Scott Woodward:
A sequence of wars that will lead up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

Casey Griffiths:
I’m sort of hoping that we’re past the worst of it, but I don’t know if we are yet. And to that end, the Lord is sort of warning us here. The words of this prophecy are pretty scary. If you have an assurance that the gospel is true, that Jesus Christ lives, that there’s a plan of salvation and resurrection, you have something to hope for, no matter how dark it gets out there.

Scott Woodward:
If it’s not okay yet, then that means it’s not the end.

Casey Griffiths:
There’s more to look forward to than there is to dread about living in the last days. We can have peace in our hearts and in our homes. We can be an influence for good in this world, every one of us.

Scott Woodward:
Hello, Casey.

Casey Griffiths:
Hello, Scott.

Scott Woodward:
Welcome back to part 2 of this week’s Come, Follow Me study. We just wrapped up Section 85 and 86. If you haven’t seen that video, go back and watch that. This is part 2 as we now dive into Section 87 of the Doctrine and Covenants.

Casey Griffiths:
It might seem weird that we’re doing a separate episode on 87 because it’s only eight verses. But, oh my goodness, there is a lot of meaning and a lot to sort of sort through in those eight verses just by themselves. So we felt like it merited a second episode all on its own because there’s some amazing stuff in here.

Scott Woodward:
Sometimes this revelation is known as the Revelation on War, Casey. That sounds very ominous. It was a revelation on not just one war, but multiple wars. As we’re going to get into. Why don’t you drop us into that? Give us our first C here of Section 87. What’s the context?

Casey Griffiths:
The Revelation on War sounds like a clickbait title, doesn’t it? But that’s literally what this is. This section is commonly known as the Revelation on War, and it comes at sort of a strange time, December 25th, 1832. So this is a Christmas present to the Saints, the Revelation on War. Joseph Smith later contextualizes this by saying that the revelation came during a time when he was really troubled over the state of the world. In his history, here’s what he writes. He says, “Appearances of troubles among the nations became more visible this season than they had previously done since the church began her journey out of the wilderness. The ravages of the cholera were frightful in almost all the large cities on the globe, and a plague broke out in India while the United States, amid all her pomp and greatness, was threatened with immediate dissolution.” This is so relatable. He’s basically saying, I was reading the news and I became overwhelmed and discouraged about all the bad things that were happening in the world. And I really think we could easily transfer his context to our time and say, Yeah, same. Now, in Joseph Smith’s time, most of these troubles, we think were highlighted by a nearby newspaper called the Painesville Telegraph.

Casey Griffiths:
And in some ways, you could read Section 87 as a response to the anxiety Joseph Smith is feeling, the anxiety that comes from reading the news. But just to put this in further context, when Joseph Smith said that the United States was threatened with dissolution, he’s making direct reference to the nullification crisis involving South Carolina.

Scott Woodward:
I remember hearing that in some history classes. What’s the nullification crisis?

Casey Griffiths:
So pre-American Civil War, the big dispute among Americans was, Are the state government’s supreme, or is the federal government supreme? You could make the case that we’re still arguing about this. Basically, South Carolina wanted to be able to nullify federal laws. So if the federal government passed a law that South Carolina didn’t like, they were saying, We’re just going to nullify that, and we’re going to do our own thing. And this raised the specter of a possible civil war between the states that felt that the federal government should be supreme and the states that felt like the state governments should be supreme.

Scott Woodward:
So a threat of civil war in 1832?

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, in 1832. This was coming up every couple of years. There’s the great compromises that are made during this time until finally, you know, there’s just too much steam built up and the civil war breaks out. But that’s not until 1860, which is 28 years after this prophecy is given. So Joseph Smith contextualizes this himself. He says, “The people of South Carolina in convention assembled and passed ordinances declaring their state a free and independent nation, and appointed Thursday, the 31st day of January 1833, as a day of humiliation and prayer to implore Almighty God to vouchsafe His blessings and restore liberty and happiness within their borders. President Andrew Jackson issued his proclamation against this rebellion, called out a force sufficient to quell it, and implored the blessings of God to assist the nation to extricate itself from the horrors of the approaching and solemn crisis.” Andrew Jackson, who I will add, is probably our scariest president, is saying, If you do that, I’m going to call out federal forces. And fortunately, this crisis is resolved by March 1833, when a compromise tariff averts a potential civil war in the United States. And so you could say Joseph Smith is just reading the newspaper, right?

Casey Griffiths:
Which he openly says that he’s doing. But this revelation seems to have deeper implications. So for instance, this revelation is received in 1832, and it appears that it’s intentionally left out of the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. But members of the Church knew about it. Joseph Smith refers to it in a discourse that he gives in 1843, which becomes part of Section 130. And Brigham Young really looked at this. So flash forward to 1860, when there is an actual Civil War happening.

Scott Woodward:
Why would this be deliberately left out of the Doctrine and Covenants in 1835?

Casey Griffiths:
I don’t know because it seems like a big deal. I mean, I’m speculating here. I don’t have a source, but I wonder if the early Saints felt like, Well, we missed it on that one, you know, because the nullification crisis doesn’t turn into anything. So choose not to put it in the Doctrine and Covenants. But by 1860, Brigham Young is aware that the actual bloody Civil War of the United States is going to occur. He gives a discourse where he says this, “That revelation,” meaning Section 87, “was reserved at the time the compilation for that book was made by Oliver Cowdery and others in Kirtland. It was not wisdom to publish it to the world, and it remained in the private escritoire,” which is just a fancy word for a small writing desk. “Brother Joseph had that revelation concerning this nation at the time when the brethren and were reflecting and reasoning with regard to African slavery on this continent and the slavery of the children of men throughout the world.” So this is second-hand source. Brigham Young wasn’t there when the revelation was received, but he later adds and says, They were talking about slavery and how the question of slavery on this continent and slavery throughout the entire world was one day going to be resolved.

Casey Griffiths:
And that’s another thing that the revelation addresses. It starts out talking about the United States, but then it goes further and starts talking about the entire world. So Section 87 is first published in 1851 in the Pearl of Great Price that’s created for the British Saints, and then it’s added to the 1876 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants and it’s been there ever since. So I don’t know in particular why they didn’t choose to publish it in 1835, but it’s right there and we have all the records pointing it’s received in 1832. It says some very specific things about the American Civil War, and then it says some stuff about the state of the world in general that is still the subject of much debate as to what it means.

Scott Woodward:
So the earliest published version of this is 1851, still a decade before the Civil War actually breaks out. So that’s important, and we’ll discuss that as we go on to the controversies. But good context, Casey. All right, let’s dive in now to the content. Well, let’s start in verse one, and we’ll just walk carefully through it. We’ll talk about the history, what we know happened as we go through. So, here’s what the prophecy says. Verse one, “Verily, thus saith the Lord concerning the wars that will shortly come to pass beginning at the rebellion of South Carolina, which will eventually terminate in the death and misery of many souls.” Most people, including Joseph Smith, probably thought this was talking about the nullification crisis of 1832, which ultimately did not lead to a civil war in the United States. What’s interesting, though, is even after that crisis passed, Joseph Smith continued to stand by the accuracy of this prophecy. In a discourse that he gives in April of 1843, he says, quote, “I prophesy in the name of the Lord God that the commencement of the difficulties which will cause much bloodshed previous to the coming of the Son of Man will be in South Carolina. It may probably arise through the slave question.”

Scott Woodward:
And this is why he’s so certain. He says, “This a voice declared to me while I was praying earnestly on the subject, December 25th, 1832.” Close quote. And by the way, an excerpt of that discourse was put into the Doctrine and Covenants. So you can go find that 1843 update in Doctrine and Covenants 130:12-13. It turns out Joseph was eventually proven correct. Right, on April 12, 1861, the American Civil War officially begins when Confederate forces fired upon Fort Sumter, which is a sea fort near Charleston, South Carolina. What seemed like a missed prophecy in 1832, Casey, turns out to be a bullseye in 1861.

Casey Griffiths:
Which leads us into verse 2. It does say in verse 1, It will terminate in the death and misery of many souls. But then verse 2 adds, “And the time will come, the war will be poured out upon all nations beginning at this place.” So in a lot of ways, the prophecy is tying the American Civil War as the beginning of the wars leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Now, first of all, the American Civil War proved to be a lot more bloody and more costly than anyone imagined at the time. And maybe this is Monday morning quarterbacking, but the people from the time did talk about how they thought it was going to be like one battle, and then everybody would be fine, and it just drags on and on and on. Like I said, the prophecy that Joseph Smith gives is that the war would terminate in the death and misery of many souls. And to this day, there is no war in the history of the United States that even comes close to the Civil War when we talk about the scale of death and destruction. It’s difficult to measure precisely, but a conservative estimate of how many people died in the Civil War is 618,000 people.

Casey Griffiths:
Just to put this in comparison, in other major wars fought by the United States, the number of deaths range from 4,435, that’s the American Revolution, 2,260 in the War of 1812, 13,280 in the Mexican War, 2,446 in the Spanish-American War, 116,516 in World War I, 405,399 in World War II, 36,574 in Korea, 58,220 in Vietnam, 383 in the Gulf War, and 6,773, which these figures, I should note, were being gathered while conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan were still happening. But these estimates only take into account the soldiers killed in the war, not the massive civilian casualty. I think if you add all those together, we still don’t pass the grand total of the Civil War. Like it was, by any objective measure, the bloodiest war that the United States ever fought because it was American versus American. It was brother against brother.

Scott Woodward:
Okay, verse three, “For behold, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations in order to defend themselves against other nations, and then war shall be poured out upon all nations.” Okay, this seems to be going beyond just the Civil War now. Now we’re talking about international battles, right. So if this revelation was read only as a prophecy of the Civil War, it would be remarkable on its own. You can read verse 3 as a prophecy of world wars that will be fought later on past the Civil War. In the first half of the 20th century, we can think of several, right. The prophecy specifically declares that the Southern nations will call upon other nations, even Great Britain, for assistance in the war. We know that during the Civil War, William L. Yancey led a group of commissioners from the Southern States that met with Lord John Russell, the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and with Napoleon III of France. Other commissioners from the South approach Spain and Belgium for help in the war as well.

Scott Woodward:
Now, the prophecy further states that they, ambiguous, whether that means Great Britain and other European nations, or whether that means the Southern States, will call upon other nations for assistance. But that’s there as well. And you can read these parts of the prophecy as coming to fulfillment during the First and Second World Wars, during which Britain calls upon the United States and other nations to come to their assistance during World War I and II, when war was being poured out upon all nations, right. Like, the toll of death and misery experienced by both military members and civilians in these wars, like, I don’t think we fully calculated that. We’ve certainly never exceeded it beyond World War II. One historical group estimates that 15 million soldiers and 25 million civilians were killed in World War II. But these are conservative numbers. And depending on how casualties are counted, there may have even been more than 50 million civilian deaths just in the nation of China. So if you look at these verses as a prophecy of not just the American Civil War, but also the world wars of the 20th century, like, this revelation becomes even more remarkable.

Casey Griffiths:
That’s a lens that you can use for the rest of the prophecy, too. Like this next verse, is this talking about the United States or is it talking about the world? Here’s what it says, verse 4, “It shall come to pass after many days, slaves shall rise up against their masters who shall be marshaled and disciplined for war.” So if we’re using the American Civil War lens and saying this is a prophecy of the American Civil War, this prophecy is fulfilled. During the American Civil War, around 180,000 Black men served in the Union Army, constituting about 10% of the total force. And most of these soldiers, by one estimate, around 90,000 of them were former slaves that had fled from the Confederate States and then joined the forces of the Northern United States By the end of the war, the Southern States became so strained for resources that the Confederate Congress actually passes a bill allowing the armies of the South to draft enslaved workers as soldiers in the war. Now, the war ended before these soldiers from the Southern States arrive in large numbers, but the act alone would have been unthinkable when Joseph Smith receives this revelation in 1832.

Casey Griffiths:
So if we’re just looking at the American Civil War, this is fulfilled. Slaves do rise up against their masters. Slaves are marshaled to war. But if we’re looking at it through the larger lens of the world wars and the actions that take place in the 20th century, even leading up to our time, this revelation might be talking about larger upheavals throughout the world. When the revelation is given to Joseph Smith, a small number of European countries virtually controls almost the entire globe. They rule the majority of the people on the Earth. But the wars that happened in the 20th century, which I think Section 87 is reframing as millennial wars, they’re wars leading up to the Second Coming and Millennium and the return of Jesus Christ, they completely destroy this system. They overthrow the colonial system that had existed in Joseph Smith’s time and into the 20th century, and they create hundreds of new nation states. I mean, just in the years immediately following World War II, dozens of nations came into being as a result of world wars, and other nations went through really dramatic changes. In fact, in our time, you could argue that wars and rumors of wars still continue on a regular basis, that we’ve kind of been topsy-turvy ever since the American Civil War, even though we were pretty topsy-turvy before it as well.

Casey Griffiths:
But, I mean, this idea that slaves will rise up against their masters might have something to do with the degree of self-determination that spread throughout the world and the way that the entire world order that exists in 1832, when the prophecy is given, is sort of flipped over on its head, and we get the world that we’re in right now.

Scott Woodward:
Fascinating. It’s interesting how you can flip back between lens number one, American Civil War, and lens number two, global wars that have happened post-Civil War, and the prophecy seems to fit both scenarios pretty well. Continuing in that vein, then let’s go to verse 5 and 6. The Lord says, “And it shall come to pass also that the remnants who are left of the land will marshal themselves, and shall become exceedingly angry, and shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation. And thus, with the sword and by bloodshed, the inhabitants of the earth shall mourn, and with famine, and plague, and earthquake, and the thunder of heaven, and the fierce and vivid lightning also, shall the inhabitants of the earth be made to feel the wrath and indignation and chastening hand of an Almighty God, until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of all nations.” Woah.

Casey Griffiths:
So do we know who the remnant are? Do we have any indications?

Scott Woodward:
We don’t know for sure. We don’t know precisely the identity of the remnants. There’s been a couple of thoughts, though. So this could refer to the Native Americans. They’re often called the remnant of the house of Israel in the Book of Mormon. Latter-day Saints at this time are referring to Native Americans as Lamanites. And so that’s definitely a possibility. It could also just be the remnants of the house of Israel throughout the world as well. So for instance, when Jesus ministers among the people of the Americas, he utters this prophecy that holds some parallels to the wording that’s being used here. This is in 2 Nephi 20:13. He says, quote, “Then shall the remnants which shall be scattered abroad upon the of the earth be gathered in from the east and from the west and from the south and from the north, and they shall be brought to the knowledge of the Lord their God who hath redeemed them.” And then he said, “If the Gentiles do not repent after the blessing which they shall receive, after they have scattered my people, then shall ye, who are a remnant of the house of Jacob, go forth among them, and ye shall be in the midst of them who shall be many, and ye shall be among them as a lion among the beasts of the forest, and as a young lion among the flocks of sheep.”

Scott Woodward:
And then he concludes the prophecy saying, “And I will gather my people together as a man gathereth his sheaves into the floor, for I will make my people with whom the Father hath covenanted. Yea, I will make thy horn iron, and I will make thy hooves brass.” And now it gets a little violent. He says, “And thou shalt beat in pieces many people, and I will consecrate their gain unto the Lord and their substance unto the Lord of the whole earth. And behold, I am he who doeth it.” Close quote. So these words seem to indicate that the restored house of Israel will somehow assist in bringing about the end of nations. While this does not necessarily mean that the people of these nations will be destroyed, it does seem to mean that their governments will be somehow affected, dissolved as the kingdom of God spreads throughout the Earth. And so that’s interesting. Casey, I don’t know if I can pinpoint a precise fulfillment of that in the Civil War or in the global wars that have come afterwards. Can you pinpoint that?

Casey Griffiths:
I would say we don’t have enough information here. Like, while you were reading those passages in the Book of Mormon, it struck me that this is a prophecy directly from Jesus to the people that are there in the Book of Mormon. And he does use the word remnant there and uses the word remnant here. But I just don’t know if I feel comfortable yet for sure saying, Oh, the remnant are the house of Israel left behind, which again, 3 Nephi 22 seems to say that the house of Israel is going to do something major. But I don’t know if I’m fully committed to saying, and that’s the same remnant that Section 87 is talking about. Like it’s possible that the remnant are the people that are left after all these wars and destructions happen, or the remnant is the entire house of Israel and not just those that inhabit the American continent. I don’t know if I’m ready to commit yet. Just that he seems to be saying that the corrupt systems of government that have existed for a really long time will be overthrown in this. And again, when and how was that fulfilled? I would argue a lot of it was fulfilled in the world wars that happened in the early part of the 20th century, that a lot of the corrupt systems that were abusive, that were putting people into slavery, that were causing horrific exploitive acts were ended by that.

Casey Griffiths:
But there’s still plenty of that going on today, too. So I’m sort of hoping that we’re past the worst of it, but I don’t know if we are yet. And to that end, the Lord is sort of warning us here to just be prepared for what is to come. He does end in, you know, a hopeful place. Verses 7 and 8, he says, “That the cry of the Saints and the blood of the Saints shall cease to come up into the ears of the Lord of the Sabaoth, from the earth to be avenged of their enemies. Wherefore, stand ye in holy places, and be not moved until the day of the Lord come, for behold, they cometh quickly saith the Lord. Amen.” Just eight verses. Okay, so the words of this prophecy are pretty scary, right? They’re painting the picture of chaos and calamity leading up to the Second Coming. But as indicated here and in other places, unfortunately, it sounds like the Saints are not going to entirely escape this destruction. That’s in all these prophecies that mention, you know, the blood of the Saints and the destruction of the Saints. However, we should also recognize this doesn’t mean that the Lord is not in control or that he doesn’t have power to protect his disciples.

Casey Griffiths:
You might have noticed that the title he uses here is the Lord of the Sabaoth, not Sabbath. Sabaoth is a Hebrew term that refers to both human and angelic army. So it’s kind of like him saying, I’m the Lord of armies. But the connotation is not just earthly armies, but heavenly armies that have more power to affect the situation. In fact, it’s a common phrase that’s often translated as the Lord of Hosts. What he’s saying is His host will intervene in the conflicts leading up to the Second Coming and bloodshed on the earth and initiate this era of peace. It’s scary stuff, but again, we’ve emphasized this over and over. We have to go through some rough times to get to that idyllic situation we have in the Millennium. I think a major message we pull away here is we might live in troubled times, but we don’t have to be troubled. That if we stand in holy places like the Lord counsels, we can have faith that the Lord is overseeing these events, and we can take comfort in knowing that whatever happens on Earth, there’s joy waiting for us in the next life. Now, in anticipating these blessings, the Saints should not give up on efforts to build Zion.

Casey Griffiths:
Like I don’t think we’re also sitting back and saying, Okay, we’re just going to wait for this whole thing to kind of happen, and then we’ll rebuild when it’s done. He’s asking them to build Zion at the same time and work to make the world a better place. When I was writing commentary for this, the thing that came to mind was September 11th, 2001, which we’re dating ourselves here, Scott, because that’s been so long ago. There’s probably people out there that weren’t even born when September 11th happened. But I remember about a month after September 11th, it was General Conference, President Hinckley got up to speak and immediately said, I’ve been informed that the United States has just begun an attack on Afghanistan, that it had been a month and the United States was taking action to go after the perpetrators of 9/11. And I also remember, like, sitting there going, Oh, man, what’s he going to say, you know? These are ambassadors of the Prince of Peace, and one of them has just been obligated to tell us that our country, the United States, is now at war. I remember feeling like we were seeing Section 87 acted out right before our eyes.

Casey Griffiths:
But I remember President Hinckley getting up and firmly saying this. He said, “Are these perilous times? They are, but there’s no need to fear. We can have peace in our hearts and in our homes. We can be an influence for good in this world, every one of us.” And so, yeah, that was a profound moment for me where the prophet was getting up and saying, Yeah, we’re at war. That doesn’t mean that we won’t still experience peace in our hearts. And peace in our homes. That’s always been the question. If you have an assurance that the gospel is true, that Jesus Christ lives, that there’s a plan of salvation and resurrection, you have something to hope for no matter how dark it gets out there.

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, that does seem to be the very note that is struck in verse 8, right, like? After seven verses, almost, of just back to back to back, prophecy of atrocity and death and bloodshed and war, he says, “Stand ye in holy places and be not moved.” That’s President Hinckley, isn’t it? Are these troubled times? Yes. But don’t be afraid. Stand in holy places. Be not moved. What a message. Awesome. Okay, well, let’s now move to controversies and unpack some interesting things there. So I’ve heard a controversy, something like this, and I’m curious how you would respond. Couldn’t this prophecy of Section 87 be just good guessing on Joseph Smith’s part? Considering the world events that were surrounding him at that time, right, you mentioned the nullification crisis of 1832, a period when South Carolina was openly defying federal tariffs and threatening secession. It was in the news. People were worried about South Carolina, and they were worried explicitly about a civil war that that could precipitate. And Joseph made the prophecy right in that context.

Casey Griffiths:
You can argue that about any prophecy, that the person just got lucky or that the person was, you know, just aware of current events. And it is true. I mean, Joseph Smith acknowledges in his own history that South Carolina was in rebellion against the United States, and it was looking like there was going to be a civil war or some kind of military action against South Carolina in 1832. But I mean, come on. Like, this actually does happen, and there is military action 28 years later. So, yeah, is it possible that Joseph Smith was just lucky? Sure. It’s entirely possible. But he does nail this, and you either have to attribute it to luck or you look at it through the lens of faith and say, No, he got it right because he was a prophet, because he knew what was going to happen.

Scott Woodward:
I remember seeing a newspaper headline published just after the Civil War began, and it said, Have we not had a prophet amongst us? And then it quoted Joseph’s prophecy. That’s a very clear conclusion you can come to. That’s not a very far leap, right? When you prophesy about the future, something this big, and it happens. Absolutely. On the other hand, you can see where some would say there was an immediate context. It wasn’t out of the blue. It was born from his circumstance. Maybe so, but I appreciate the pushback we gave earlier, which was he stuck to his guns, right, like? Even after this nullification crisis passed, in 1843, right, he’s saying, It’s going to happen. How do I know? Because a voice told me on December 25th, 1832, and I know that voice, and so I know this is going to happen. Maybe 1843 is the more remarkable prophecy, Casey, because the whole nullification crisis context was gone.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah, by that point, the immediate crisis from 1832 had passed, but Joseph Smith is still saying, No, it’s going to happen, and it’s going to happen in South Carolina. Like, he’s still that specific, basically. And it happens, and it happens in South Carolina. Nobody can really dispute that part of it.

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, there are facts, and then there are inferences we make from those facts. And facts are what we all agree on, and we can all agree on that, at least. Joseph called it, and it happened. Now, you can infer whatever you want. Lucky guesser or prophet of God, that’s up to you. But the facts are the facts. Let me ask you a couple of other questions that sometimes come up where people say, Section 87, if you like zoom out and read it, it kind of seems like it all comes to pass. But if you get really granular, then it seems like it doesn’t really play out like the prophecy says. For instance, verse 2 and 3, when it says that “war will be poured out upon all nations beginning at this place,” meaning South Carolina, and then that war shall be poured out upon all nations. Some critics want to say that the American Civil War does not immediately lead to a direct global war involving all nations. Like, it had international implications like Britain’s neutrality, potential intervention, but it doesn’t escalate into global conflict in the immediate aftermath. And so tying other world wars to the Civil War seems tenuous. What would you say to that?

Casey Griffiths:
I’ll acknowledge that the American Civil War ends in 1865, and then what we call World War I breaks out in 1914. So that’s quite a long span. Now, there are wars in between that time, plenty of examples that it’s not hard to find. But really, the World War starts in 1914, and then World War II starts in 1939, depending on who you talk to. Some people say as early as ’37. Some people say it was all the same war. They just had a little halftime in the middle and then continued to fight it. But I think what we would say in answer to this is that Section 87 is depicting a long-term prophecy about global conflict and the pattern of global conflict that would happen, that what happens in the United States eventually affects conflicts in other nations. And one major argument you could make is that the Civil War was sort of the first modern war. Part of the reason why the Civil War was so bloody wasn’t just because every person that was killed was an American. It’s because the tactics and the technology had changed. In fact, most people would frame it by saying that the tactics hadn’t caught up with the technology.

Casey Griffiths:
So you’re using Napoleonic tactics where basically you walk in a straight line towards your enemy, and your enemy can only fire a bullet every minute or two because they have to reload. And now we’ve got, like, repeating rifles and gatling guns and grapeshot cannon. And by the end of the Civil War, they were really involved in the type of warfare that we see demonstrated in World War I, where it was trench warfare, and it was because the tactics were resulting in too many people getting killed. The other thing that the Civil War really set up was this idea that war would encompass entire populations. So, you know, prior to the American Civil War, at least the way warfare was fought between organized nations was an army. You went into winter quarters. You know, you didn’t attack civilians. The Civil War was a total war. Like, everybody was affected. People were displaced. And we start to see that same thing happen in World War I and World War II. Another major change was, civilian populations are affected. In World War I and World War II, you were in just as much danger if you were living in, you know, London as if you were living in France, where the front lines were, because of advances in technology.

Casey Griffiths:
By World War II, we’re talking about ballistic missiles and modern bombers and all that kinds of stuff. So I would say it’s a long-term prophecy. And again, you can look at Section 87 just as a prophecy about the American Civil War, and it still works. I just think that that little tweak where it says, They shall call upon other nations, if you assume that they means the European nations, that the South was asking for help, still works pretty well. I think both of those lenses are informative. Both the local, this concerns the United States, and the worldwide, this has to do with worldwide conflict, still works.

Scott Woodward:
You talk about it’s a pattern of global conflict. I think that’s probably borne up pretty well by verse 2, the phrase when he says, The time will come. I mean, that seems to support kind of a more extended timeline on this. Okay. Some people say, Well, verse 3 doesn’t really quite come to pass the way that it’s written. It says that the Southern states, I’m quoting now, “will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, and they shall also call upon other nations in order to defend themselves against other nations.” The criticism is this, the Confederacy does seek diplomatic recognition and aid from Great Britain and France, but they were largely unsuccessful in securing direct military intervention or full-fledged alliances. So we know that Britain remains officially neutral during the conflict. While there were some sympathetic elements, they never, like, defended themselves against other nations with the direct military backing of foreign powers. What would you say to that?

Casey Griffiths:
I guess the assumption here is that this is just talking about the American Civil War. And first thing I would say is it doesn’t say that Britain and France or any European nation is going to intervene. The prophecy strictly read just says the Southern States will call upon those nations to intervene. They don’t. There’s actually a lot more involved in it than people sometimes give credit for. Like, some people would argue that Britain did intervene because Britain built ships and armed raiders on behalf of the Confederacy. The most famous Confederate raider, the USS Alabama, was actually built in Britain and outfitted by the British. And some people would argue that that made the British a party to the war as well. But yeah, I don’t get where they’re coming from here because all the prophecy says, They shall call upon other nations, and they absolutely do that. Nobody’s saying that they didn’t.

Scott Woodward:
So the criticism is really based in reading beyond what the text is saying.

Casey Griffiths:
Yeah.

Scott Woodward:
Okay, that’s good. Any other controversies from Section 87 we ought to cover, Casey?

Casey Griffiths:
The biggest controversy I can think of that remains is the meaning of “the remnant.” I mean, verse 5, “The remnants who left of the land will marshal themselves, and shall become exceedingly angry, and shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation.” So I don’t know who the remnant are, and I don’t know if that part of the prophecy has been fulfilled or not. If you’re saying the remnant refers to Native Americans, then you could say it’s at least been partially fulfilled by the wars fought between the United States and the Native Americans in the latter part of the 19th century. But it seems to me that it’s bigger than that.

Scott Woodward:
Did the Native Americans, like, vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation in any of those conflicts?

Casey Griffiths:
I mean, yeah. Little Bighorn, right? It’s clear, and I’m not disputing that the Native Americans were the ones that received the worst treatment. There is no doubt in my mind. I’ve been to Bear River. I know the history of events like the Bear River Massacre, and what a tragedy all those things were. At the same time, too, I mean, it vexed the Gentiles. All it says is that they were vexed, and it did cause a lot of misery and a lot of suffering and a lot of death on both sides. It’s a major tragedy in the history of the United States. But again, my feeling is that this is bigger than the United States. Like, I like to read this verse through the lens of the global prophecy of war. And if that’s the case, I still don’t know who the remnants are. Are they the people left over from the wars that happened in the early 20th century? Are they some other group? Are they the house of Israel? And can we fully identify exactly who the house of Israel is, given the information we have right now? I don’t think we can answer any of those things.

Casey Griffiths:
So, yeah, if you’re reading it just as an American prophecy, I think it still works. If you’re reading it as a worldwide prophecy, again, the language here is very broad, and there’s a number of ways you could say, Yeah, this has been fulfilled. The world’s been in continuous conflict since World War II. One thing that I’ve thought about, too, was the prophecy talks about wars and rumors of wars. And you could argue that the rumors of wars, like the impact of the Cold War, where, you know, there wasn’t as much bloodshed as the World Wars, but did it definitely vex people? Did it cause distress and anxiety? Talk to your grandparents who grew up in an America where there were bomb shelters, where they were constantly afraid that there was going to be some kind of nuclear war. The rumors of wars were just as vexing as the wars themselves and caused major, major shifts in society and continue to do so even into our day.

Scott Woodward:
Those are really good thoughts. Maybe one other critique that I’d be curious your thoughts on is, this just occurred to me, is that critics will sometimes suggest that the strength of D&C 87 as a prophecy comes from its flexible interpretation. And we’ve been doing that a little bit here as we’ve been talking like, well, maybe it means this, maybe it means that. It’s not clear who the remnant is. Maybe we’re doing that a little bit. So what they’ll argue is that its general nature sometimes allows believers to kind of retrospectively fit various historical events into the framework rather than it being like a really precise, undeniable prediction. What would you say in response to that?

Casey Griffiths:
I would grant that a lot of the language in Section 87 is really flexible and can be interpreted a number of different ways. I mean, we’re not even sure who the “they” is that are mentioned in verse three. At the same time, too, there’s parts of Section 87 that are very, very specific, you know? Specifically, the war is going to start in South Carolina. That’s real specific, right? Slaves will rise up against their masters. That’s pretty specific, too. And so it’s a criticism of all prophecy in scripture to just say, Oh, it was written in such a way that it’s so broad and so vague that you could basically fit anything into it. Well, yes and no. I mean, saying the war is going to start in South Carolina is not vague at all, is it? And it actually happened that way. But at the same time, too, some of the wording is vague, and I don’t know if we’ve got the interpretation right. Like, outside of the irrefutable facts that the Civil War started in South Carolina, everything is open to interpretation here, and we might be surprised to find out that we’ve been totally wrong in the interpretations we’ve been given so far. But again, that’s a feature of prophecy, is that God doesn’t get too specific or that kind of spoils the test for us.

Scott Woodward:
Yeah, that’s what makes the specificity in this so remarkable is that he names place. And Joseph even guesses right at the issue, right, in the 1843 version that we find in Doctrine and Covenants 130. He says this will probably arise over the slave question. That’s Joseph speculating, which he got it right. There is a great deal of specificity here, which is really remarkable. But I’m with you that there are also some ambiguities that we would need to grant to the critics here and say, yeah, maybe we do do that sometimes. But how do you explain the specificity of place and issue?

Casey Griffiths:
So much to digest here. A lot we know, a lot we don’t know. What are the consequences of this prophecy on war?

Scott Woodward:
This prophecy was kind of a late addition to the Doctrine and Covenants, but it was possibly used by the Saints even to plan their move westward. Like, when the Civil War broke out, many Church leaders saw this as, like, vindication of Joseph Smith and the punishment on the nation for their rejection of the prophets for killing Joseph and Hyrum Smith. In fact, Section 136 even mentions as much. I mean, even Abraham Lincoln came to see the Civil War as a punishment on the nation for the sin of slavery, he said. The full meaning of the prophecy is still being felt today, and we don’t know if it’s all been completely fulfilled or not yet. I guess the phrase “the end of all nations” has not yet come, and so there’s more that remains to be fulfilled in this prophecy. But it does set out a perspective that the American Civil War was the beginning of a sequence of wars that will lead up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. That’s one of the major sort of framings that this section does for Latter-day Saints. And so in summary, it’s remarkable in terms of its prophecy, accurately foretelling the American Civil War, its broader implications for future global conflicts and calamities that would come after the Civil War.

Scott Woodward:
And I think ultimately for believers, it’s a call to prepare spiritually for the Second Coming of the Lord, come what may. Remember, as verse 8 says, “to stand in holy places and be not moved.” Are these perilous times? Yes. There’s going to be a lot of times we’ll be able to say, Yeah, these are perilous times. But verse 8 will stand through all of that. Stand in holy places, be not moved, trust in the Lord, and everything ultimately will be okay in the end. And if it’s not okay yet, then that means it’s not the end.

Casey Griffiths:
I hope everybody knows, too, that the Doctrine and Covenants isn’t a book of doom and gloom. The prophecy on war is real short. It’s eight verses. Next week, we’re going to talk about the prophecy on peace that’s received just a few days after this frightening revelation on war is received, and it’s one of the longest revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. So there’s more to look forward to than there is to dread about living in the last days. At the same time, I think the Lord knew he would be doing us a disservice if he didn’t level with us about what we were facing in the latter days, too.

Scott Woodward:
So we’ll look forward to next week with Section 88 as we discuss what Joseph called the olive leaf plucked from the tree of paradise, the Lord’s message of peace to us. So until then, Casey.

Casey Griffiths:
Until then.