Doctrine and Covenants 84

<p>In section 57 the Lord identified the site for his temple in Zion. That was the first reference to a specific latter-day temple in the Doctrine and Covenants. There is not another one until section 84, which tells the Saints to build the temple and forges the gospel links between their missionary work, the gathering of scattered Israel, the fulfillment of ancient prophecies, and the building of New Jerusalem, crowned with its holy temple. </p> <p>Joseph’s history designates section 84 as a “Revelation … On Priesthood.”<a href="#_ftn1" id="_ftnref1" title="" class="see-footnote">[1]</a> That is worth considering. It could be described as a revelation on temple ordinances, covenants, the gathering of Israel, missionary work, the law of consecration, and the imminent coming of the Savior to “reign with my people” in Zion, as He says in closing (D&C 84:119). So why “priesthood?” What was Joseph seeing? What difference will it make to our understanding when we see it too? </p> <p>The answer may be in a long digression between verses 7 and 31. It seems, at first, to be a tangent from the point of the revelation, which began with a prophecy about building the temple. It turns out, however, that the digression becomes an explanation of priesthood and the relationship between priesthood, ordinances, and the endowment of power we need to transcend the Fall and regain God’s presence. In short, priesthood validates the ordinances to be performed in the prophesied temple. </p> <p>Moses understood this principle, the revelation says, and tried to teach it plainly, but the Israelites of his day did not generally want the endowment of priesthood power. They could not, therefore, endure God’s presence. Angry, God gave them less priesthood than he had to offer but as much as they were willing to receive. Joseph later taught about this strange human tendency to “set up stakes and say thus far will we go and no farther.” By contrast, Moses and Joseph were like Peter and the others who, Joseph said, received “the fullness of priesthood or the law of God” when the Savior was transfigured before them.<a href="#_ftn2" id="_ftnref2" title="" class="see-footnote">[2]</a></p> <p>I remember a Sunday School class discussion in which the consensus was that God does not get angry. It was an example of wresting the scriptures, which testify in section 84 and elsewhere that the Lord’s “anger was kindled against them,” and justifiably so. They rejected him, his plan, his sacrifice, his redeeming love, his fullness. The misguided class was trying to articulate truth about God’s character. It was a little like the process by which the creeds of Christianity eventually determined that God had no passions or emotions like anger. Section 84 does a better job. The Lord is justifiably angry, it says. There is nothing wrong with justified anger. The problem is the choice to express it badly. God does not express his anger the way a fallen mortal might. Section 84 says that when God is angry at his children for rejecting his blessings, he responds by offering as much as they are presently willing to receive, preparatory to their receiving more (D&C 84:23–26). </p> <p>Having concluded his digression, the Lord returns to his main theme, namely, how priesthood holders will serve in the temple to be built on the consecrated spot in Independence, Missouri. Saints who are full of priesthood power—figurative descendants of Moses and Aaron—will be filled with the Lord’s glory in the temple. One would think this revelation would provide the Saints enough incentive to begin building a temple on the dedicated site in Independence, Missouri—Zion. They did not, however. There are several complicated reasons why, and later revelations will cover these.</p> <p>The Saints obeyed section 84 in other specific ways. A council of high priests assigned Orson Hyde and Hyrum Smith to write a rebuke of the Church leaders in Missouri, as verse 76 commanded.<a href="#_ftn3" id="_ftnref3" title="" class="see-footnote">[3]</a> As instructed in verses 112–114, Bishop Whitney and Joseph Smith left Kirtland “to fulfill the Revelation,” making important contacts in New York City, visiting Albany, and prophesying in Boston.<a href="#_ftn4" id="_ftnref4" title="" class="see-footnote">[4]</a> The gospel continues to be preached to “all who have not received it” (D&C 84:75). Many people have made the covenant to receive, obtain, and magnify the priesthood as outlined in section 84. Many people have obeyed the law of consecration as instructed in verses 103–110. </p> <p>Perhaps the most important result of section 84 is that it raised Joseph’s consciousness of the fundamental importance of priesthood and, inseparably, the temple. He had listened attentively all night at age seventeen while Moroni explained the imperative need to obtain restored priesthood in order to seal the human family together before the Savior’s coming, but the doctrine of the priesthood distilled on Joseph like dew from heaven (D&C 121:45). Considerable dew condensed during the night nine years later, when section 84 explained the priesthood’s past and projected its future use in temples.<a href="#_ftn5" id="_ftnref5" title="" class="see-footnote">[5]</a></p> <div class="footnotes"> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref1" id="_ftn1" title="" class="footnote-label">[1]</a> “<a href="https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-a-1-23-december-1805-30-august-1834/235" target="_blank">History, 1838–1856, volume A-1 [23 December 1805–30 August 1834]</a>,” p. 229, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 7, 2020.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref2" id="_ftn2" title="" class="footnote-label">[2]</a> “<a href="https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/discourse-27-august-1843-as-reported-by-james-burgess/3" target="_blank">Discourse, 27 August 1843, as Reported by James Burgess</a>,” p. [12], The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 7, 2020.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref3" id="_ftn3" title="" class="footnote-label">[3]</a> Joseph Smith, Letterbook, 1829–1835, pages 20–25; Kirtland Minute Book, January 13, 1833, Church History Library, Salt Lake City. See Section 82.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref4" id="_ftn4" title="" class="footnote-label">[4]</a> Newel K. Whitney, undated statement, Newel K. Whitney Collection, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University; Samuel H. Smith, Journal, November 26, 1832, Church History Library, Salt Lake City; Joseph to Emma Smith, July 13, 1832, Community of Christ Archives, Independence, Missouri.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref5" id="_ftn5" title="" class="footnote-label">[5]</a> Richard Lyman Bushman, <em>Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling</em> (New York: Knopf, 2005), 202–05.</p> </div>

<p>No concept fired the imagination of the early Saints of this dispensation more than the construction of a holy city of God on the American continent. One survey found that in early Latter-day Saint literature the most quoted passage from the Book of Mormon was Ether 13:4–8, in which the ancient prophet Moroni foretold “that a New Jerusalem should be built up upon this land, unto the remnant of the seed of Joseph” (Ether 13:6).<a href="#_ftn1" id="_ftnref1" title="" class="see-footnote">[1]</a> Interest in this New Jerusalem continued as Joseph Smith’s translation of the Bible restored the knowledge of a city called Zion built by the antediluvian prophet Enoch, where the people “were of one heart and one mind and dwelt in righteousness” (Moses 7:18).<a href="#_ftn2" id="_ftnref2" title="" class="see-footnote">[2]</a> </p> <p>Early in the summer of 1833, a Plat of the City of Zion was sent to Church leaders in Missouri. This plan illustrates not only the grand designs of the city but also the practical details of its creation. Created as a collaborative effort among the members of the First Presidency—Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, and Frederick G. Williams—the plat is essentially the master plan for the city of God. Written around the edges of the plan are detailed notes about the nature of the city. The city was to be one square mile and have a grid system outlining rectangular blocks with lots laid out for homes and gardens. In many ways the plat resembled urban land division patterns utilized throughout the United States in the 1830s. In other ways the plat was highly unusual.<a href="#_ftn3" id="_ftnref3" title="" class="see-footnote">[3]</a></p> <p>Where the city’s design diverged from that of other American communities was at the heart of the map, where two prominent rectangles sat with numbers from 1 to 24 inside of them. These rectangles designated a sacred place at the center of the city where a complex of twenty-four temples was to be built. According to the plans, these temples were intended for a different function than were later Latter-day Saint temples. Rather than being places where ordinances were performed for the living and the dead, these temples were intended to serve as administrative centers. In divisions of three, the temples were assigned to house various Church organizations. For example, temples 10, 11, and 12 were designated as “the house of the Lord for the presidency of the high and most holy priesthood.” Other temple trios were identified by titles such as “the house of the Lord for the presidency of the high priesthood after the order of [Aaron],” “the house of the Lord for the teachers in Zion,” “the house of the Lord for the Deacons in Zion,” and so forth.<a href="#_ftn4" id="_ftnref4" title="" class="see-footnote">[4]</a> The offices of the priesthood had been revealed gradually, but the designations of the orders of the priesthood came from information provided in this revelation (D&C 84). </p> <div class="footnotes"> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref1" id="_ftn1" title="" class="footnote-label">[1]</a> Grant Underwood, “Book of Mormon Usage in Early LDS Theology,” <em>Dialogue</em> 17, no. 3 (Autumn 1984): 39.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref2" id="_ftn2" title="" class="footnote-label">[2]</a> “Old Testament Revision 1,” p. 16, JSP.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref3" id="_ftn3" title="" class="footnote-label">[3]</a> Richard Francaviglia, <em>The New Mapmakers of Zion, </em>2015, 31.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref4" id="_ftn4" title="" class="footnote-label">[4]</a> “Plat of the City of Zion, circa Early June–25 June 1833,” p. 2, JSP. </p> </div>

<p>The city of Zion and its temples remain to be built. Some detractors have claimed that this passage proved to be false because the temple was not “reared in this generation” (D&C 84:4). There are several reasons why this claim is not true.</p> <p>First, it is possible that this commandment is not a <em>prophecy, </em>but a <em>commandment. </em>When commandments are not kept they are not invalidated. The Lord commanded, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor” (Exodus 20:16). If a person does not keep that commandment it is reflection of the weakness of the individual, not of the prophet who received the commandment or of the foreknowledge of God. In later revelations, the Lord provided two reasons why the temples were not built: there were contentions, envyings, and strife among the Saints in Missouri (D&C 101:2, 6–8), and the enemies of the Saints were demonstrating intense opposition. In Doctrine and Covenants 124:49–50, the Lord refers to the charge to build the temples as a commandment that He rescinded because of persecution.<a href="#_ftn1" id="_ftnref1" title="" class="see-footnote">[1]</a></p> <p>Second, there is some uncertainty surrounding the use of the word <em>generation </em>in this passage. The Lord told Joseph Smith, “This generation shall have my word through you” (D&C 5:10). It seems that in this case the word<em> generation </em>is used as a synonym for <em>dispensation. Generation </em>as used here does not appear to refer to the time between parents’ birth and the birth of their children, but as an epoch of time in this history of the human race.<a href="#_ftn2" id="_ftnref2" title="" class="see-footnote">[2]</a></p> <p>Finally, the passage declares that “this generation shall not all pass away until <em>an</em> house shall be built unto the Lord” (verse 5). It is possible that this passage specifies only that <em>a </em>house will be built, not necessarily that the temples in Zion will be built. If this is the case, a house was built in Kirtland, Ohio (See D&C 109–110). Another house was built by this generation in Nauvoo, Illinois. Many of those who lived in the days of Joseph Smith survived long enough to see temples rise in Utah at St. George, Logan, Manti, and Salt Lake City. A smaller number who lived into the 1920s even saw temples dedicated in Cardston, Canada, and Laie, Hawaii. In this sense, the word of the Lord was more than fulfilled.</p> <div class="footnotes"> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref1" id="_ftn1" title="" class="footnote-label">[1]</a> Stephen E. Robinson and H. Dean Garrett, <em>A Commentary on the Doctrine and Covenants, </em>2004, 4 vols. 3:26.</p> <p class="footnote"><a href="#_ftnref2" id="_ftn2" title="" class="footnote-label">[2]</a> Joseph Fielding McConkie and Craig J. Ostler, <em>Revelations of the Restoration, </em>2000, 588.</p> </div>