Casey Griffiths:
All of this is about building Zion. It’s not just about getting people ready for the hereafter. It’s changing the right now.

Scott Woodward:
I think that shows a loving God who’s been very generous over the centuries, trying to elevate humanity to the degree that he seeth fit.

Casey Griffiths:
But can you imitate the beauty of the truths that are given or create something that leads people to have hope in their lives and also lead better lives?

Scott Woodward:
Is this the ultimate challenge to know if Joseph Smith is a true prophet?

Casey Griffiths:
I’m glad that you asked this question. Hello, Scott.

Scott Woodward:
Hello, Casey.

Casey Griffiths:
We’re getting into one of the more complicated sections of the Doctrine and Covenants because this is when they decide to make a Doctrine and Covenants, correct?

Scott Woodward:
Exactly, yes. And maybe we can just say with a broad brush stroke, that’s the theme of this week’s Come, Follow Me is scripture, scripture, scripture, with an emphasis on the Doctrine and Covenants. We’re doing Section 67, 68, 69, and 70. And, Casey, don’t these all have to do with scripture?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, and for you super scripture nerds out there, you might want to take a note, too, that this is when Section 1, which is the introduction to the Doctrine and Covenants that we talked about a few months ago, is received, and Section 133, which was intended to be an appendix to the Doctrine and Covenants. So really, we could be smooshing together five or six different revelations that are received over a very brief period of time in the fall of 1831. After all the adventures they’ve had going to Zion and everything, now they’re dealing with some serious Church issues, which is, is it time for us to create a new book of scripture? Keep in mind, it’s been less than two years since they already did that. The Book of Mormon was just published in 1830, and the translation was finished in 1829. So they’re moving quickly here, and it causes them to ask some questions that really every person of faith should ask at one point or another, which is, What is scripture? And what do I treat as scripture? And what do I esteem as scripture? How is it different than, say, general inspirational literature?

Scott Woodward:
And if we’re going to really get nerdy about this, like, what’s the difference between scripture and canon? We’re going to talk about that today. Is it possible to forge a revelation? And if so, how could you detect one?

Casey Griffiths:
Who can speak scripture? What do we mean by that term, and where does it come from? And who has the authority to give scripture as well, which is a pretty big deal.

Scott Woodward:
And the answer in these revelations sections is actually kind of surprising to that question.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah. Then there’s some more practical questions that these sections answer, like where are we supposed to print the scriptures, and how do we pay to get the scriptures printed? So Section 69 and Section 70 kind of deal with those practical, down-to-earth, okay, we’ve had a great idea, which is, let’s create a new book of scripture. How do we actually have that happen? And there’s advice given there on what they should do.

Scott Woodward:
So lots of really interesting stuff relative to scripture and specifically the Doctrine and Covenants. Let’s get into it. It doesn’t seem like it was always in the mind of Joseph Smith to print the revelations. It doesn’t seem like this was always his plan. There seems to have been some historical events that happened when he returned home from Missouri that may have sparked the initiative here to print the revelations. You want to walk us through the context here?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah. Keep in mind, up to this point, most of the revelations are sort of being recorded and they’re being put down. And some people are even coming up and making their own copies of the revelations. Hyrum Smith did that with the revelation given to him. But the idea of creating a new book of scripture in addition to the Book of Mormon, you’ll note all the revelations up to this point, like Section 42 that address scripture, generally defined the canon of the Church as the Bible and the Book of Mormon. But now there’s some circumstances that have arisen that have caused them to say, Well, maybe for transparency’s sake, we need to make these revelations more public to the world because word is starting to get out. Like another thing I might note is if you go in the Joseph Smith Papers project, they usually have the earliest copy of each revelation there. And Section 20, which is a huge revelation that’s really consequential, that’s referred to as the Constitution of the Church. The earliest copy was in a newspaper that was hostile to the Church. And so other people were printing the revelations at this point.

Casey Griffiths:
It became natural for them to say, Well, are we going to print the revelations, or are we just going to let other people get them out there for us when they could be misinterpreting or even misprinting the revelation? So their solution is they call together all the available Church leaders to the John Johnson Farm, which is where Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon are staying during this fall and winter of 1831. And the big question that the conference was supposed to answer was, Should we publish the revelations that have already been received? And many of the revelations were already circulating privately among the Saints, but public access to the revelations was a really pressing question. Here’s one reason. You remember our old buddy, Ezra Booth, that we spent a couple of sections talking about?

Scott Woodward:
Good old Ezra Booth, yes.

Casey Griffiths:
Good old Ezra, who becomes disenchanted, disillusioned on the road to Zion, and then just becomes a full-blown apostate when he comes back. Ezra Booth publishes a series of letters in The Ohio Star claiming that certain commandments given to Joseph Smith were concealed the world. And Booth makes a number of outlandish claims about these revelations, some of which are true and some of which are not true. For instance, he included a charge that one of them had commanded that the Church should build Joseph Smith an elegant house and give him $1,000. Now, there is a place where the Lord does command them, it’s in Section 41, to build a home for Joseph Smith. But an elegant home and $1,000 are just outright lies, to be honest with you. And by the way, the home that they do eventually build has been restored in Kirtland. It’s a historic site now. If you go there, you’re going to see that it’s not a mansion, I guess you’d say.

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, it’s not an opulent palace, yeah.

Casey Griffiths:
It’s a nice house. I mean, and it’s a great little historic site. It’s right by the temple. But again, some of what Ezra Booth is claiming is true, some of what he’s claiming is not true. And Joseph Smith and others may have felt the need to publish the revelations in the interest of transparency and also to refute Booth’s claims that they were abusing their authority. So sunlight is the best disinfectant, and it seems like part of their argument was, Hey, why don’t we just get the revelations out there? Then nobody can claim we’re trying to cover anything up because they’ll be able to pick up a copy of the revelations themselves.

Scott Woodward:
Conspiracy theories are always way more potent when the actual, like, proof is kind of hidden, when it’s like, No, no, he has these secret revelations, and here’s the real story of what’s really happening. So, yeah, as soon as they publish the actual revelations and people can look at them themselves, that’s going to disarm these types of arguments against the Church.

Casey Griffiths:
It’s a cycle that’s being repeated again in our day. A lot of people were claiming things about Joseph Smith’s communications or copies of revelations or how they were edited. And so starting 20 years ago, the Church started the Joseph Smith Papers project, which the aim is to put every available document linked to Joseph Smith on a publicly-accessible website so that you can look at it and see for yourself how things are. So this is an early version of the Joseph Smith Papers, I guess you’d say. One of the benefits is this conference, which is about whether or not they should publish the revelations, provides an outpouring of revelations itself. We already mentioned that Section 1 was received as part of this, which today serves as the preface of the Doctrine and Covenants. During the first three days of November, four new revelations are received. Doctrine and Covenants 68 was received first, which provided direction to four elders of the Church and counsel and guidance to the members of the Church in Independence, Missouri. Doctrine and Covenants 1 and 133, which, as I mentioned, now constitute the preface and what, it’s sometimes called the appendix of the doctrine evidence, that’s Section 133, they’re received at the same time as well.

Casey Griffiths:
And several of the elders that are attending the conference were asked to provide their witness that the revelations were true. So same pattern as the Book of Mormon, we’re going to have a series of witnesses. The elders signed a document stating, quote, “They were willing to bear testimony to all the world of mankind, to every creature, upon all the face of the earth, upon the islands of the sea, that God hath borne record to our souls through the Holy Ghost shed forth upon us, that these commandments are given by inspiration of God and are profitable for all men and verily true.” Now, sometime during the conference, Joseph Smith receives Section 67, which also addresses some of the fears that the elders attending this conference had about the revelations. And the Lord declared that the elders had expressed concerns over imperfections, both in Joseph Smith and in some of the language used in revelations. So they might be addressing language in 68, 1, or 133. One of the revelations given just prior had actually addressed this question. This is Section 1, which explains that the revelation had been given, this is the wording in Section 1, “To my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.”

Casey Griffiths:
And Joseph Smith, in his own history, notes that after this revelation, Section 1 was received, “Some conversation was had concerning revelations and language, and I received the following,” Section 67. So this is another one of those, the Lord doesn’t mind answering people’s questions, kind of revelations where they’re saying, Hey, what about the language in some of these revelations? And what if it’s not perfect? And I guess the basic question they’re asking here is, What if you’re just making this all up, which is a legitimate question that people still ask about Joseph Smith to this day concerning all Restoration scripture, which is, Was this something that was received by inspiration or is this something that was received by the work of a gifted person, but not through the instrumentality of God?

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, very logical and important questions. Let’s keep in mind, too, that Joseph Smith is 25 years old at this time. He’s a young prophet. Some of the people in that room are older than him, and we don’t have that dynamic today in the Church. Like, Church leaders typically are older than the majority of Church members, right? There’s just a deference with age that in some ways comes with that. Imagine the Church being led by a 25-year-old. What kind of questions would you have about the revelations that come through him, right? Is it possible that he’s, A, making it up? And if this is really coming from God, then what about the language? Sometimes the language isn’t as beautiful and maybe as, you know, divine-sounding as you might expect if it’s legit. And so I think it’s those kinds of questions given a 25-year-old prophet that are totally banging around in their heads, and the Lord says, Let’s talk about it.

Casey Griffiths:
And it’s also useful to place this in context where some of the big revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants that I always put forward to say, Of course Joseph Smith’s a prophet, haven’t been received yet. Today, when someone points me towards, Is Joseph Smith the prophet? I usually say, Well, the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, they have the Book of Mormon, and I think everybody there has faith in the Book of Mormon. Even a guy like William McLellin never loses his faith in the Book of Mormon. But the Doctrine and Covenants as we know it doesn’t exist, and they’re really asking the question of, Does it need to? We mentioned when we talked about Section 1, that there were people at the conference, like David Whitmer, who felt like they shouldn’t publish the revelations. But it seems like his argument wasn’t that he didn’t believe. He felt like the revelations were private communications to individuals, which, again, I’d push back against him to say, No, they’re not. Section 20 isn’t to a private individual. Schedule, and neither is Section 29, and neither is Section 37, or Section 42, or Section 45. But I get where David’s coming from there.

Scott Woodward:
There’s a couple of intimate revelations that were given to David Whitmer, to his point. But to your point, yeah, there’s plenty that are universally applicable to the Church, and were even given to apply to the whole Church. Okay, well, let’s see what the Lord says with these kinds of questions bouncing around in the minds of these good elders. The Lord opens the revelation saying, “Behold and hearken, O ye elders of my church, who have established yourselves together, whose prayers I have heard, and whose hearts I know, and whose desires have come up before me. Behold and lo, mine eyes are upon you, and the heavens and the earth are in mine hands, and the riches of eternity are mine to give. Ye endeavored to believe that ye should receive the blessing which was offered unto you.” I just got to right there and say, we’re not quite 100% sure what the Lord’s talking about here. We have maybe a guess or two. So something was offered to them, he says here, you tried to believe that you would receive that blessing, but, he says, “Verily I say unto you there were fears in your hearts, and verily this is the reason that ye did not receive.”

Scott Woodward:
It sounds like the elders were promised that they could receive some type of divine manifestation. Maybe something like what the Three Witnesses received. Later on in this revelation, the Lord is going to talk about what it takes to actually see God face-to-face. So maybe it was something to that degree, to that level. We’re not sure exactly what they were promised, but it does seem to be on the level of a very clear divine manifestation.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, and that’s understandable, right? The last time they produced a book of scripture, three witnesses saw an angel and heard the voice of God. And so they’re producing a new book, and they’re going to have witnesses. That’s the pattern. It might have been understandable that they’re saying, Hey, are we going to get to see an angel? Are we going to get to hear the voice of God? Are we going to get to see some kind of sacred object like the gold plates? And the Lord seems to be leading them towards saying, Probably If you’re not, this isn’t going to be the blessing that you’re expecting it to give.

Scott Woodward:
It seems like Joseph Smith may have said, Sure, you can if you’re faithful. And then they tried and then they failed. Something along those lines. We’re not sure the particulars, but it seems like it’s in that same spirit, like you’re saying, of the witnesses of the Book of Mormon. What about witnesses of the Doctrine and Covenants and the truthfulness of the revelations? They tried, they failed. The Lord said, it was because of fear in your heart.

Casey Griffiths:
Let’s address some of those fears, which the Lord does in the next two verses here. He says, “I, the Lord,” this is verse 4, “give unto you a testimony of the truth of these commandments which are lying before you. Your eyes have been upon my servant, Joseph Smith, Jun., and his language you have known, and his imperfections you have known, and you have sought in your hearts knowledge that you might express beyond his language; this you also know.” So this is the Lord addressing, man, one of the biggest questions that just seems to come up again and again and again, which is the imperfection and the humanity of prophets, of the people that God chooses to lead his church. And it manifests in us saying, Hey, we don’t like the language Joseph Smith uses to sometimes, I don’t like the personality of the person that leads the Church. There’s a lot of that with Brigham Young and others, too. I don’t like the policies that this person is putting out there or anything like that.

Scott Woodward:
Ezra Booth said, Joseph Smith was too jovial. He joked around too much. Other little things like that. He’s not the most articulate guy in the room, actually. Like Sidney Rigdon is more articulate. Oliver Cowdery is a better wordsmith. W. W. Phelps is much better with words. And here’s this 25-year-old prophet. We know him. Lord, if you’re really speaking through him, wouldn’t you speak more eloquently?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah. It’s also a phenomenon of our distance to these things. Like, I remember Scott, when I was a kid, seeing the missionaries and thinking, Those guys have got it together. Like, they’ve got it figured out. And then I became one, and I had no clue what I was doing about 90% of the time and was just trusting in the Lord to guide me. And the same thing has happened, you know, with my elders’ quorum leadership and a bishop. You know, when you become one of those guys, you realize, oh, man, you are frail and you are imperfect. And I got to imagine that it’s that way when you also have a close personal relationship with the prophet of the Church, too, that you come to realize there’s a lot of frailty there and there’s a lot of humanity, and that’s okay. The Lord works through imperfect people. Prophets, apostles, and all manner of leaders of the Church are just good people doing the best that they can. In fact, I really like this quote from Jeffrey R. Holland. He said, “Be kind regarding human frailty, your own, as well as of those who serve with you in a Church led by volunteer mortal men and women. Except in the case of his only perfect Begotten Son, imperfect people are all God has ever had to work with. That must be terribly frustrating to him, but he deals with it, and so should we.”

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, there is some imperfection there. And yeah, they do make mistakes, and they’re human, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be instruments in God’s hand.

Scott Woodward:
When evaluating evaluating the restoration itself or the Book of Mormon or anything that claims to be divine, don’t be surprised when you see some human in it. You see it on the preface of the Book of Mormon, right? Don’t throw out the teachings in this book because you see weaknesses of men. Moroni says, like, please sift the divinity out from the humanity and savor that. And that’s happening here. In fact, verse 6, the Lord issues a challenge, actually, to these people who are seeing real weaknesses in Joseph Smith. They see his frailties. That’s totally fine, the Lord says. But here’s the challenge. He said, quote, “Now, seek ye out of the Book of Commandments,” that’s the original compilation of the revelations that later becomes the Doctrine and Covenants. “Seek ye out of the Book of Commandments, even the least that is among them,” and pick out one revelation, “and appoint him that is the most wise among you; or, if there be any among you that shall make one like unto it, then are ye justified in saying that you do not know that they are true; but if you cannot make one like unto it, ye are under condemnation if ye do not bear record that they are true. For ye know that there’s no unrighteousness in them, and that which is righteous cometh down from above, from the Father of lights.”

Scott Woodward:
So, whoa. The Lord just dropped it, Casey. He’s like, All right, no problem. Joseph is definitely flawed, but can you do what he’s doing? That’s going to be at least an evidence that there is something divine actually happening here with this 25-year-old prophet that you all see.

Casey Griffiths:
Surprisingly, someone does take the challenge where the Lord says, Appoint him that is most wise among you to attempt to duplicate one of the revelations. William McLellin, our friend that was introduced last time. I don’t know if he’s volunteered or if he steps forward. This is the way Joseph Smith writes it. And keep in mind, this is from the prophet’s 1838 history. So this is after William McLellin has left the Church and become quite an antagonist to the prophet. But he writes this, “William E. McLellin, as the wisest in his own estimation, having more learning than sense, endeavored to write a commandment like unto one of the least of the Lord’s, but failed. It was an awful responsibility to write in the name of the Lord. The elders and all present that witnessed this vain attempt of a man to imitate the language of Jesus Christ renewed their faith in the fullness of the gospel and in the truth of the commandments and revelations which the Lord had given to the Church through my instrumentality. And the elders signified a willingness to bear testimony of their truth to all the world.” I wouldn’t go too hard on McLellin here.

Casey Griffiths:
His journals, which we have from this time, indicate he was very faithful, but he was also, I guess you would say, the closest thing to a man of science. Among the people that are present in this conference, everybody else kind of comes from an ecclesiastical or legal background. He’s a school teacher. And I don’t know if Joseph Smith’s commentary on this indicates that McLellin volunteered. It really makes it sound like McLellin volunteered because Joseph Smith says, “Having more learning than sense,” is the way Joseph Smith describes him. Again, a revelation given around the same time, which is Section 68, does say McLellin is one of the faithful elders of the Church, and he’s eventually going to become a member of the Quorum of the Twelve. And even though he does eventually fall into major transgression which we talked about last time, he’s also going to be one of those elders that bears witness of the testimony of the revelation. So in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, the witnesses are the Twelve Apostles, called in 1835, and William McLellin is one of them. And maybe it’s ironic, but his testimony is at the front of every copy of the Doctrine and Covenants that’s produced, that at least at this point in his life, he couldn’t produce a revelation like Joseph Smith could, and he was willing to bear witness that the revelations were divinely inspired.

Scott Woodward:
That’s a really good point. Now, the Lord concludes this section, this little revelation, with a promise hearkening back to their desire for something divine, a divine manifestation. Listen to what the Lord says in verse 10. “And again, verily I say unto you,” this group here, “that it is your privilege, and a promise I give unto you that have been ordained unto this ministry, that inasmuch as you” strip yourselves from jealousies and fears and “humble yourselves before me, for ye are not sufficiently humble,” here’s the promise. He says, “The veil shall be rent and you shall see me and know that I am – not with the carnal neither natural mind, but with the spiritual. For no man has seen God at any time in the flesh, except quickened by the Spirit of God.” He explains this a little further. “Neither can any natural man abide the presence of God, neither after the carnal mind. Ye are not able to abide the presence of God now,” he says, “neither the ministering of angels; wherefore, continue in patience until ye are perfected. Let not your minds turn back; and when ye are worthy, in mine own due time, ye shall see and know that which was conferred upon you by the hands of my servant, Joseph Smith, Jun. Amen.”

Scott Woodward:
Wow. So the Lord drops, can we call this the ultimate promise, a promise that you can, if you prepare yourself properly, actually see God and experience the ministering of angels. You’re not ready for that, he tells them right now. You’ve got some things to work through, jealousy, fear, humility. You need to be patient as you continue to develop that, but you will. If you continue faithful, you will have that promise. What a promise to drop on this group, Casey, especially considering some of their doubts, some of their fears in their hearts. What a tender way to end this revelation.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, and he also gives a pretty good answer to a common misunderstanding that seems to be brought up all the time. That is that it’s impossible for a human to see God.

Scott Woodward:
Isn’t that what 1 John says? 1 John 4, doesn’t it say, “No man has seen God at any time?”

Casey Griffiths:
The Lord here clarifies, “No man,” this is verse 11 of Section 67, “No man has seen God at any time in the flesh, except quickened by the Spirit of God.” So there is a way. He’s just saying in the natural form, we can’t. In fact, that passage in the Gospel of John that gets brought up all the time, Joseph Smith, when he was translating the Bible, actually altered to read, “No man hath seen God at any time, except he hath borne record of the Son; for except it is through him no man can be saved.” And another New Testament passage that seems to suggest you can’t see God, this is 1 Timothy 6:16, which reads, He “only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting.” Joseph Smith also alters to read, “Whom no man hath seen, nor can he see, unto whom no man can approach, only he who hath the light and the hope of immortality dwelling in him.” Then one last example, you brought this up in 1 John, the text which says, “No man has seen God at any time.”

Casey Griffiths:
Joseph has changed to read, “No man has seen God at any time,” except them who believe. It seems like the message of all these corrections is presented really clearly in Section 67, which, again, just solves it by saying, Nobody can see God at any time except he’s quickened by the Spirit of God. Meaning our belief is that it is possible for a mortal person to survive in the presence of God if they’re transfigured by the Holy Ghost, if they’re changed so that they can abide the presence of God, and that God is more than capable of bringing about that change in the physical bodies of his servants, provided they’re sufficiently humble to demonstrate the necessary faith to see God. And this is a great way to reconcile those passages that nobody can see God with other passages where it makes it sound like people did see God, and God spoke to prophets like Moses and Isaiah in the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Scott Woodward:
That’s helpful. But the fact that he’s offering this to that group is amazing. This is the ultimate invitation to mysticism, right? Mysticism is belief that we can actually interact with God. We can actually have real experiences with God. This is the ultimate open door here in Section 67.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, to me, it also signals that this group’s questions weren’t cynical. They were sincere. You know, when someone comes up and says, Well, how do I know Joseph Smith wasn’t just making it all up? There’s a lot of cynicism behind that. But if somebody asks in a genuine, sincere way, How do I know that a man can’t just produce revelations like this? I think the Lord’s okay answering those questions. I think he’s okay dealing with the sincere skeptic, just not a cynic that’s just trying to tear down faith that has already made up their mind anyway. Let’s deal with a couple of controversies here. One is there is stuff out there that is not in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture, but other people accept as canon or scripture. Are we to say that people can make stuff up if we don’t believe these to be true? For instance, the Quran you were mentioning issues a similar challenge. This is in Surah 2:23-24. And Scott, you teach world religions, right? So have you dealt with this question in your world religions class?

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, I always have my students read the second Surah of the Quran because it’s the longest of all the chapters of the Quran. So if you want to just read one chapter to kind of get a sense of the voice and the tone and the way of the Quran, like, just read chapter 2. So yes, we deal with this. There are so many interesting parallels between Muhammad and Joseph Smith that are so fun and interesting to explore. But this is one of them. In light of what we just read in Section 67, where the Lord challenges the wisest elder to reproduce one of the least of the revelations, like, that language is in my mind when I read chapter 2 of the Quran, and Allah, God, says this, quote, “And if you are in doubt about what we have revealed to our servant, then produce a chapter like these, and call your witnesses apart from God if you’re truthful. But if you do not, and you will not, then beware the fire prepared for the disbelievers.” That is so similar, right? If you don’t believe that I have revealed to my servant Muhammad, then produce a chapter like one of these chapters in the Quran.

Scott Woodward:
If you don’t, and you won’t, then beware of condemnation. That’s the word the Doctrine and Covenants use. Condemnation. Here, he talks about beware of the fire prepared for the disbelievers. But that’s super interesting, right? One of the evidences that a lot of marvelous Muslims today will use to show that Muhammad was truly a prophet of God is to say that the Quran is inimitable. That’s what they say. It’s inimitable, meaning you can’t imitate it, that people can’t reproduce even a chapter of the Quran, which is the very challenge the Lord is throwing out here about the Doctrine and Covenants with those who are doubting that Joseph Smith was a true prophet or that maybe he wasn’t making some of this up. And so what do we do with that? What do we do with that, Casey?

Casey Griffiths:
I mean, let’s look at the challenge in context. We’ve already quoted several people that described what it looked like when Joseph Smith received a revelation, and that is that he would pray. Again, this isn’t uniform across the board. There’s different ways the Doctrine and Covenants was received, but a revelation like Section 67 seems to fit the Parley P. Pratt description where he says, Joseph Smith would pray and then dictate a sentence, wait for it to be recorded long hand, and then dictate another sentence, wait for it to be recorded, and so on and so forth. And I don’t know, and you’re more familiar with the Quran than I am. I’m going to have the humility to admit that. But is that how Muhammad claimed the Quran was received? I mean, wasn’t the Quran dictated to him by Gabriel, the angel Gabriel? And then he dictated to people, and it was in an oral form for several years, even after Muhammad’s death, correct?

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, that’s my understanding is that he dictated what the angel had dictated to him. In fact, Quran means “the recitations.” It’s what he recited to him. Ad then he recited it orally to his followers. And then in its mostly-final form, it was brought together by his followers and produced into a book form about 20 years after Muhammad’s death. So Muhammad won’t have the same privilege that Joseph Smith will have of going through his revelations and editing and making it tighter and clarifying. But we do get the Quran about, like I said, 20 years after Muhammad’s death. And the claim is that these are dictations directly from Allah, I guess through Gabriel, but to Muhammad.

Casey Griffiths:
The Quran has really beautiful passages in it, right? And Muhammad recited these in people’s presence, correct? But when they were received, when they were composed, no one was there. And I’m not casting aspersions or doubt on Muhammad. I’m just trying to explain the differences between the two faiths here. So I don’t know if it’s exactly the same thing. What do you think?

Scott Woodward:
I don’t know. It’s just uncannily similar, which is kind of fun. I guess, is this the ultimate a challenge to know if Joseph Smith is a true prophet? I would say no. This is a one-off in a particular context with a particular group. He says, Try it. And if you can do it, then you’re justified in saying you don’t know for sure that the revelations are true. Just because somebody could produce one is not evidence that Joseph is not a true prophet. He is addressing these doubts, right, in the hearts of these elders.

Casey Griffiths:
Let me add, are we averse to the idea that Muhammad could have been inspired of God? I mean, I remember reading Parley P. Pratt once who said Muhammad may have been raised up by God to remove the scourge of idolatry from the people. And he certainly did that. There’s no doubt in my mind.

Scott Woodward:
No, I don’t think there’s anything in our theology that would prevent us from accepting the idea that God actually spoke to Muhammad. For instance, in 1978, the First Presidency gave this marvelous statement about how God’s been working with religious leaders all throughout time. And the very first person on their that they list as inspired by God was Muhammad. Here’s what they said, quote, “The great religious leaders of the world, such as Muhammad, Confucius, and the reformers,” and they mentioned Socrates, and Plato, and others, “actually received a portion of God’s light,” they said. “Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and bring a higher level of understanding to individuals.” This idea that God works through people who are not Latter-day Saints and even inspires them with actual revelations is actually backed up in our own books of scripture, too. Like Section 49:8, we talked about this a couple of weeks ago. The Lord told Joseph Smith that there are “other holy men that ye know not of.” I’m not just working with you, Joseph. There are others. And like the Book of Mormon in Alma 29:8 says this, “For behold, the Lord doth grant unto all nations, of their own nation and tongue, to teach his word, in wisdom, all that he sees fit that they should have.”

Scott Woodward:
And that’s the spirit of the 1978 declaration of the First Presidency, is God gave them whatever light and truth he saw fit that they should have so that he could elevate entire nations. A couple of years ago, two, three years ago, Elder Bednar and Elder Gong did a great little gathering where they invited some Muslim leaders in Utah down to BYU, had a great forum. And then around that same time, they actually produced a pamphlet showing the similarities between Islam and Latter-day Saints. And we have so much in common. It’s pretty striking. The Church has produced that. You can find it in your Gospel Library app. But I think the point that we’re trying to make here is the controversy of this challenge could be construed to say that if somebody can produce what they claim to be a revelation and others can’t reproduce it, does that necessarily mean that they are a true prophet of God? And I don’t know that that’s the challenge the Lord is throwing out here. I think he’s saying, You’re justified in your doubts if you could produce one. But he’s not saying this is the ultimate test of a prophet. Is that a fair distinction?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, I think it’s probably best if we don’t separate this challenge from its immediate context, which was he was talking to people there in that room, and they accepted the challenge, at least one of them did, and they weren’t able to do what the Lord had asked them to do.

Scott Woodward:
Well, let me throw out another controversy that’s related to this one. What about the break-offs of the Church after Joseph Smith’s death? There have been others. The most prominent is the Community of Christ, for instance. Formerly the RLDS Church, now Community of Christ. There’s been break-offs of that, like the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And the reason they bring them up is because they have produced revelations that have been added to the Doctrine and Covenants. Like the Community of Christ has 54 additional revelations in their Doctrine and Covenants that are not in our Doctrine and Covenants. The Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which broke off from the Community of Christ, received… They have 17 additional revelations received by their prophet at the time named Fred Larsen. You knew Fred Larsen, didn’t you, Casey?

Casey Griffiths:
I knew him. He was a dear friend of mine. Yeah.

Scott Woodward:
So I guess the question is, So what do we do with the Community of Christ revelations and Fred Larsen’s revelations from the Remnant Church, Casey?

Casey Griffiths:
I’m glad that you asked this question because I know a lot of people from those churches. I work closely with them. Some of them are my dear friends. First of all, we probably apply the Muhammad rule here, right, where we’d say, Hey, we’re not averse to the idea that God does speak to them, but there are also some things in those revelations that directly contradict some of the things that we’ve been told, and it’s okay for us to be friendly but firm. Second, I don’t know if Community of Christ or the Remnant Church was claiming that these were received the same way Section 67 was, with that kind of spontaneous dictation all in one sitting down. And even in our own Doctrine and Covenants, there are sections of the Doctrine and Covenants, like Section 134, which we aren’t claiming is that kind of revelation, where it was received through a divine instrument, or Joseph Smith just dictated it spontaneously. Section 134 is a great example of a declaration where they clearly sat down and wrote this together. And it’s canon. We accept it because it represents the official teaching of the Church, and we believe that it was influenced by the Holy Ghost, but that it didn’t come through an overtly supernatural process.

Casey Griffiths:
In our conversations before this, you mentioned that you asked ChatGPT to make a Quran, a verse of the Quran, and you asked ChatGPT to create a revelation, and you’re claiming it did.

Scott Woodward:
ChatGPT did a pretty good job of creating a Doctrine and Covenants-sounding revelation, although it was kind of just, like, stealing passages randomly from the Doctrine… So I pushed it again. I said, Hey, don’t use any phrases from the Doctrine and Covenants, but do it in the style of the language of the Doctrine and Covenants. And then it did a good one. It also did that with the Quran. I’m not as familiar with the Quran, so I couldn’t recognize right away that it was just ripping off past sentences from the Quran. But anyway, I was just being playful. Like, okay, the Lord threw out this challenge, nobody in that room could do it, but I wonder if ChatGPT could. And it did a pretty good job.

Casey Griffiths:
We separate this from its immediate context at our own peril, and sometimes we do. We put that out there when… Yeah, I could probably reproduce something like Section 15. I don’t know if I could do it off the top of my head, but give me a little time and an AI program, and, yeah, I could probably make something that’s fairly convincing. The Lord was saying to these men, at this point and in this time in that situation, Can you do this? And they couldn’t. The other thing, too, is if we back up a little bit to that beautiful phrase the Lord puts in here where he says, “Ye know that there is no unrighteousness in them,” this is verse 9, “and that which is righteous cometh down from above, from the Father of lights.” The other question I would ask is, Okay, you can imitate scriptural language, but can you imitate the beauty of the truths that are given or create something that leads people to have hope in their lives and also lead better lives? We’ve gotten to the point to where the scriptures do tell us that deception will become more widespread and more convincing in the last days.

Casey Griffiths:
There is that test of, did it come from God and can the Holy Spirit bear witness of its truth, which isn’t very scientific, but is ultimately the most important test for me when it comes to understanding scripture.

Scott Woodward:
That’s the Lord’s favorite test, his go-to test. You see in the Book of Mormon a couple of times is, just stop and think about for a second, is it good? Is it light? Does it edify? Then it’s from me. And by the way, I use that in my world religion course. I challenge my students to, as we study other religions, knowing that, with this First Presidency statement, that God had actually inspired lots of people outside of our Church, like, let’s look for it. Let’s go look for it. What’s our test? How do we tell? Let’s use this as the litmus test. Is it good? Is it righteous? Does it edify? Will it build you up if you leaned into that and lived it? A lot of times, you can totally find that. I think that shows a loving God who’s been very generous over the centuries, trying to elevate humanity to the degree that he seeth fit, as the Book of Mormon says. Well, let’s go then to the consequences of Section 67.

Casey Griffiths:
The Lord shows that he’s okay with hard questions, and he also bolsters confidence in the revelations received through a 25-year-old prophet. Sometimes we just don’t appreciate that, right? That Joseph Smith is so young, and the Lord also acknowledges Joseph Smith’s weaknesses and limitations while at the same time, underscoring the righteousness of the revelations that have come through him. Joseph Smith, I believe, says, I never said I was perfect, but there’s no imperfections in the revelations. And again, he’s talking imperfections in the conceptual sense. There’s spelling errors here and there, and sometimes maybe the language isn’t the absolute best. There’s a little bit of difference in a revelation received through Joseph Smith and a revelation received through Isaiah because they’re different people. But that’s part of the purpose of the revelation, and it seems like it does to accomplish that. They do go ahead with their decision to publish the Doctrine and Covenants, which they call the Book of Commandments at that time. Let’s move on to Section 68.

Scott Woodward:
Okay, so Section 68, Casey, this is kind of a two-part revelation received by Joseph on November 1st in the midst of that conference. You mentioned that this is likely received before Section 67 or Section 1. It’s put in the Doctrine and Covenants a little out of order, but it’s in the ballpark.

Casey Griffiths:
And we should emphasize the Doctrine and Covenants is in roughly chronological order. They did get it wrong every now and then. And so we don’t know. This probably did come before Section 67, according to the best data we have.

Scott Woodward:
The two parts seem to be… Okay, so part one seems to be directed to four elders who are there, and they’re mentioned in the revelation. We’ll get to them. Then, like, it abruptly, like, switches, and we’ll call that part two. This seems to be revelation more generally toward the Church, especially those over in Missouri. And so we’ll kind of feel that break. And I’m not sure what we know about the context of why Joseph is doing both of those things. What can you tell us about that, Casey?

Casey Griffiths:
This is at that same conference held on the 1st and 2nd of November, 1831. Ten elders are gathered together for a conference in Hiram, Ohio, at the John Johnson Farm. And the discussion is whether or not we should publish the revelations. It seems like this is, like you mentioned, two revelations combined together into one section. The first part, verses 1 through 12, roughly, are given to four of the elders at the conference: Orson Hyde, Luke and Lyman Johnson, who are the sons of John and Elsa Johnson, whose home the conference is being held in, and William McLellin, who’s mentioned in the previous context of the revelation. So it seems like these four approach Joseph Smith on the first day of the conference. And what Joseph Smith states is, “They were desirous to know the mind of the Lord concerning themselves.” So Joseph said, “I inquired and received” Section 68. That’s the introduction he gives. But like I said, it’s clear that it’s two revelations, verses 1 through 12 only addresses these four elders and then concludes in verse 12 with an amen, which usually signals the end of a revelation. Then from verse 13 onward, there’s an abrupt shift in both the audience that’s being addressed and the subject matter of the revelation.

Casey Griffiths:
For this reason, it’s likely that this was two separate revelations later combined together. But we don’t have the original manuscripts either. And our earliest versions always contained both parts as one revelation, so we can’t confirm this. Just a theory. What seems clear is that the sudden shift in both audience and subject in verse 13 strongly indicates there was a second backstory going on, a separate set of questions that have been lost to us. And using contextual clues, as we look through the rest of Section 68, we can maybe guess as to what the questions were they’re trying to answer. For instance, verse 13 references items in addition to the covenants and commandments. And then, given the fact that Section 20 was called the Covenants and Church Articles, and that our earliest manuscript here says laws and commandments, referring to Section 42, and given the fact that what follows in verses 14 to 35 is a description of the calling of Church bishops and an added law for parents in Zion, and given the fact that a major purpose of Section 42 was to outline the duties of a bishop and the laws regulating Church members. The major purpose of D&C 20 was to outline the duty of Church members.

Casey Griffiths:
It’s probably reasonable to conclude that the major issue that this part of Section 68 is addressing is the need to add some further regulatory instruction beyond Sections 20 and Section 42, based on the growing needs of the Church, especially in Zion, meaning Independence, Missouri. So there’s the backstory a little bit, as far as we know. Now, should we dive to the content of the revelation?

Scott Woodward:
In the first part of this revelation, responding to the four inquiring elders, the Lord begins by addressing “my servant Orson Hyde,” who had just been baptized and ordained an elder the previous month at age 26. The Lord explains that Orson was, quote, “Called by his ordination to proclaim the everlasting gospel, by the Spirit of the living God, from people to people and from land to land, in the congregations of the wicked, in their synagogues.” Synagogues. That’s not a term just referencing Jewish places of worship. This is just a generic place of worship. And he says that Orson is to “reason with and expound all scriptures” unto people in their places of worship. “And, behold, and lo,” the Lord says, “this is an ensample,” meaning a pattern or a model, “unto all those who were ordained unto this priesthood, whose mission is appointed unto them to go forth.” Specifically, he then clarifies in verse three, the pattern that these elders are to follow is, quote, “That they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.” That’s the pattern. Here’s the promise. And here’s the promise, “And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost, shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.”

Scott Woodward:
Woah. Okay, so Casey, here, just in this theme of scripture, and what is scripture, and who can produce it, and all that, like. What a stunning promise the Lord is outlining here to a couple of recent converts here, the Lord is defining scripture as that which is spoken when moved upon by the Holy Ghost. In Joseph Smith’s day, like in our day, the dictionary meaning of scripture is “that which is written, or sacred writings,” and it usually kind of carries the connotation of ancient texts. But here the Lord is directly challenging that paradigm, declaring that even the newest converts like Orson Hyde could be Spirit-guided to speak fresh scripture representing the Lord’s own will and mind and word.

Casey Griffiths:
Let me add in here, too, that this isn’t a wholly new concept, right? The Book of Mormon kind of makes this point, too. In the Book of Mormon, Alma adds that God imparts his word to, this is his wording, “Not only men, but women also. And this is not all; little children do have words given unto them many times, which confound the wise and the learned.” That’s Alma 32:23. And Nephi kind of teaches the same idea, too, that anyone who receives the Holy Ghost can, this is Nephi’s wording, “speak with the tongue of angels by the power of the Holy Ghost,” which means they can speak the words of Christ. That’s in 2 Nephi 32:2-3. It seems like what the Lord is affirming here in these verses to these four young converts is this idea that anybody can receive scripture, that when a person speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost…

Scott Woodward:
I know we’re not to controversies yet, but how do we reconcile those verses with what we just got done discussing in Section 67, that if anyone here can imitate a passage of the Doctrine and Covenants, then maybe you can doubt that Joseph’s a true prophet. But then there’s the very next revelation here, the Lord’s saying, Anyone can receive scripture, even the newest converts, even children, women. How do we reconcile those together?

Casey Griffiths:
My feeling with this would be, it seems like in Section 67, he’s using a term that seems to differentiate scripture, which the definition he’s giving of scripture, and he’s giving it, is that if it’s spoken by the power of the Holy Ghost, it’s scripture, which he seems to indicate in Section 67 by using a word like commandments. Now, I might be going out on a limb here, but I think commandments, because they’re talking about creating a new book of scripture, is the word the Lord is using for canon, which, that’s another term we’d have to introduce, to say we don’t think that everything spoken by the Holy Ghost is binding on every member of the Church. Like, if I say something really wise to one of my children and I say it by the power of the Holy Ghost, that doesn’t mean that it’s binding on everybody else in the Church. But canon is. Canon is scripture, utterances made by the gift of the Holy Ghost, that we know for sure is scripture, and that we’ve put into one of our authoritative books as a measuring rod. In fact, that’s what the word canon means.

Casey Griffiths:
It’s a Greek word that means a measuring rod. So if somebody comes in and says, Hey, the Lord spoke to me and he told me this, we’re going to do exactly what Joseph Smith did with Hiram Page, which is say, Well, let’s measure this against the canon. Let’s see if this actually works. If we go all the way back to Section 28, we’ll note that Hiram Page’s revelations Joseph Smith said, contradicted the New Testament, which is canon, and the revelations he had already received, which hadn’t been canonized yet, but he was already instinctively using the revelations and the scripture and the canon that we’ve been given as a measuring rod to say, Yeah, it’s right.

Scott Woodward:
I think this is really important. So canon is that which is official, that which is binding, that which is used to measure the orthodoxy and orthopraxy, if we can say that, of the Church. Right, like what’s official doctrine? Well, it’s in the canon, which is distinct from scripture, which can be anything anybody says when moved upon by the Holy Ghost. It’s inspired, yes, but it’s not binding. It’s not used as a measuring route of orthodoxy. It’s not used as a measuring rod of orthopraxy in the Church. It is scripture. So for instance, maybe this is a good one, patriarchal blessings would be an example of scripture that is definitely not canon.

Casey Griffiths:
They’re a great example of that, right, where they are scripture to the person who the blessing is received on behalf of, but they wouldn’t be canon on behalf of the entire Church. Now, parts of patriarchal blessings have been placed in the canon. Like it seems like a patriarchal blessing that was given to Joseph Smith, Sr. becomes part of Section 107. But we draw that line between saying, Hey, I said something that was inspired and came by the gift of the Holy Ghost, which fits the Lord’s definition in Section 68 and Alma’s and Nephi’s definition, but isn’t used as a measuring rod for the entire Church. Sometimes because it’s just specific to me, and sometimes because it’s not as universally applicable as the stuff that we find in the canon. Even though not everything in the canon is universally applicable, we don’t use the Book of Leviticus a lot today, but we know Leviticus was scripture at the time it given, so we keep it in as a measuring rod.

Scott Woodward:
I remember President Hugh B. Brown saying that we are only bound by the standard works in terms of, like, officialness. He says, “But I have no doubt that members of our Church and leaders of our Church say inspired things all the time, but we are only bound by that which is in the standard works.” That’s a really, I think, important distinction to think through here, which we’re doing mid-stride here. This wasn’t the controversy section, but I couldn’t I couldn’t help it, Casey. I couldn’t help but just bring that up in light of what we just talked about in Section 67. So thank you for indulging me.

Casey Griffiths:
In the next couple of verses, take a look at this. He says, “This is the promise of the Lord unto you, O ye, my servants. Wherefore, be of good cheer, and do not fear, for I the Lord am with you, and will stand by you, and ye shall bear record of me, even Jesus Christ, that I am the Son of the living God, that I was, that I am, and that I am to come. This is the word of the Lord,” he says, not only to Orson, Luke, Lyman, and William, but he mentions “unto all the faithful elders of my church.” And I’d add in Alma saying, the elders of the Church and the women of the Church and the children of the Church. I just think you put all that together. And we don’t want to limit this to just those four, that the Lord is saying, really anybody that speaks by the power of the Holy Ghost, can utter scripture. Like I’d go so far as to say, I feel comfortable applying that promise to someone who’s not a member of the Church, but is speaking by the Holy Ghost, which can happen.

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, which we just got done talking about with the Lord being very generous to people all down through time in multiple nations, not just Latter-day Saints. So excellent. And so to his servants, the Lord continues here, he says, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, acting in the authority which I have given you, baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” And then he promises that “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned. And he that believeth shall be blest with signs following, even as it is written.” He also promises his servants that “unto you it shall be given to know the signs of the times, and the signs of the coming of the Son of Man; and of as many as the Father shall bear record,” he said, “to you shall be given power to seal them up unto eternal life.” This is a privilege that Joseph had just taught the previous week belonged to those of the high priesthood. In fact, you see the same language in Section 1, that his servants have the power to seal people up into eternal life, which is another interesting point of departure if we wanted to.

Scott Woodward:
Like, what did Joseph and this first group of Saints understand sealing people to eternal life meant prior to the coming of Elijah in 1836, when he restores what we often refer to as the sealing power? What did they understand this to me? And we could go down that path if we want as well.

Casey Griffiths:
I think he is hinting at bigger things here, the idea that a person can be sealed up to eternal life. It’s found in other scriptures, too. It’s just my understanding reflects the way it was revealed later on. So I’m not going to jump into their mind and say, Well, what were they thinking at this point in time? And if I were to venture a guess, I would say seal in the sense of providing like a seal, like a seal of approval, a mark of authenticity that you’ve been given the power to tell people authentically that they’re going to gain eternal life if they stay faithful. But that’s just me speculating.

Scott Woodward:
And then notice at the end of verse 12, he says, “Amen.” So that marks the end of the Lord’s response to these four men. And then we get to part 2.

Casey Griffiths:
And part 2, verses 13 to 35, go on to address other issues in the Church generally. For instance, “And now,” verse 13 transitions, “concerning the items in addition to the covenants and commandments, they are these.” Again, the covenants here probably refer to Section 20. They refer to it as the Articles and Covenants. And commandments probably refers to Doctrine and Covenants 42, the law of the Church, specifically, and perhaps the various other revelations generally. So definitely Section 20 and Section 42, but maybe the other commandments generally. Now, he announces a couple of things. For instance, “In the due time of the Lord, other bishops are to be set apart unto the church, to minister even according to the first.” So this idea of a bishop of the Church who’s in charge of the temporal affairs, who’s taking care and making sure people are fed and clothed, was at this time only Bishop Partridge. But he’s saying there’s going to be other bishops. There’s going to need to be if the Church continues to grow. He also explains that these additional presiding bishops must “be high priests who are worthy,” who are “appointed by the First Presidency of the Melchizedek Priesthood.”

Casey Griffiths:
So bishops are appointed by the First Presidency, which, again, is an idea that is coming down the road. In fact, in the 1835 edition of this section, Joseph Smith added what might be referred to as the literal descendants of Aaron exception clause to this rule, which spans the end of verse 15 to verse 21. And boy, is there a lot of discussion about what this means, and we’re going to try and sort through that.

Scott Woodward:
You can see a lot of 1835 fingerprints in this 1831 revelation. Like, just the fact that he said that bishops must be high priests who are worthy, who are appointed by the First Presidency of the Melchizedek priesthood is anachronistic to 1831. There is no First Presidency yet in 1831. And so in preparation to print these revelations in 1835, Joseph is going to go through them, and part of that is going to be updating some of this language based on subsequent revelations that he’s received that now puts things in their proper order in the Church. And so you see First Presidency here. You also see this, I like how you called it, a literal descendants of Aaron exception clause, that a bishop has to be a high priest. He goes on to say this. He says, “If they,” meaning a bishop, “be literal descendants of Aaron they have a legal right to the bishopric,” specifically, “if they are the firstborn among the sons of Aaron; because the firstborn holds the right of the presidency over this priesthood, and the keys or authority of the same. And no one else has a legal right to this office.”

Scott Woodward:
But since “a high priest of the Melchizedek Priesthood has authority to officiate in all lesser ordinances he may officiate in the office of bishop when no literal descendant of Aaron can be found.” Yet even if a man, he says, is a literal descendant of Aaron, he can only officiate in that office if he’s ordained under the hands of the First Presidency to do so. Now, a lot of this seems to be put in in 1835, right before publication. And what brought this about? What prompted this descendants of Aaron exception clause? We don’t know for sure. As far as we know, there have been no firstborn, literal descendants of Aaron to fill the office of bishop or presiding bishop in the Church. But what seems to be my theory, Casey, if I can share my theory, the Lord is saying bishops need to be high priests in order to be bishops, which compensates for the fact that there are no literal descendants of Aaron. In other words, he’s saying, like, Sure, if we had literal descendants of Aaron here, they would be the rightful people to occupy this office. But since we don’t, that’s why we ordained people to be a high priest to then preside over the Aaronic priesthood.

Scott Woodward:
That could have created a question in people’s mind, right? Why do they have to be a high priest in order to preside over a lower priesthood? And the Lord is saying, Well, yeah, in an ideal world, we’d have descendants of Aaron do this, but we don’t have any. So that’s why we ordained high priests first before he become a bishop. I think that’s all he’s saying. I don’t think he’s trying to put out these mystical threads like, One day there will be descendants of Aaron who rise up and claim the bishopric or anything like that. I think he’s just explaining why we ordain bishops high priests first before they become bishops. I think that’s it.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, and it’s a practical thing in the Church that sometimes members don’t always grasp that when a person is ordained a bishop, they are also ordained the presiding high priest. You could see the chaos that would happen if there was a person who was in charge of the Aaronic priesthood and another person who was the presiding high priest. In fact, I’m told in some wards in early Utah, they did do that. Sometimes they had a bishop and a presiding high priest. But the instructions here seem clear that it’s best to have that power invested in one person. And my heart goes out to the bishops out there who manage both the high priest needs of the ward, the spiritual needs of the ward, and the bishop needs of the wards, which consists of things like working with youth and temporal affairs. And it’s just, it’s a lot of work. It’s very rewarding, but it’s a lot to do. The other thing we might address here is, you know, I used to have this mistaken conception that a person that was a literal descendant of Aaron could come in and just walk in and be like, sit down, everybody. I am the bishop.

Casey Griffiths:
We should clarify that this is only speaking of the office of presiding bishop in the Church. And the Lord also says he can only officiate in this office, meaning a person who is a literal descendant of Aaron and can prove they’re a literal descendant of Aaron, if they’re ordained under the hands of the First Presidency to do so. So it’s not like a literal descendant of Aaron can walk in and just take over your ward. He’d have to be identified as a literal descendant of Aaron by the First Presidency and ordained by the First Presidency to do what he’s doing. So this isn’t a, we found the lost son of Aaron kind of situation. It wouldn’t work that way. It would work in an ordered way, the way the Church works today.

Scott Woodward:
Which is interesting because every bishop today is authorized by the First Presidency, which is cool. Like, stake presidents recommend, but the First Presidency still is the one that authorizes every bishop in the Church. Okay, well, continuing then. Verses 22 through 24 just briefly explain that only the First Presidency could take a disciplinary action against the presiding bishop, should that need arise. Verses 25 through 30 then transition to the topic of the duty of parents toward their children in Zion or in any of her stakes which are organized. So let’s start walking through what the Lord says to parents. I think this is probably the most relevant material in Section 68 still today. So the Lord begins here by warning that parents who don’t teach their children to, quote, “Understand the doctrine of repentance, faith in Christ the Son of the living God, and of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of the hands,” what the Lord has previously referred to collectively as the “fullness of my gospel” or “mine everlasting covenant.” If you don’t explain that to your kids, you don’t help them understand it, that’s the operative word. Help them understand it.

Scott Woodward:
Don’t just explain it, but help them understand it. If you don’t have that done, by the time they are eight years old, the Lord says, “The sin be upon the heads of the parents. And this shall be a law unto the inhabitants of Zion, or in any of her stakes which are organized.” Okay, at first, that seems like super heavy and can make all parents who are already stressed to the max about will their kids turn out okay, even more stressed. But I think the logic behind this law of parenting seems to be basically this. By teaching your children to understand this core doctrine, parents are giving their sons and daughters the optimal opportunity to choose to become the children of Christ, heirs in his kingdom through the everlasting covenant, right. And if you fail to teach your kids to understand that doctrine, then you’re basically impairing your children’s ability to choose Christ and his kingdom. And for that impairment, if you know better as a parent and you don’t teach, for that impairment, parents will be held accountable. So that’s the curriculum. Can we call it that? That’s the curriculum the Lord has given parents of all the things that you teach them, and you’re going to teach them a thousand things.

Scott Woodward:
Every parent knows that. You’re trying to teach your kids everything to prepare them for life. But the one thing you must not fail to teach is the doctrine of Christ, the everlasting covenant. Make sure they at least know those core four: faith, repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost. Just those four. And if you do that, then the sins of your children belong on their own heads, not yours. Which is pretty relieving to me as a parent. I’ll just say that. Now, of course, teaching children to understand the doctrine of the fullness of the gospel will in no way guarantee that they’re going to choose to receive it, but it will guarantee that they have a choice to receive it. That’s super important. Parents are never, ever commanded by the Lord to force gospel compliance upon their children. But they are commanded, right here, to enable your children to choose Christ by teaching them the way to do that, by teaching them to understand the fundamental doctrine of verse 25. So I think that’s a pretty important distinction to make here.

Casey Griffiths:
And he does bring into account an important law that’s followed in the Church, too. He says this, after they’ve been taught, “Their children shall be baptized for the remission of their sins when eight years old, and receive the laying on of hands.” And this is the only verse in scripture that mentions eight years old as the earliest age for baptism. Previous revelations had authorized baptism for those who had arrived at the age of accountability, but hadn’t really delineated exactly what that age was. But in the Bible translation that Joseph Smith is working on, he gets to Genesis 17 earlier in that year. And that’s where Joseph learns that according to JST Genesis 17:11, “Children are not accountable before me until they are eight years old.” And now here for the first time, these two ideas are kind of directly joined together. And the Lord goes on to say, parents “shall also teach their children to pray, and walk uprightly before the Lord,” and both parents and children shall “observe the Sabbath day to keep it holy,” and those who “are appointed labor should do so in all faithfulness; for the idler shall be had in remembrance before the Lord.”

Scott Woodward:
So it’s almost like those verses are explaining what it looks like to have faith in Christ, right, like. What does it look like to be faithful in Christ? Well, you pray, you walk uprightly before the Lord, you observe the Sabbath day, you do everything in faithfulness. It’s a covenant relationship with Jesus, and this is how you do it. It’s kind of that modeling of discipleship.

Casey Griffiths:
And I do really appreciate what you said about the idea that we do this so that, if we don’t do this, we’re accountable for their sins. But it seems like the Lord is also teaching in a gentle way, acknowledgement of agency as well, that you could be the best parent on Earth and be amazing in every way. But your child is a being that has agency, and they may choose to not follow that. In fact, let me share this quote from President Nelson, I really love. He said this, “When our youngest daughter was about four years of age, I came home from hospital duties quite late one evening. I found my dear wife to be very weary, so I offered to get our four-year-old ready for bed. I began to give orders, take off your clothes, hang them up, put on your pajamas, brush your teeth, say your prayers, and so on, commanding in a manner befitting a tough sergeant in the army. Suddenly, she cocked her head to one side, looked at me with a wistful eye and said, Daddy, do you own me?” And then he adds, “She taught me an important lesson. We don’t own our children. Our parental privilege is to love them, to lead them, and to let them go.”

Casey Griffiths:
And that can be really tough, too. Like there’s all kinds of times when I, you know, look at my kids and say, Have I done enough? Section 68 is saying, Your job is to teach them the gospel. That way you’re not accountable for their sins. But there seems to be an implication there saying, at that point, they become accountable for their actions, and they have to take accountability for their choices, what they decide to do with their life and their agency.

Scott Woodward:
Now, it seems like the reason that the Lord is mentioning each of these items about parenting here, he now discloses in verse 31. He says it’s because, quote, “I, the Lord, am not well pleased with the inhabitants of Zion,” meaning the Church members in Missouri, “for there are idlers among them; and their children are also growing up in wickedness; they also seek not earnestly the riches of eternity, but their eyes are full of greediness. These things ought not to be,” he says, “and must be done away from among them; wherefore,” he says, “let my servant Oliver Cowdery carry these sayings unto the land of Zion.” Meaning that Oliver is to personally deliver the Lord’s words here, of Section 68, to Missouri Church members. And then the Lord adds a final cautionary commandment to those in Missouri saying, “That he that observeth not his prayers before the Lord in the season thereof, is to be had in remembrance before the judge of my people,” Edward Partridge. So here the Lord is explicitly kind of calling them out, isn’t he? That I’m not pleased with how things are going in your private devotion to me in Missouri. And it’s having an effect on your children.

Scott Woodward:
Your children are being influenced by the world too much. Their eyes are full of greediness, and they’re seeking the Lord too little. And so here are the core things, right. So that seems to be what stimulated this particular set of passages about parenting in Zion.

Casey Griffiths:
He says, “These sayings are true and faithful,” and testifies, “wherefore, transgress them not, neither take them therefrom. Behold, I am Alpha and Omega, and I come quickly. Amen.” It’s a common theme that he does reprove several places in the Doctrine and Covenants. The one that comes to mind is Section 93 after this, where he actually reproves the First Presidency and basically tells them, Hey, don’t get so caught up in your Church job that you forget that your first and most important job is to be a parent. In fact, parenting is a Church job. Maybe I shouldn’t make that distinguishment between the two.

Scott Woodward:
I think that’s a good distinction, actually, because sometimes we can put our calling in the Church above of our eternal calling to our children, right, to love them, to lead them, and prepare them to go, to let them go. Like, if you’re gung-ho in your Church calling and you neglect your children, that seems to be what sparked President David O. McKay’s famous comment, that no success outside the walls of your home can compensate for failure inside the walls of your home. I’m paraphrasing, but that’s first. Like, your family is first. Kind of reminds me of something President Hinckley once said to a group of Church leaders in one of those worldwide leadership training meetings. I’ll paraphrase, but he said, your priorities should go something like this, Church leaders, bishops, stake presidents, Relief Society, all you who have really kind of weighty callings. God is number one, your family, your marriage, your children is number two, and then your Church calling is number three, he said, which is super valuable. Like you’re saying, Section 93, the Lord says to Church leaders, like, Hey, don’t neglect your kids. That is an eternal responsibility, so make sure you take that seriously. That same tone is coming across here.

Casey Griffiths:
For people like you and me, Scott, who teach the gospel for a living, which isn’t our Church calling, I want to be absolutely crystal clear, there still is this temptation to say, Well, my students need me. I have to remind myself that I work with my students for 3-4 months at the most, and I work with my children for eternity, and that there might be several hundred students that I’ve been asked to help, but those three or four that I’ve been asked to be a father to do have to take priority. They’re higher on the scale of things God has given me to take care of.

Scott Woodward:
Okay, so one controversy we’ve already talked about is the difference between scripture and canon. Are we really to believe from Section 68 that anybody in the Church can speak scripture, not just prophets and apostles? Because I often hear people invoke Section 68, those first few verses about the mind of the Lord, the will of the Lord, all that, but only talking about prophets and apostles. And yet the context is clear, he’s not talking about just prophets and apostles. Are we committed to this? Are we serious that anybody can speak scripture if the Holy Ghost moves upon them?

Casey Griffiths:
I wish we would be a little bit more serious about this. I think if we take Section 68 seriously, and I do, we’ve got to accept that scripture has a much broader definition than most of the time we assume it does. That a patriarchal blessing can be scripture or an inspired talk given in sacrament meeting or something that you said by the power of the Spirit in a one-on-one conversation is scripture. And that scripture has been some of the most impactful in my life. You know, a one-on-one conversation where my mom or my dad spoke to me by the power of the Holy Ghost, or I spoke in a private setting by the power of the Holy Ghost, can be hugely impactful. What we need to be cautious with is when we start to take those things that are said in unauthoritative settings and start to apply them to the wider Church. So if I get a revelation or say something that’s inspired, and I start to use it in a way that supersedes the canon of scripture, the four standard works say this, but I’ve been told this, that’s when we start to get into trouble. And that’s why there needs to exist a healthy tension between scripture and canon, that we got to be really familiar with those two ideas, or we can go off the reservation.

Casey Griffiths:
Because obviously, not everything that people claim is scripture actually is. And sometimes people become so bound up in the canon that they won’t do anything unless it’s actually in the canon. So we’ve got to develop a greater utility. We got to know what’s in the canon and know it really well so we can detect false scripture when it comes around. But we’ve also got to be open and flexible to this idea that God speaks to us in a number of ways from a number of different people. And sometimes something said by your spouse or someone you work with in a calling or even a child can be direction that comes from the Lord if it’s given by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and it doesn’t contradict the canon that we already have.

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, I agree, Casey. I think that’s super important, that distinction and the tension between scripture and canon. We are bound institutionally by the canon, but we have to be wise enough to follow true scripture when it comes our way.

Casey Griffiths:
So, Scott, let’s move on to the consequences of Section 68.

Scott Woodward:
I guess we could summarize the key contributions here as being, I guess, first, it expands the meaning of the term scripture. It broadens our understanding of who can speak it, which is anyone speaking by the power of the Holy Ghost. Second, it also forecasts an imminent organizational expansion in the number of presiding bishops and provides further details about who can serve in that position and their accountability to the First Presidency. That seems a little administrative, but that’s going to be a crucial structure piece that’s going to impact all of our lives in the Church. Third, it added an additional law. This was not in Section 42, and it was not in Section 20. Here’s a law to parents in the Church, both in Zion, Missouri, and in the stakes thereof, he says, to teach their children to understand the doctrine of the fullness of the gospel, to pray, and to walk uprightly before the Lord. Let’s go ahead and append that right to Section 42 and Section 20 as, like, the marching orders for members of the Church. And then fourth, it contains a rebuke to Church members in Missouri, specifically regarding their idleness, their wickedness, their greed, together with a stern commandment for them to regularly pray before the Lord, which is a stunningly simple prescription, by the way, for that diagnosis, for the Lord to say, You got all these problems. It’s time to take your prayer life more seriously. That’s how the section ends. And the relevance for that for all of us is pretty powerful. So that’s the story of Doctrine and Covenants 68, Casey. Let’s move on to Section 69, then.

Casey Griffiths:
Section 69 is continuing this string of sections about the publication, the creation of a new book of scripture, which they’re going to call the Book of Commandments, which will eventually become the Doctrine and Covenants.

Scott Woodward:
Would you say the big question of this revelation is, like, How do we get the revelation manuscripts that are here on this table in Hiram, Ohio, to print, which the printing press is all the way, almost a thousand miles away in Missouri. Isn’t that the big issue here?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, this is practical, right? We’ve got the revelations. Now, what do you want us to do with them? So here’s the context. Section 69 gives them directions about what to do after the November 1831 conference. And basically, it’s assigning John Whitmer to travel to Missouri with Oliver Cowdery, who was also commanded earlier, that’s in Section 68, to take care of or arrange for the printing of the revelations. Now, remember, William W. Phelps is already setting up a printing office in Independence, Missouri, and Church leaders plan to print and produce the first bound copies of Joseph Smith’s revelations there. And so John Whitmer is being assigned to travel with Oliver Cowery as part of his assignment as Church historian. So they’re really all in on Missouri at this point, meaning, oh, that’s eventually going to be the headquarters of the Church. That’s where our printing establishment should be. And so they’re going to take the revelations there, these manuscript revelation books, which are so precious to us today, are taken all the way to Missouri so that they can start to arrange them, to publicly print them and create this new book of scripture.

Scott Woodward:
So how do we get these revelations, which we have decided to print from Hiram, Ohio, to almost a thousand miles away in Missouri, to Phelps’s printing press? We’re going to need Oliver Cowdery to take these. And now this section is giving John Whitmer the command to accompany him, which is actually a pretty big shoutout to John Whitmer’s trustworthiness here. So let’s dive into the content and see what the Lord says. Verse one begins like this, “Hearken unto me, saith the Lord your God, for my servant Oliver Cowdery’s sake. It is not wisdom in me that he should be entrusted with the commandments and the moneys which he shall carry unto the land of Zion, except one go with him who will be true and faithful.” I don’t think the Lord is saying here that Oliver Cowdery is not trustworthy. This is obviously a high position of trust to carry the revelations and the donated money of the Church that’s been raised to go and help purchase lands in Zion. Like, that’s a high position of trust. I think the Lord is saying he needs a backup. He needs somebody there to accompany him carrying such precious cargo. And that’s when verse 2 appoints my servant, John Whitmer, to go with him.

Scott Woodward:
And verse 3, the Lord says, As you go, “he,” meaning John Whitmer, “shall continue in writing and making a history of all the important things which he shall observe and know concerning my church; and he shall also receive counsel and assistance from my servant Oliver Cowdery and others. And also, my servants who are abroad in the earth should send forth the accounts of their stewardships to the land of Zion.” So John Whitmer, who we mentioned was called as Church historian back in Section 47, is now having his role further clarified here. As he goes to Missouri with Oliver Cowdery, he has to continue to do historical stuff. He is to continue to write the history, make observations. But now the Lord also calls for his servants who are out serving missions to to send accounts of their stewardships back to Zion for John Whitmer to compile and keep a record of. That’s going to be a huge contribution. We still have these in Church archives, like the archives of those who he did this commandment and sent a record of their ministry in their journals, which is a rich resource that the Lord says is going to be a benefit to future generations in verse 8.

Scott Woodward:
We’ll get to that verse in just a minute, but let’s keep going here in the next couple of verses.

Casey Griffiths:
This recording happens to take place while I’m doing a brief stint where I’m a few days a week at the Church History Library, which is a literal fulfillment of this revelation. It’s really impressive that with a few keystrokes there, you can call up a record from almost any organization in the Church. I’m working with the records from a branch in New York right now. It just kind of emphasizes that, yes, the scriptures are a priority, but all of these documents, everything done by the servants of the Lord around the Earth, that the historical enterprise of the Church includes everyone who participates, even the history of a small organization like a branch or a ward that might seem insignificant in the grand scheme of things, is a valuable part of the larger story. Then Lord ties it together. Verse 6, “The land of Zion shall be a seat and a place to receive and do all these things. Nevertheless, let my servant John Whitmer, travel many times from place to place, and from church to church, that he may more easily obtain knowledge – preaching and expounding, writing, copying, selecting and obtaining all things which shall be for the good of the church, and for the rising generations that shall grow up on the land of Zion, to possess it from generation and generation, forever and ever. Amen.”

Casey Griffiths:
So we’re witnessing the literal fulfillment of this in that if you go on the Church history library site, you can actually see more and more of this work of the historian of the Church who leads a team of historians today that go around and interview people and collect their experiences, collect documents, collect artifacts to help us tell the story. And that all of this is intended to be kind of collected at the seed of Zion, which at this time is Independence, Missouri. Today is Salt Lake City, Utah. This idea that the historical work of the Church is really important, that there’s going to be a record kept by the leaders of the Church. Again, in commanding the revelations to be printed in Missouri, though, it does seem to indicate that the Lord is emphasizing the importance of Zion and its development of the Church in the latter days, that the land of Zion is a big deal to him, and the idea of a central place where all these sacred records are kept is intrinsic in the revelations given at this point.

Scott Woodward:
I love in verse 8 that he says that the purpose for doing this, which can sometimes be tedious, is, quote, “For the good of the church, and for the rising generations that shall grow up on the land of Zion.” History matters for future generations, right. Like collecting historical documents, records of ministries, that kind of stuff. Sometimes it can seem kind of mundane, but future generations, man. A lot of what we’re able to talk about on this podcast, Casey, is because people kept records. Praise John Whitmer. Praise all those who helped in this enterprise. That gives us a lot of rich material to draw from now in this generation, drawing on previous generations in order to bless and benefit the Church today. And so literally, we see that right here on this podcast. We see it all the time in the Church. Anytime a story is told from our past, it’s because somebody wrote that story down. And oftentimes, those are seriously beneficial to our faith and to the effectiveness of our own ministries. There’s just a lot of power and a lot of good that comes from obedience to this rather mundane commandment, if I can say it that way.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, well said.

Scott Woodward:
By the way, I heard that if you would like to submit your mission journal to the Church History Library, they would gladly take it in the spirit of Section 69. You can actually submit the record of your ministry. So if anyone out there is interested in doing so, this is still, I think verse 5 still stands, right? That those who had served and my servants who are abroad on the earth should send forth the accounts of their stewardships to the land of Zion. I believe that’s still true. Casey, have you heard anything different?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah. Now, don’t everybody submit your journals all at once. At the same time, keep in mind those records are important to your family, too. But as someone that’s worked with the historians at the Church History Library, I would also say that one of the things that they particularly need is records from women. We need more records from women and more from international Church members. So if you served a mission in a place that is a little far off, that’s far away from the headquarters of the Church, you might want to think about submitting that, too. Me and my teaching assistants here at BYU just finished writing a history of the Church in the Solomon Islands, which the Church is really new there. And I didn’t think there would be in the Church History Library when we searched it for sources on the Solomon Islands. But yeah, Church historians have been there. It’s a really remote corner of the earth. They went there, they interviewed people. We used those interviews in our history, and we conducted interviews, too, that we hope, you know, we can pass on to continue to compile this incredible story of God’s Church in the latter days.

Scott Woodward:
So, Casey, I’d say there’s really no big controversies with Section 69. Do you agree?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, nothing too controversial here. Maybe you’re feeling guilt over your journal or something like that. But outside of that, no major controversies. So let’s move on to the consequences, should we? So John does go to Missouri. He actually writes in his own history, “About this time, it was in contemplation for Oliver Cowdery to go to Zion and carry with him the revelations and commandments. And I also received a revelation,” that’s Section 69, “to go with him. We left Ohio on the 20th of November, 1831, and arrived in Zion, Missouri, January 5th, 1832. When we arrived in Zion, we found the Saints in as good a situation as we could reasonably expect.” However, everything’s going well in Zion, according to John, but he does also record in his history, and this is after the fact, that there’s starting to be a shadow growing over Zion in Missouri. John notes in his history that a few weeks after their arrival in Independence, he says, “The enemies held a council in Independence, Jackson County, Missouri, how they might destroy the Saints, but did not succeed at this time.” So he does hint that something a little bit darker is going on.

Casey Griffiths:
And although the Lord accepts Zion as the center place, he does command John to travel from place to place and gives these implicit instructions that the story of the Church isn’t just the story of the people at headquarters. It’s the story of the Church all around the world. And we need to keep in mind today that that doesn’t just include places in the United States and Canada, places like Dubai, Shanghai, Kiribati, India. All these places are important in the history of the Church. I have a friend, Tana Lynn Ford, who likes to say that it’s always 1830 somewhere in the Church. And one thing that we sometimes tear our hair out over is we don’t have a lot of information from the early days of the Church because we didn’t have a guy like John Whitmer doing the job. So hopefully, if you’re in a place where it’s 1830 right now or whatever year figuratively it is, you’re keeping a record because that story is going to be important in time and eternity.

Scott Woodward:
Section 70, Casey, last but not least. This revelation is received back in Kirtland. So the previous 67, 68, 69, that’s all up in Hiram, Ohio, about 30 miles outside of Kirtland. But now we go Kirtland. What happens here? What’s the context of Section 70?

Casey Griffiths:
Once the Saints decided to publish the revelations, another conference is held on November 12th at the John Johnson Home to kind of figure out the details of how they’re going to go ahead with publishing the revelations. We have minutes from this conference, and they show that the elders present, this is what the minutes say, quote, “Voted that Joseph Smith, Jr. be appointed to dedicate and consecrate these brethren and the sacred writings, and all they have entrusted to their care to the Lord done accordingly.” The minutes also note that the members present declared the revelations to be, here’s the wording, “The foundation of the Church and the salvation of the world and the keys of the mysteries of the kingdom and the riches of eternity to the Church,” and also declared that the revelations were, quote, “prized by this conference to be worth to the Church, the riches of the whole Earth, speaking temporally.” So again, you still see these phrases in the introduction to the Doctrine and Covenants that they pull from these minutes about how essential they feel these revelations are going to be to the work of God moving forward. And Joseph Smith, while he’s writing his own history several years later, he reflected on, in his words, “The great benefits to the world which resulted from the Book of Mormon and the revelations, which the Lord has seen fit in his infinite wisdom to grant unto us for our salvation and for the salvation of all that will believe.”

Casey Griffiths:
Joseph Smith also adds in his history that this particular revelation, Section 70, came in answer to an inquiry, a question. But he doesn’t record what the question was, specifically. We just know that in the revelation, to facilitate the publication of the revelations, the Lord directed the elders present to form another adaptation of those earlier principles of consecration. So this is another one showing that consecration is a little bit more fluid. This small group of people were going to sacrifice. They were going to pool their resources so that the revelations could be published, and this group becomes known as the literary firm. The literary firm plays a key role not only in the printing of Joseph’s revelations, but also in the publications of Joseph Smith’s translation of the Bible, the first hymnal, Church almanac, children’s literature and various Church newspapers. So in creating that record, this group is going to play a big role. So this is a significant revelation because it gets us a lot of the material that we’re using today to explore the early history of the Church.

Scott Woodward:
So the revelation begins like this. “Behold, and hearken, O ye inhabitants of Zion, and all ye people of my church who are afar off, and hear the word of the Lord, which I give unto my servant, Joseph Smith, Jun.” And then he adds a couple others. “And also my servant, Martin Harris, and also my my servant Oliver Cowdery, and also my servant John Whitmer, and also my servant Sidney Rigdon, and also unto my servant William W. Phelps, by way of commandment unto them.” This is, as you mentioned, Casey, this is going to be the who’s who of the literary firm. And so what the Lord is going to do here is delineate stewardships, where he’s going to give some of them stewardships over receiving the revelations, others over scribing the revelations, editing the revelations, preparing the revelations, printing the revelations, financing the publication of the revelations, selling the revelations. And so that’s what this section is about. Sometimes you can get kind of lost in the weeds of this revelation. And so it’s really crucial to just know what the Lord is doing here in order to kind of keep our bearings as we read through this. So the Lord is talking specifically to these men for this purpose.

Scott Woodward:
Like in verse three, he says, “I, the Lord, have appointed them,” this group, “and ordained them to be stewards over the revelations and commandments which I’ve given unto them, and which I shall hereafter give unto them; and an account of this stewardship will I require them in the day of judgment.” He’s being serious here, like how you handle the revelations in this project to get the revelations out to everybody, I want you to take very seriously, because I’m going to hold accountable at judgment day for this. “Wherefore, I have appointed unto them, and this is their business in the church of God, to manage them and the concerns thereof, yea, the benefits thereof.” So most of the men involved here are those who have been with Joseph Smith from the beginning, right? Though Sidney Rigdon and W. W. Phelps are going to be newer to the work. But it’s clear that they’re all part of the endeavor here. So Joseph Smith, anxious to recognize those involved in this work, declared during the November 12th conference, he said, quote, “Brother Oliver has labored with me from the beginning in writing. Brother Martin Harris has labored with me from the beginning, and brothers John and Sidney also for a considerable time. And as these sacred writings are now going to the Church for their benefit, that we may have claim on the Church for recompense. If this conference think these things worth prizing to be had on record to show hereafter, I feel that it will be according to the mind of the Spirit, for by it, these things were put into my heart, which I know to be the spirit of truth.”

Scott Woodward:
So that’s interesting, right? So in elevating these particular members of the literary firm, Joseph also said that they are worthy of compensation for their efforts. This revelation is going to continue to talk about that. This is kind of a work that people get paid for. We’re talking about preparing manuscripts and printing and selling them. This is going to be a lot of work that’s going to take them away from their normal day jobs if they had them. The Lord in this section, is going to give permission for compensation.

Casey Griffiths:
This is where that fine line between Church member and Church employee kind of comes into play, where we still deal with the same tension today, where, you know, sometimes as someone that works for the Church, I ask, Am I a hired gun? Am I practicing priestcraft here? And the Lord seems to be saying, Well, no, this is an important job that they need to work on full-time, so they’re entitled to compensation because I need them to focus on this. I recognize my job as Church employee doesn’t imbue me with ecclesiastical authority, but it does give me employment to do the things that I need to do.

Scott Woodward:
Today, we have, our literary firm would be like Deseret Book and the distribution center that actually publishes the scriptures. Is it okay for those who work at Deseret Book and the Church distribution center to get paid for their efforts? For those who actually do the publishing, the printing, the selling? Nobody listening to this would bat an eye at that, right? But because these are the early Church leaders, and this is where the Lord is saying some of them can be compensated for their work, like, this causes some people pause. And what we’d like to say is it doesn’t need to. Like, this is the beginning of Church employees. I think that’s the best way to say it, Casey, like you said.

Casey Griffiths:
And all this isn’t happening separate from the law of consecration. He’s adjusting the law of consecration. For instance, take a look in verse seven, where he directly does this. “Inasmuch as they receive more than is needful for their necessities and their wants, it shall be given into my storehouse; and the benefits shall be consecrated unto the inhabitants of Zion, and unto their generations, inasmuch as they become heirs, according to the laws of the kingdom.” So nobody’s going to become fabulously rich, even if the revelations become like a runaway bestseller. The intent isn’t for any of these men called to serve in the literary firm to be the richest guy on the block. And I would still say that’s part of being a Church employee, too, is when I was training as a seminary teacher, one of the people that trained me said, You’re not going to be the richest person on the block. We don’t want the seminary teacher to be the richest person on the block, but we’re going to take care of you also. And then tying it back, verse 9, “This is what the Lord requires of every man in his stewardship, even as I, the Lord, have appointed or shall hereafter appoint unto any man.”

Casey Griffiths:
So again, he’s emphasizing consecration. “And behold, there are none exempt unto this law who belong to the church of the living God.” And undoubtedly, what he’s referring to here is the law of consecration, Section 42:30-42. I think one of the most valuable things about this revelation is that it demonstrates that although the principles of the law of consecration are eternal, the implementation of the law is adaptable according to their circumstances. So we shouldn’t expect Section 42 to be the end all get all, because as early as this revelation, Section 70, the Lord’s already making adjustments and saying, Okay, let’s figure out a group of people we can put together and get the scriptures printed. They’re still going to live under the law of consecration, but I’m going to give them a different set of expectations to follow. They’re a smaller consecrated group that’s going to oversee the publication of the scriptures and other Church projects. But he also mentions that this is an expectation he has for everybody. Everybody is expected to enter into the law of consecration. And well, it was an expectation that everybody would move to Missouri, which he’s going to emphasize in revelation just two sections later to build Zion.

Casey Griffiths:
The elders who are put into this literary firm are following a form of consecration, even if it’s a little bit different from what’s in Section 42. But I think the principle is that, okay, once your family is taken care of, what can you do with your surplus to bless and help others, particularly those in the Church, is something that we do still emphasize in the Church, that, hey, if the Lord’s blessed you temporally, one thing you should be looking at is, What are my needs? How do I know that I have what I need to take care of myself and my family? And then what can I do with what’s left over to try and build Zion and make the world a better place, which is part of building Zion, too.

Scott Woodward:
Continuing with that consecration theme, notice in verse 14, the Lord says, “Nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the Spirit shall be withheld. Now, this commandment I give unto my servants for their benefit while they remain, for a manifestation of my blessings upon their heads, and for a reward of their diligence and for their security; for food, for raiment, for inheritance, for houses, for lands, in whatever circumstances I, the Lord, shall place them, and whithersoever I, the Lord, shall send them.” So again, hearkening back to that language of Section 42, that they’re equal here does not mean the same. It means sufficient for the needs of you and your family. So what’s equal is that everybody is equally taken care of based on the needs of your particular family. And so 100%, he’s building off of those concepts in Section 42. And then the Lord ends this way. He says, “For they have been faithful over many things, and have done well inasmuch as they have not sinned. Behold, I, the Lord, am merciful and will bless them, and they shall enter into the joy of these things. Even so. Amen.”

Scott Woodward:
So the they and the them here is, again, that group in verse one. Joseph Smith, Martin Harris, Oliver Cowdery, Sidney, Phelps, this group, they’ve been faithful. So far, so good. Keep it up. And the manifestations of the Spirit will continue to be poured out upon them. So that’s the end of the content of Section 70, Casey. First of all, could we say that the literary firm here being set up by Section 70 is the first for-profit business sponsored by the Church?

Casey Griffiths:
Maybe. Yeah, that’s probably fair to say. I mean, did they expect to make a profit publishing the Book of Mormon? Maybe. They’d have to pay off Martin Harris’s farm first. And it seems like that’s a lot to ask. It’s a tall order. But yeah, publishing the scriptures seems to be a top priority of the Church then and now. And they do charge people for the scriptures, and they are intending to recompense these people that are asking to serve as part of the literary firm. So yeah.

Scott Woodward:
Okay, so if that’s the case, then maybe we could talk about a broader issue here, Casey, like. Is it okay for our Church to be engaged in for-profit businesses? Most of our listeners know this is not the last time the Church does a for-profit venture. And Section 78 is going to add more to this. We’re going to start bringing in the Whitney store in Kirtland. We’re going to bring in the Gilbert store in Missouri. We’re going to create this thing called the United Firm. Like that’s all coming up on the horizon. But there’s going to be, like, literally, like, a business venture between different groups in the Church to produce profit in order to further the cause of Zion. I guess, is this okay to have for-profit businesses?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah. I mean, it’s no surprise to anybody that the finances of the Church have always been a hot topic of discussion. That’s why I think we have talked about this a little bit. But I also think that people need to recognize and frame this in the context of consecration, and that, I mean, it takes money to accomplish your goals. And the early leaders of the Church were concerned about that literal, How do we build the temple? How do we make sure people aren’t hungry? How do we get everybody a house and goods and a means to provide for themselves? Was a real, real concern. And all of this, like I said, is there from the beginning of the Church. And sometimes people are surprised that the Church doesn’t seem to play by the rules that other churches do. But I mean, it’s built into the DNA of the Church from the beginning that they are seeking resources because you have to have resources in order to affect change in the world. They’re not just teaching moral principles, though the Church does do that. The Church is designed to affect change. And that’s one of the reasons why when somebody says, you know, Why do we need a church?

Casey Griffiths:
Why can’t we just be Christians, you know, and treat people well, which obviously that’s the most important thing. But we can do a lot more good structurally if we are organized into a church, and we’re pulling the resources that everybody has, and we’re seeking further resources so that we can get humanitarian aid or, you know, build schools in countries so that people can increase both their spiritual and their secular learning. Like, all of this is about building Zion. It’s not just about getting people ready for the hereafter. It’s changing the right now.

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, we’ve got places of worship to build. We’ve got temples to build. We’ve got missionary efforts to help fund. We’ve got welfare needs of people, right. We’ve got land to buy. All of that requires money. Now we’ve got Church employees to pay, right. As of Section 70. We’ve got full-time general authorities like Bishop Partridge that need recompense so that he can actually take care of his family because he’s dedicating his full efforts to the Church now. And so what about people like that? Last year, Casey, we talked about the finances of the Church. I can’t remember how many episodes on this, but we talked a lot about the Church’s for-profit businesses. We’re in a lot of places. We’re in the cattle industry. We’re in the citrus industry. We’re into almonds, almond farms and avocados in California, Florida. We’re into real estate. We’re into purchasing land, building property, renting, leasing. We’ve talked about City Creek Mall, Polynesian Cultural Center in Hawaii, where you got to pay a pretty good ticket price. And that money then goes to help fund the students that are studying at BYU Hawaii. And that money is now being used to further the purposes of the Church that are outlined in these original revelations as early as Section 42. And now we’re seeing more in Section 70.

Casey Griffiths:
This was there from the beginning, right? This is us using every possible means we can find to forward the work to build the Kingdom of God, to alleviate human suffering right now, and get people ready for the next life as well. Those goals are all overlapping with each other.

Scott Woodward:
All right, Casey, take us home then. What are the consequences of Section 70?

Casey Griffiths:
Major consequence of Section 70 is the literary firm is set up. They’re going to have stewardship over the revelations, which includes receiving, scribing, editing, preparing, printing, and selling the revelations. And the literary firm continues to operate until 1836. Initially, the conference called for them printing 10,000 copies of the revelations. That number was later reduced to 3,000. W. W. Phelps gets a printing press in Cincinnati, Ohio, and he’s able to begin setting up the printing operation in Independence, Missouri, by December of 1831. The next year, the literary firm begins publishing some really valuable stuff. That includes The Evening and the Morning Star, which is an early Church newspaper. By December 1832, the first copies of the revelations, which we mentioned before, are not titled the Doctrine and Covenants. They’re titled the Book of Commandments, goes to press. However, unfortunately, this first attempt to publish the revelations, to create a new book of scripture, don’t get off the ground completely, because in July of 1833, a mob destroys the Church printing press in Independence, and only a few copies of those printings are saved, which are later bound together, creating, unfortunately, fewer than 500 copies of the Book of Commandments that can be salvaged from what’s left.

Casey Griffiths:
The Book of Commandments literally stops in mid-sentence because of this when you can find it. But the literary firm continues. They set up shop in Kirtland, Ohio, where it’s a little bit safer. They start to work on a new and updated version of the Book of Commandments, which eventually becomes the Doctrine and Covenants. The press in Kirtland also continues to publish The Evening and Morning Star, along with other things like the Latter-day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate, a political paper called the Northern Times. And the press in Kirtland is responsible for producing the first hymnbook, which is published in 1835, just in time for the Kirtland Temple to be dedicated. These early papers are incredibly valuable resources. It’s where we draw a lot of the teachings of early Church leaders from. There were editorials, letters, things placed in Church newspapers. Although, persecutions and the high cost of printing kept the literary firm just hovering just above insolvency, the group did manage to preserve and publish some of the most important documents from this crucial and formative period of the Church, including the revelations we’ve been talking about this entire time right now.

Scott Woodward:
That’s so cool. And although the literary firm was not incredibly lucrative, as you mentioned, it does set a precedent for, again, Church-sponsored business ventures to raise money to further the cause of Zion.

Casey Griffiths:
There’s a lot to sum up here in these sections. How do we get scripture? What is scripture? How do you print scripture? And how do you go through the work of bringing scripture to the people? Again, all of them linked together, and all of them are responsible for us having this sacred book of scripture that we’re discussing right now, the Doctrine and Covenants.

Scott Woodward:
Well, awesome. Well, thank you, Casey. Fun to talk scripture from the scriptures this week. Stay tuned next time. Things get a little hairy when the Lord calls Joseph and Sidney to go and meet their enemies and confound them as they’re spreading lies about the Church. So stay tuned next time for some really interesting stuff.

Casey Griffiths:
Okay. Until next time.