenville, Indiana, while Bishop Whitney recovered. He wrote in a letter to Emma Smith,
My Situation is a very unpleasant one although I will endeavor to be contented. The Lord assisting me I have visited a grove which is just back of the town almost every day where I can be secluded from the eyes of any mortal and there give vent to all the feelings of my heart. In meditation and prayer I have called to mind all the past moments of my life and am left to mourn and Shed tears of sorrow for my folly in suffering the adversary of my Soul to have so much power over me as he has had in times past.3
However, in the midst of his trials Joseph also remembered the goodness of God in his life. “But God is merciful and has forgiven my sins,” he wrote to Emma. “I rejoice that he sendeth forth the Comforter to as many as believe and humbleth themselves before him.”4
On one occasion Joseph believed he had been poisoned. “I rose from the dinner-table, I walked directly to the door and commenced vomiting most profusely,” he later wrote. “I raised large quantities of blood and poisonous matter, and so great were the muscular contortions of my system that my jaw was dislocated in a few moments.”5 Joseph later recovered through a priesthood blessing, and he and Bishop Whitney left the inn the following day. By the time they returned to Kirtland they had been gone nearly three months.
More trouble greeted Joseph when he arrived home. A letter from John Corrill, a counselor to Bishop Edward Partridge in Missouri, raised some points of conflict and animosity toward Joseph Smith and other Church leaders in Kirtland. Shortly after hearing these accusations, Sidney Rigdon suffered an episode where he became frantic and declared in public that “the keys are rent from this people.”6 Joseph was forced to travel to Kirtland from where he was staying in Hiram, Ohio, to remedy the situation. For a time, he was forced to remove Sidney from the First Presidency and revoke his priesthood.7
During these challenging months, Joseph Smith began to reflect on his experiences and record his history for the first time. He wrote an account of the First Vision and documented the appearance of angels who had given him his authority to minister. In this history, he suggested that he had received two different kinds of authority, noting that “the ministering of Angels” gave him an authority that allowed him “to administer the letter of the Gospel.” He also wrote of receiving “the high Priesthood after the holy order of the son of the living God,” giving him “power and ordinance from on high to preach the Gospel in the administration and demonstration of the spirit.”8
Writing this history and enduring the tumultuous events surrounding the government of the Church were likely factors in the Prophet seeking further guidance on the nature of the priesthood. The revelation in section 84 traced the lineage of the two orders of the priesthood and explained the blessings associated with each. In a later history, Joseph Smith designated this revelation as simply “On Priesthood” and gave the following context for it: “The elders began to return from their Missions to the eastern states, and present the histories of their several stewardships in the Lord’s vineyard; and while together in these seasons of joy, I inquired of the Lord and received the following: [D&C 84].”9
The Prophet received the revelation over two days, the 22nd and 23rd of September, 1832. Evidence from the earliest copies of the revelation suggests that the revelation was received in two parts. We do not know exactly where the first part ends and the second part begins; however, several of the early scribes of the revelation, including Frederick G. Williams and John Whitmer, left a break after the phrase “for he is full of mercy, justice, grace and truth, and peace, forever and ever, Amen” (D&C 84:102). This break suggests that Doctrine and Covenants 84:103–120 were received on September 23rd.10
See “Historical Introduction,” Revelation, 22–23 September 1832 [D&C 84]
1. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 208, JSP.
2. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 214, JSP.
3. Letter to Emma Smith, 6 June 1832, p. 1, spelling corrected and punctuation added, JSP.
4. Letter to Emma Smith, 6 June 1832, pp. 1-2, spelling corrected and punctuation added, JSP.
5. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 215.
6. Lucy Mack Smith, History, 1844-1845, p. 5, book 13, JSP.
7. See “Historical Introduction,” Letter to William W. Phelps, 31 July 1832, JSP.
.8. Joseph Smith—History, circa Summer 1832, p. 1, JSP.
9. Joseph Smith—History, vol. A-1, p. 229, JSP.
10. See Revelation Book 1, p. 155, JSP. In this copy of the revelation, John Whitmer actually wrote “Received on the 23 day of September 1832” before the rest of the revelation.
COPYRIGHT 2024 BOOK OF MORMON CENTRAL: A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REGISTERED 501(C)(3). EIN: 20-5294264
