When is a Prophet Not a Prophet?
- stephenstrent7
- Aug 31
- 5 min read
Where Science Meets the Doctrine and Covenants, for the Come Follow Me lesson September 1-7; Doctrine and Covenants 94-97
The heading to Doctrine and Covenants Section 95 states, “Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Kirtland, Ohio, June 1, 1833. This revelation is a continuation of divine directions to build a house for worship and instruction, the house of the Lord (see section 88:119–36).”
Joseph Smith’s journal entry for Wednesday 8 February 1843 stated, “This morning, I read German, and visited with a brother and sister from Michigan, who thought that ‘a prophet is always a prophet;’ but I told them that a prophet was a prophet only when he was acting as such.”1 There is probably no greater example of what Joseph stated in 1843 than Doctrine and Covenants sections 88 and 95, received in 1833.
Concerning those sections, Lisa Tait and Brent Roge stated, “On June 1, 1833, Joseph Smith received a revelation that contained a stern rebuke [Doctrine and Covenants 95]. ‘Ye have sinned against me a very grievous sin,’ the Lord declared, ‘in that ye have not considered the great commandment in all things that I have given unto you concerning the building of mine house.’ That ‘great commandment’ had come five months earlier in a lengthy revelation Joseph called the ‘olive leaf’ (now Doctrine and Covenants 88). It had directed the Saints to ‘organize [themselves]’ and establish ‘an house of prayer, an house of fasting, an house of faith, an house of learning, an house of glory, an house of order, an house of God.’”2
Tait and Roge continued, “Taken together with instructions to ‘teach one another’ and ‘seek learning even by study and also by faith,’ Joseph Smith and the elders in Kirtland understood this revelation to deliver a twofold mandate. They were to ‘build an house of God, & establish a school for the Prophets.’ (Joseph Smith letter to William W. Phelps, Jan. 11, 1833, in Letterbook 1, page 19, josephsmithpapers.org.) Joseph Smith and the Saints in Kirtland began acting on this instruction almost immediately, but, as the June 1 revelation indicated, they still had only a dim understanding of what it would ultimately mean or of the enormous sacrifices it would require.”3
So, according to Tait and Roge, after receiving the revelation recorded as section 88, Joseph and the elders in Kirtland apparently only understood the revelation to mean that they were to build a school. And, “…they still had only a dim understanding of what it would ultimately mean…” They continued, “On May 4, a conference of high priests met to consider ‘the necessity of building a school house for the purpose of accommodating the Elders who should come in to receive their education for the ministry.’…Though the building would come to be known as the Kirtland Temple, the Saints in 1833 did not yet know they were building a temple. They had read of temples in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, but they still knew little about them.”4
Today, we commonly discuss section 88, “an house of prayer, an house of fasting, an house of faith, an house of learning, an house of glory, an house of order, an house of God” as referring to the temple; however, at least I, don’t have a great appreciation of the lack of modern knowledge of our Church predecessors among the Saints of 1833. Tait and Roge said, “The records from the spring of 1833 show that the Saints were thinking of the Kirtland ‘house’ primarily as a ‘school house,’ not necessarily connecting their command with the temple in Zion. Now the June 1 revelation declared that Joseph Smith and the Saints had not sufficiently ‘considered’ the urgency or the importance of the commandment.”5
Even though section 95 contains the phrase, “endow those whom I have chosen with power from on high” (Doctrine and Covenants 95:8), the “endowment” itself was not introduced until the Nauvoo Temple. Temples were described and discussed extensively in the Old Testament, and there were apparently many more temples than just the one in Jerusalem. They were used for animal sacrifices, which ended at the crucifixion of Christ, the great and last sacrifice.6 The references in the New Testament to the Temple in Jerusalem are to Jesus’ teaching there and to his casting out the money changers. In the latter cases, Christ referred to the temple as His Father’s house.7
After Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, temples are not discussed in the New Testament; except as the dwelling place of God.8 There is no indication that a temple was part of early Christian worship or education. Even in reference to baptism for the dead, temples were not mentioned.9 Therefore, it is not surprising that the Saints of 1833, and even Joseph Smith, did not understand the relationship between temples and Christian worship. Even today, the vast majority of Christian worship does not include temples.
So, the evidence suggests that between January 3 (Doctrine and Covenants 88) and June 1 (Doctrine and Covenants 95), Joseph Smith, the Prophet, did not understand the purpose of the structure the Saints were supposed to build, and which had been commanded by revelation in section 88 to be built. Indeed, the Kirtland Temple functioned quite differently from our more modern temples.
Furthermore, according to Tait and Roge, “Joseph Smith and his counselors, Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams, were duly appointed ‘to obtain a draft or construction of the inner court of the house.’ Williams later described the ensuing vision. ‘We went upon our knees,’ he remembered, ‘called on the Lord, and the Building appeared within viewing distance: I being the first to discover it. Then all of us viewed it together. After we had taken a good look at the exterior, the building seemed to come right over us.’ The finished building, he said, ‘seemed to coincide with that I there saw to a minutia.’…While the building’s dimensions and functions and some aspects of its appearance were specified by revelation, other elements were left up to the leaders and workers on the site. The building’s design shows that they drew on their own experience and assumptions about what a church building should look like. Its shape reflects the popular Greek Revival style. Like many builders of the time, they also borrowed an eclectic mix of features from standard building manuals. The Gothic windows were widely associated with religious buildings, and the tower and steeple had become iconic features of New England churches.”10
These revelations (sections 88 and 95), in my opinion, make it clear that Joseph Smith only knew about the temple in as much as his revelations taught him. He was only a prophet when receiving revelation. Even then, it seems clear that he didn’t understand the revelation he received January 3 until he had received additional, clarifying revelation on June1 (section 95).
Trent Dee Stephens, PhD
References
1. History of the Church 5:265
2. Revelations in Context, 165-173; Lisa Olsen Tait and Brent Rogers; A House for Our God; churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/revelations-in-context/a-house-for-our-god?lang=eng; see also “Revelation, 1 June 1833 [D&C 95],” 59, josephsmithpapers.org; spelling modernized; see also Doctrine and Covenants 95:3
3. Ibid
4. Ibid
5. Ibid
6. Hebrews 10:1-18
7. John 2:16; Luke 2:49
8. Revelation 7:15
9. 1 Corinthian 15:29
10. Tait and Rogers
Comments