Doctrine & Covenants 128 All

Home > Doctrine & Covenants > Section 128 > Verses 128:1-5
Previous page: Section 128                      Next page: Verses 128:6-18

This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Section 128. The relationship of Verses 128:1-5 to the rest of Section 128 is discussed at D&C 128.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 128:1-5 include:

Discussion

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:1. Much of this verse might be chalked up to formality, perhaps in the wake of Joseph's increasingly heavy involvement with legal procedures during the Missouri and Illinois experiences (he was, of course, away from the saints precisely because of legal efforts to extradite him to Missouri to face charges). Some of the formal and legal language that creeps into this revelation (as a whole and not just in this first verse) is quite instructive: the particularity of the instructions Joseph is giving reflect his increasing awareness of how public and political the institution of the Church necessarily is. But the wording is still richer if it is taken more immediately within the revelation. For example: "As I stated to you in my letter before I left my place...." Joseph offers in just these opening words a rather technical introduction to the instructions he is about to give. The former revelation (D&C 127) becomes a statement, something not only fixed or unchangeable (as a statement it is something static), but something authoritative or official (as a statement it is also something with an official status). In short, the former revelation, as stated, becomes a function of the state, fixes or establishes a state of affairs, both in the Church and in the world. And the statement is not only signed ("As I stated") but dated ("before I left my place") and located spatially ("my place"). The revelation, whatever its canonical status, becomes in the midst of all of these linguistic cues somehow binding. That such language permeates a revelation that deals specifically with how it is that the priesthood is connected with the act of writing (cf. especially verse 9) is certainly not something to be ignored. What all of this amounts to will, of course, still have to be worked out.

The historical situation bears on the content of the revelation as well. For example, Joseph seems to connect his being "pursued by [his] enemies" with the fact that "the subject of baptism for the dead" was on his mind. Perhaps this is especially suggested by the strong language of this phrase: "and press itself upon my feelings the strongest." Whatever this might mean, it seems clear that there is some connection between his being in hiding and this question of baptism for the dead. Perhaps a first way of approaching this apparent connection is to recognize the sheer loneliness of Joseph's situation, and how opposed this loneliness must have seemed to the doctrines of eternally binding people together. At the very least, there seems to be some reason to recognize the situation as connected with the doctrine pressed upon him.

Another clue that comes out of this verse is the fact that Joseph had promised to discuss "many subjects," though only this one seems to be what he wrote of. Joseph seems to have understood the time of exile he was facing as an opportunity to seek direct revelation and to communicate it to the saints, as, that is, a time of rest from the strenuous duties of his office at the time. Joseph was often trying to set up programs at the time to allow him more opportunity to "translate" and receive further revelations. He seems to have understood this period of time to be just such an opportunity. It is curious, then, that Joseph seems to have been entirely taken up with only this one subject. A few interesting points arise here. All of Joseph's study, translation, and so forth seems to have pointed, at the time, to this one question. Moreover, he seems to have seen this doctrine as embracing all others, that (especially by the end of this section) this single doctrine (which turns out essentially to be the doctrine of gathering things together in one) gathered everything he had experienced and/or taught in one. One should ask to what extent Joseph's being away from the scattering concerns of daily life with the Saints shaped this singular focus. At the very least, it can be said that more should certainly be read into this first verse than is usually done.

The manner in which Joseph describes his interest in baptism for the dead is also interesting: "that subject seems to occupy my mind, and press itself upon my feeling." In both expressions, Joseph puts himself grammatically in the objective case (which is not even to mention the military spirit of the phrase, "occupy my mind"!). It seems this is not something he is merely choosing to think about; rather, he is occupied and pressed to think about these things, both in his mind and his feelings. Is this because Joseph had hitherto been overlooking something? Is this because Joseph might otherwise be inclined to think about something else? Or is this just the means by which inspiration typically worked for Joseph? At any rate, it is perhaps somewhat surprising to find such "subjective" language in a verse that can also be said to be so formal, so official, so objective. This strange interweaving of objectivity and subjectivity deserves careful interpretation: might it not suggest that the common distinction between these two "categories" should be rethought (if not canceled entirely)?

• D&C 128:2. Most of this verse simply refers back to D&C 127. There is, however, an interesting word that makes this verse unique: "views." Joseph here describes what he is about to write as his "few additional views." That he puts it this way seems to emphasize the fact that he had received the revelation in the previous section (which is not without its "thus saith the Lord" authority) that he now simply proceeds to explore. This section should probably be understood to be Joseph's incredibly inspired thinking through of the revelation of section 127.

Joseph's use of the word certify here also seems interesting. The KJV uses "certify" for Greek and Hebrew words that generally mean "to make known" (cf. 2 Sam 15:28, dbr = "to say" ; Ezra 4:14, 16; Ezra 5:10; Ezra 7:24, yda = "to know or make known"; Esth 2:22, `mr = "to say"; Gal 1:11, gnorizo = "to make known"). This generally agrees with Webster's 1828 definition, "to testify to in writing." The word used here puts Joseph's act of writing in a relation with the process of recording and witnessing that he goes on to describe. That is, Joseph's act of writing to the Church seems semantically (and typologically?) related to the recording and witnessing that pertains to baptism of the dead. Though not a direct synonym to "record" or "witness," certify has similar forensic and communicative connotations. The word "certify" will be used, curiously, three more times in the next two verses.

• D&C 128:3. Joseph begins with a difficulty imposed by the previous revelation: to have a single recorder who takes care of all the records of these ordinances would be almost impossible. So the prophet suggests a solution: several recorders doing the work, whose records, in the next verse, will be gathered together by a general recorder. Much of this verse, however, is dedicated to the absolute precision of the records to be kept. The real crux of this issue arises only with verse 5.

The wording of this verse seems to emphasize the testifying role role that the recorder is to play. Not only is he to jot down the facts that occur, but he is to certify that he has seen "with his eyes, and heard with his ears." The naming of the three individuals as witness also seems to underscore this testifying-witnessing aspect of the recording process. Following Joseph's use of the term certify about himself in verse 2, this testifying-witnessing aspect of the recording-certifying process suggests an implicit connection between the recording of baptisms for the dead and the letter that Joseph is writing, especially in light of the more general principle of witnesses that is cited at the end of this verse (cf. Deut 17:6; Deut 19:15; Matt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28; D&C 6:28).

• D&C 128:4. Beyond the several wards' recorders, Joseph suggests a "general recorder," to whom the several records are to be given. The general recorder can then, by the due precision with which the several records have been made, enter them into a single "general church book" in a way that they "shall be just as holy, and shall answer the ordinance just the same as if he had seen with his eyes and heard with his ears, and made a record of the same." The point seems to be one of transfer: this order is a way of translating the records from so many books to one book.

The last sentence of this verse describes a substitution mechanism that will be doubled in the ordinance of baptism for the dead: "just the same as if . . . ." When judgment out of the book of life is described later, starting verse 6, then the records being kept will be given a very important role—a role that ultimately seems to undermine the personal possessive pronoun their in the phrase "their works." The substitutionary aspect of the records, then, seems intimately tied to the sealing power which binds the fathers and children, the heavens and earth, etc.

• D&C 128:5. With verse 5, what seems a rather simple, mundane situation suddenly grows rather complex. This business of so many books being transfered into the one book seems to be something far more profound and far more eternal than would at first appear, "by conforming to the ordinance and preparation that the Lord ordained and prepared before the foundation of the world." The implication seems to be that this pattern of connecting so many books and so many recorders with a central book and a central recorder has something to do with something heavenly, in fact, with something done in the pre-mortal council. That Joseph would set up this system in parallel to the heavenly version is specifically "to answer the will of God," and Joseph seems to be quite adamant on this point.

But things get more complicated still when all of this draws on the final phrase: the "ordinance and preparation" before the foundation of the world has something to do with "the salvation of the dead who should die without a knowledge of the gospel." And here things get rather difficult to unravel. At the very least, reduced to the absolutely undeniable, this much is clear: some pre-mortal ordinance/preparation had something to do with joining the many together in the one, and all of this had something to do with saving those who die "without a knowledge of the gospel."

The verse is phrased rather ambiguously so that it might be interpreted in a hundred different ways--perhaps each interpretation picking up on a different thread in Joseph's public discourses of the time. It seems there was some sort of pre-mortal ordinance about gathering many in one that had something to do with saving the those who die without a knowledge of the gospel.

Later in this section, salvation and judgment will be talked about in terms of works. However, in this verse, salvation is juxtaposed with "knowledge of the gospel," not works. Why is "knowledge of the gospel" mentioned here, rather than, say, priesthood authority?

We might surmise that those who died without a knowledge of the gospel did not do works such that it is possible to be saved. Works in later verses, then, might be taken to refer either to "good works" quite generally or, more specifically, to the ordinance of baptism. The way in which this verse is read, it seems, will depend on how we understand the relationship between baptism and salvation. If, on the one hand, baptism is taken as an ordinance which puts us into a covenantal relationship with Christ (i.e. knowing Christ), and Christ's righteousness then becomes a part of us, then "works" in subsequent verses might be taken quite generally, and baptism, on this reading, becomes the consummate symbol/ordinance of covenantal relationship with Christ through which his righteousness becomes our righteousness. On the other hand, if baptism is taken as an ordinance that is required because it washes us clean in some metaphysical sense (by the power of the atonement), then "works" in subsequent verses might be taken as referring to salvific ordinances. Whether either of these readings conforms with the rest of this section, as well as to Joseph's understanding of salvation and baptism more generally, requires more careful consideration.

Unanswered questions

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:5. What does it mean that baptism for the dead was "ordained and prepared before the foundation of the world" (v.5)? Does that mean that it existed, and was perhaps even performed, before Adam was even baptized?

Resources

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.

Previous page: Section 128                      Next page: Verses 128:6-18

Home > Doctrine & Covenants > Section 128 > Verses 128:6-18
Previous page: Verses 128:1-5                      Next page: Verses 128:19-25

This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Section 128. The relationship of Verses 128:6-18 to the rest of Section 128 is discussed at D&C 128.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 128:6-18 include:

Discussion

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:6. This verse builds on the ideas introduced in verse 5, and so some of the ambiguity of the previous verse is retained here. Is "this very subject" referring specifically to the salvation of those who "should die without a knowledge of the gospel" or more generally to the salvation of the dead and perhaps how this relates to "the book of life"?

The situation, apparently, in Rev 20 is the final judgment, after the wrapping up of the earthly events, at the time of a new heaven and a new earth, etc., etc. It is specifically the dead who stand before God while "books" are opened. At the same time, another "book" is opened, namely, the "book of life." There seems quite clearly to be here a reference to the one record versus the many records: the one book corresponding to the general book, while the books being opened--not the book of life, but these other books--correspond to the many books in which so many records are kept.

When John says that "the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books," it is not obvious whether books here should be read to include the book of life or not. On the one hand, it may be that the "the book of life" has no direct bearing on the judgment of the dead, but pertains only to the living. In other words, "the book of life" might be taken as a book for the living--at the time of the wrapping up of all things, while the books (many records) are the books that contain "the record of their works," the works of the dead. In short, at the judgment, there may be two separate kind of books for the judgment to be performed: there will be a "book of life" for the living, and so many "books" for the dead, and the judgment will proceed with them. On other hand, the gathering of the many books into the one book described above (cf. verse 4) suggests some sort of important relationship between the many books and the single book (the book of life in this case). Joseph elaborates on this in the subsequent verses.

• D&C 128:7. Joseph points out explicitly that "the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books" rather than "the book of life," emphasized by the word "but." He explains matter-of-factly: "consequently, the books spoken of must be the books which contained the record of their works, and refer to the records which are kept on the earth. In other words, so many books are precisely earthly books, and the earthly books are tied to the dead. He goes on to explain that there is also "the book which was the book of life," and that it "is kept in heaven." The idea of the one book is that it is not an earthly record at all, but a record kept in heaven. And now there seems to be a clue given as to why Revelation has been quoted: so many books, with their records, must have their legitimate records transfered into the heavenly book, into the book of life, so that the dead might be saved from death. The contrast between the judgment of the dead with the book of life suggests that resurrection seems has something to do with what is written in the book of life. Once the records are transfered, there seems to be the implication that the dead will no longer be dead, no longer be without their names in the "book of life," or the "book of the living."

Joseph then goes on to point out that all of this agrees precisely with what he had written in section 127: "that in all your recordings it may be recorded in heaven." The particularity with which the ordinances must be performed and recorded has something to do with this ability to transfer the records from the books of the dead on earth into the book of the living in heaven, and all of this precisely for the resurrection of the dead. All of this seems to reflect back onto verse 5 a resolution of the ambiguities there: the ordinance prepared from the foundation of the world seems precisely to be the ordinance of recording on earth and so recording in heaven. But, again, this is still rather vague: that there is simply an ordinance of writing in two places or witnesses testifying that something has been performed does not seem to be such a shocking thing. If the dead are judged by the "records which are kept on earth," then the book in heaven might be taken as somewhat superfluous, at least without further explanation.

• D&C 128:8. Joseph explains quite clearly that the nature of the ordinance is a question of the priesthood, or at least of its power--and that by the revelation of Jesus Christ. This power is "that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" and vice versa. Joseph then offers a different "translation," substituting "record" for "bind." It should be noted that Joseph does not offer a corrected translation here, but "a different view of the translation." That is, he suggests that "to bind" might just be "to record," or that the two are somehow intertwined or connected. This explicit connection between writing and priesthood at once simplifies and complicates things greatly. On the one hand, the question becomes far simpler: the possibility of transferring a record from the books to the book is a question of the priesthood, the binding power that allows for the books to be tied together with the book. On the other hand, it seems a strange thing to suggest that the power of the priesthood is itself confined to the act of writing, rather than to acting (since the ordinance is performed by the speaker, not by the one who takes down a record of the event).

This growing difficulty becomes still more difficult with the latter part of the verse. It seems simple enough that the dead are to be judged according to their works whether they have performed them or some other, but now when Joseph mentions "the ordinance which God has prepared for their salvation from before the foundation of the world," the reference does not seem to be the book/books business, but rather the ordinance of baptism for the dead. That is, since Joseph explicitly mentions the distinction between attending to ordinances on one's own and receiving them by proxy, it seems clear that the ordinance being referred to in the final phrase is the ordinance of baptism for the dead. But then it is not quite clear that that is what is referred to: any ordinance performed in proxy is going to require the same transfer or translation as does the tying together of the books and the book. That is, what seems to be at the root of both questions, whether of work for the dead or of transferring records, is the ability to transfer or translate. At this point, the apparent equivalence between "bind" and "record" becomes somewhat more curious: might the baptism of someone living as effected for someone dead be called a sort of translation or a transfer? The ordinance and preparation set up before the foundation of the world for the salvation of the dead seem to have been more directly tied with this business of translation or transfer, with this question of binding through recording or recording through binding that is at work in these verses. One must admit that the language is rather difficult to work through.

The relationship between the several books and the single book of life which began in verse 6 here begins to be fleshed out more carefully. In verse 7, the relationship was merely claimed, and by a reference to a rather vague phrase in the previous letter/section: "that in all your recordings it may be recorded in heaven." The "it may be recorded" of this earlier statement is now strengthened: "whatsoever you bind[/record] on earth shall be bound[/recorded] in heaven." The relationship, then, between the many books on earth and the single book in heaven seems, through the priesthood, to be absolute. Thus, although it might seem to be a bit unnecessary to have the book in heaven open if judgment is based on the books on earth, in fact it seems this relationship between heaven and earth is key to what Joseph is saying in this letter.

If the book of life is only written upon or altered by power of the priesthood, an implicit question to consider might be whether sins are recorded in the book of heaven. Ordinances are the only thing that seem to be discussed in terms of what is written in the book of life, so perhaps we are only justified in thinking about something like a list of names being written in the book of life of those who have received ordinances by the power of the priesthood. If this is the case, then perhaps the description of the book in heaven as the "book of life" is telling: it only records the names of those who will be granted life in heaven.

• D&C 128:9. The next verse only complicates things more, since the priesthood becomes there a question of doing something "in authority, in the name of the Lord." In other words, it is to write (to be an author or to have author-ity), and to do it "in the name of the Lord," that is, apparently, as the Lord, or as a proxy for Him. There seems to be at work in every priesthood ordinance a sort of translation: the person performing the ordinance is transcribed as Christ, as the Lord, acting and speaking in His name, and hence, acting as if Him. What makes it a law (a lex, a written or read thing) is precisely this translation of oneself and the fact that there is "kept a proper and faithful record of the same." There seems to be a proliferation of writing references throughout this business, and it becomes more and more complex--even as it becomes simpler and simpler--with every word.

However, the point of verse 9 is not to explicate the priesthood further so much as it is to lessen the shock of the doctrine: this "may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of," but it is the same thing ever given when the priesthood is given. And it is "according to the decrees of the great Jehovah." The language is quite clear that this is as shocking as can be, but it perhaps should not be. In other words, this all amounts to a complete rereading of the scriptures, and that is why it is as familiar as possible and yet the most shocking thing of all. Verse 10 will offer just such a rereading explicitly.

• D&C 128:12. This verse seems to state that "the ordinance of baptism for the dead" existed before the "ordinance of baptism by water" for the living, which was then later "instituted to form a relationship" with the previously existing baptism for the dead. This adds even more detail to D&C 128:5, where we read that baptism for the dead was ordained before the foundations of the world. As baptism symbolizes death and rebirth, baptism for the dead is an ordinance created to both makes possible and forshadows the resurrection of those who die without hearing the gospel. According to the timeline given here, baptism for the living would have been instigated at a later date to allow the living to also receive this foreshadowing. Baptism for the living and the dead are not the only priesthood ordinances that serves as a physical foreshadowing of future events and blessings (cf. Alma 13:2).

• D&C 128:15. This verse makes it clear that fathers and children cannot be saved without each other, and that this ordinance of baptism for the dead was instigated to allow children to save their fathers, and perhaps for fathers to also save their dead children. The themes outlined in this section clearly relate baptism for the dead to other patriarchal priesthood practices outlined in Moses 6:1-5.

• D&C 128:17: Heart of the fathers. The earliest quotation of this scripture is in Malachi 4:6. There, as here, the word "heart" is singular. The scripture is also referred to in 3 Nephi 25:6, where "heart" is also singular: "the heart of the fathers." On the other hand, in Luke 1:17 and D&C 27:9, 98:16, and 110:15, the quotation is plural: "the hearts of the fathers."

Unanswered questions

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:12: This ordinance? Two ordinances are mentioned at the beginning of this verse--baptism by water and resurrection (for more info on resurrection as a priesthood ordinance, see below). Which of these ordinances is the one that was "instituted to form a relationship with the ordinance of baptism for the dead?
• Form a relationship? What might the Lord mean when he says that the ordinance of baptism by water (or resurrection?) was instituted to "form a relationship" with the ordinance of baptism for the dead? Does this indicate that baptism for the dead (or resurrection) existed before baptism for the living? Why might such a relationship have been desirable?

• D&C 128:14: Key of knowledge. What does the phrase "key of knowledge" mean here? In what sense is knowledge related to the sealing power? How does this help us understand the nature of knowledge?

• D&C 128:17. Is it significant that Malachi refers to the heart (singular) of the fathers rather than the hearts (plural) of the fathers? (See the lexical notes for this verse, below.)

• D&C 128:18. There must be a welding link between the fathers and the children or the earth will be cursed. Given what the scriptures teach about binding, record, priesthood, etc., what might one say about the nature of that welding link?

• D&C 128:18. If we understand the nature of that welding link, what might that say about our relations to our children and our parents? to our history? to our culture?

Resources

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• Resurrection is a Priesthood Ordinance. This was taught by President Brigham Young (Journal of Discourses, 15:137-139) and then reaffirmed by President Spencer W. Kimball in an April 1977 General Conference Talk.

Notes

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.

Previous page: Verses 128:1-5                      Next page: Verses 128:19-25

Home > Doctrine & Covenants > Section 128 > Verses 128:6-18
Previous page: Verses 128:1-5                      Next page: Verses 128:19-25

This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Section 128. The relationship of Verses 128:6-18 to the rest of Section 128 is discussed at D&C 128.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 128:6-18 include:

Discussion

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:6. This verse builds on the ideas introduced in verse 5, and so some of the ambiguity of the previous verse is retained here. Is "this very subject" referring specifically to the salvation of those who "should die without a knowledge of the gospel" or more generally to the salvation of the dead and perhaps how this relates to "the book of life"?

The situation, apparently, in Rev 20 is the final judgment, after the wrapping up of the earthly events, at the time of a new heaven and a new earth, etc., etc. It is specifically the dead who stand before God while "books" are opened. At the same time, another "book" is opened, namely, the "book of life." There seems quite clearly to be here a reference to the one record versus the many records: the one book corresponding to the general book, while the books being opened--not the book of life, but these other books--correspond to the many books in which so many records are kept.

When John says that "the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books," it is not obvious whether books here should be read to include the book of life or not. On the one hand, it may be that the "the book of life" has no direct bearing on the judgment of the dead, but pertains only to the living. In other words, "the book of life" might be taken as a book for the living--at the time of the wrapping up of all things, while the books (many records) are the books that contain "the record of their works," the works of the dead. In short, at the judgment, there may be two separate kind of books for the judgment to be performed: there will be a "book of life" for the living, and so many "books" for the dead, and the judgment will proceed with them. On other hand, the gathering of the many books into the one book described above (cf. verse 4) suggests some sort of important relationship between the many books and the single book (the book of life in this case). Joseph elaborates on this in the subsequent verses.

• D&C 128:7. Joseph points out explicitly that "the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books" rather than "the book of life," emphasized by the word "but." He explains matter-of-factly: "consequently, the books spoken of must be the books which contained the record of their works, and refer to the records which are kept on the earth. In other words, so many books are precisely earthly books, and the earthly books are tied to the dead. He goes on to explain that there is also "the book which was the book of life," and that it "is kept in heaven." The idea of the one book is that it is not an earthly record at all, but a record kept in heaven. And now there seems to be a clue given as to why Revelation has been quoted: so many books, with their records, must have their legitimate records transfered into the heavenly book, into the book of life, so that the dead might be saved from death. The contrast between the judgment of the dead with the book of life suggests that resurrection seems has something to do with what is written in the book of life. Once the records are transfered, there seems to be the implication that the dead will no longer be dead, no longer be without their names in the "book of life," or the "book of the living."

Joseph then goes on to point out that all of this agrees precisely with what he had written in section 127: "that in all your recordings it may be recorded in heaven." The particularity with which the ordinances must be performed and recorded has something to do with this ability to transfer the records from the books of the dead on earth into the book of the living in heaven, and all of this precisely for the resurrection of the dead. All of this seems to reflect back onto verse 5 a resolution of the ambiguities there: the ordinance prepared from the foundation of the world seems precisely to be the ordinance of recording on earth and so recording in heaven. But, again, this is still rather vague: that there is simply an ordinance of writing in two places or witnesses testifying that something has been performed does not seem to be such a shocking thing. If the dead are judged by the "records which are kept on earth," then the book in heaven might be taken as somewhat superfluous, at least without further explanation.

• D&C 128:8. Joseph explains quite clearly that the nature of the ordinance is a question of the priesthood, or at least of its power--and that by the revelation of Jesus Christ. This power is "that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" and vice versa. Joseph then offers a different "translation," substituting "record" for "bind." It should be noted that Joseph does not offer a corrected translation here, but "a different view of the translation." That is, he suggests that "to bind" might just be "to record," or that the two are somehow intertwined or connected. This explicit connection between writing and priesthood at once simplifies and complicates things greatly. On the one hand, the question becomes far simpler: the possibility of transferring a record from the books to the book is a question of the priesthood, the binding power that allows for the books to be tied together with the book. On the other hand, it seems a strange thing to suggest that the power of the priesthood is itself confined to the act of writing, rather than to acting (since the ordinance is performed by the speaker, not by the one who takes down a record of the event).

This growing difficulty becomes still more difficult with the latter part of the verse. It seems simple enough that the dead are to be judged according to their works whether they have performed them or some other, but now when Joseph mentions "the ordinance which God has prepared for their salvation from before the foundation of the world," the reference does not seem to be the book/books business, but rather the ordinance of baptism for the dead. That is, since Joseph explicitly mentions the distinction between attending to ordinances on one's own and receiving them by proxy, it seems clear that the ordinance being referred to in the final phrase is the ordinance of baptism for the dead. But then it is not quite clear that that is what is referred to: any ordinance performed in proxy is going to require the same transfer or translation as does the tying together of the books and the book. That is, what seems to be at the root of both questions, whether of work for the dead or of transferring records, is the ability to transfer or translate. At this point, the apparent equivalence between "bind" and "record" becomes somewhat more curious: might the baptism of someone living as effected for someone dead be called a sort of translation or a transfer? The ordinance and preparation set up before the foundation of the world for the salvation of the dead seem to have been more directly tied with this business of translation or transfer, with this question of binding through recording or recording through binding that is at work in these verses. One must admit that the language is rather difficult to work through.

The relationship between the several books and the single book of life which began in verse 6 here begins to be fleshed out more carefully. In verse 7, the relationship was merely claimed, and by a reference to a rather vague phrase in the previous letter/section: "that in all your recordings it may be recorded in heaven." The "it may be recorded" of this earlier statement is now strengthened: "whatsoever you bind[/record] on earth shall be bound[/recorded] in heaven." The relationship, then, between the many books on earth and the single book in heaven seems, through the priesthood, to be absolute. Thus, although it might seem to be a bit unnecessary to have the book in heaven open if judgment is based on the books on earth, in fact it seems this relationship between heaven and earth is key to what Joseph is saying in this letter.

If the book of life is only written upon or altered by power of the priesthood, an implicit question to consider might be whether sins are recorded in the book of heaven. Ordinances are the only thing that seem to be discussed in terms of what is written in the book of life, so perhaps we are only justified in thinking about something like a list of names being written in the book of life of those who have received ordinances by the power of the priesthood. If this is the case, then perhaps the description of the book in heaven as the "book of life" is telling: it only records the names of those who will be granted life in heaven.

• D&C 128:9. The next verse only complicates things more, since the priesthood becomes there a question of doing something "in authority, in the name of the Lord." In other words, it is to write (to be an author or to have author-ity), and to do it "in the name of the Lord," that is, apparently, as the Lord, or as a proxy for Him. There seems to be at work in every priesthood ordinance a sort of translation: the person performing the ordinance is transcribed as Christ, as the Lord, acting and speaking in His name, and hence, acting as if Him. What makes it a law (a lex, a written or read thing) is precisely this translation of oneself and the fact that there is "kept a proper and faithful record of the same." There seems to be a proliferation of writing references throughout this business, and it becomes more and more complex--even as it becomes simpler and simpler--with every word.

However, the point of verse 9 is not to explicate the priesthood further so much as it is to lessen the shock of the doctrine: this "may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of," but it is the same thing ever given when the priesthood is given. And it is "according to the decrees of the great Jehovah." The language is quite clear that this is as shocking as can be, but it perhaps should not be. In other words, this all amounts to a complete rereading of the scriptures, and that is why it is as familiar as possible and yet the most shocking thing of all. Verse 10 will offer just such a rereading explicitly.

• D&C 128:12. This verse seems to state that "the ordinance of baptism for the dead" existed before the "ordinance of baptism by water" for the living, which was then later "instituted to form a relationship" with the previously existing baptism for the dead. This adds even more detail to D&C 128:5, where we read that baptism for the dead was ordained before the foundations of the world. As baptism symbolizes death and rebirth, baptism for the dead is an ordinance created to both makes possible and forshadows the resurrection of those who die without hearing the gospel. According to the timeline given here, baptism for the living would have been instigated at a later date to allow the living to also receive this foreshadowing. Baptism for the living and the dead are not the only priesthood ordinances that serves as a physical foreshadowing of future events and blessings (cf. Alma 13:2).

• D&C 128:15. This verse makes it clear that fathers and children cannot be saved without each other, and that this ordinance of baptism for the dead was instigated to allow children to save their fathers, and perhaps for fathers to also save their dead children. The themes outlined in this section clearly relate baptism for the dead to other patriarchal priesthood practices outlined in Moses 6:1-5.

• D&C 128:17: Heart of the fathers. The earliest quotation of this scripture is in Malachi 4:6. There, as here, the word "heart" is singular. The scripture is also referred to in 3 Nephi 25:6, where "heart" is also singular: "the heart of the fathers." On the other hand, in Luke 1:17 and D&C 27:9, 98:16, and 110:15, the quotation is plural: "the hearts of the fathers."

Unanswered questions

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:12: This ordinance? Two ordinances are mentioned at the beginning of this verse--baptism by water and resurrection (for more info on resurrection as a priesthood ordinance, see below). Which of these ordinances is the one that was "instituted to form a relationship with the ordinance of baptism for the dead?
• Form a relationship? What might the Lord mean when he says that the ordinance of baptism by water (or resurrection?) was instituted to "form a relationship" with the ordinance of baptism for the dead? Does this indicate that baptism for the dead (or resurrection) existed before baptism for the living? Why might such a relationship have been desirable?

• D&C 128:14: Key of knowledge. What does the phrase "key of knowledge" mean here? In what sense is knowledge related to the sealing power? How does this help us understand the nature of knowledge?

• D&C 128:17. Is it significant that Malachi refers to the heart (singular) of the fathers rather than the hearts (plural) of the fathers? (See the lexical notes for this verse, below.)

• D&C 128:18. There must be a welding link between the fathers and the children or the earth will be cursed. Given what the scriptures teach about binding, record, priesthood, etc., what might one say about the nature of that welding link?

• D&C 128:18. If we understand the nature of that welding link, what might that say about our relations to our children and our parents? to our history? to our culture?

Resources

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• Resurrection is a Priesthood Ordinance. This was taught by President Brigham Young (Journal of Discourses, 15:137-139) and then reaffirmed by President Spencer W. Kimball in an April 1977 General Conference Talk.

Notes

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.

Previous page: Verses 128:1-5                      Next page: Verses 128:19-25

Home > Doctrine & Covenants > Section 128 > Verses 128:6-18
Previous page: Verses 128:1-5                      Next page: Verses 128:19-25

This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Section 128. The relationship of Verses 128:6-18 to the rest of Section 128 is discussed at D&C 128.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 128:6-18 include:

Discussion

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:6. This verse builds on the ideas introduced in verse 5, and so some of the ambiguity of the previous verse is retained here. Is "this very subject" referring specifically to the salvation of those who "should die without a knowledge of the gospel" or more generally to the salvation of the dead and perhaps how this relates to "the book of life"?

The situation, apparently, in Rev 20 is the final judgment, after the wrapping up of the earthly events, at the time of a new heaven and a new earth, etc., etc. It is specifically the dead who stand before God while "books" are opened. At the same time, another "book" is opened, namely, the "book of life." There seems quite clearly to be here a reference to the one record versus the many records: the one book corresponding to the general book, while the books being opened--not the book of life, but these other books--correspond to the many books in which so many records are kept.

When John says that "the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books," it is not obvious whether books here should be read to include the book of life or not. On the one hand, it may be that the "the book of life" has no direct bearing on the judgment of the dead, but pertains only to the living. In other words, "the book of life" might be taken as a book for the living--at the time of the wrapping up of all things, while the books (many records) are the books that contain "the record of their works," the works of the dead. In short, at the judgment, there may be two separate kind of books for the judgment to be performed: there will be a "book of life" for the living, and so many "books" for the dead, and the judgment will proceed with them. On other hand, the gathering of the many books into the one book described above (cf. verse 4) suggests some sort of important relationship between the many books and the single book (the book of life in this case). Joseph elaborates on this in the subsequent verses.

• D&C 128:7. Joseph points out explicitly that "the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books" rather than "the book of life," emphasized by the word "but." He explains matter-of-factly: "consequently, the books spoken of must be the books which contained the record of their works, and refer to the records which are kept on the earth. In other words, so many books are precisely earthly books, and the earthly books are tied to the dead. He goes on to explain that there is also "the book which was the book of life," and that it "is kept in heaven." The idea of the one book is that it is not an earthly record at all, but a record kept in heaven. And now there seems to be a clue given as to why Revelation has been quoted: so many books, with their records, must have their legitimate records transfered into the heavenly book, into the book of life, so that the dead might be saved from death. The contrast between the judgment of the dead with the book of life suggests that resurrection seems has something to do with what is written in the book of life. Once the records are transfered, there seems to be the implication that the dead will no longer be dead, no longer be without their names in the "book of life," or the "book of the living."

Joseph then goes on to point out that all of this agrees precisely with what he had written in section 127: "that in all your recordings it may be recorded in heaven." The particularity with which the ordinances must be performed and recorded has something to do with this ability to transfer the records from the books of the dead on earth into the book of the living in heaven, and all of this precisely for the resurrection of the dead. All of this seems to reflect back onto verse 5 a resolution of the ambiguities there: the ordinance prepared from the foundation of the world seems precisely to be the ordinance of recording on earth and so recording in heaven. But, again, this is still rather vague: that there is simply an ordinance of writing in two places or witnesses testifying that something has been performed does not seem to be such a shocking thing. If the dead are judged by the "records which are kept on earth," then the book in heaven might be taken as somewhat superfluous, at least without further explanation.

• D&C 128:8. Joseph explains quite clearly that the nature of the ordinance is a question of the priesthood, or at least of its power--and that by the revelation of Jesus Christ. This power is "that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" and vice versa. Joseph then offers a different "translation," substituting "record" for "bind." It should be noted that Joseph does not offer a corrected translation here, but "a different view of the translation." That is, he suggests that "to bind" might just be "to record," or that the two are somehow intertwined or connected. This explicit connection between writing and priesthood at once simplifies and complicates things greatly. On the one hand, the question becomes far simpler: the possibility of transferring a record from the books to the book is a question of the priesthood, the binding power that allows for the books to be tied together with the book. On the other hand, it seems a strange thing to suggest that the power of the priesthood is itself confined to the act of writing, rather than to acting (since the ordinance is performed by the speaker, not by the one who takes down a record of the event).

This growing difficulty becomes still more difficult with the latter part of the verse. It seems simple enough that the dead are to be judged according to their works whether they have performed them or some other, but now when Joseph mentions "the ordinance which God has prepared for their salvation from before the foundation of the world," the reference does not seem to be the book/books business, but rather the ordinance of baptism for the dead. That is, since Joseph explicitly mentions the distinction between attending to ordinances on one's own and receiving them by proxy, it seems clear that the ordinance being referred to in the final phrase is the ordinance of baptism for the dead. But then it is not quite clear that that is what is referred to: any ordinance performed in proxy is going to require the same transfer or translation as does the tying together of the books and the book. That is, what seems to be at the root of both questions, whether of work for the dead or of transferring records, is the ability to transfer or translate. At this point, the apparent equivalence between "bind" and "record" becomes somewhat more curious: might the baptism of someone living as effected for someone dead be called a sort of translation or a transfer? The ordinance and preparation set up before the foundation of the world for the salvation of the dead seem to have been more directly tied with this business of translation or transfer, with this question of binding through recording or recording through binding that is at work in these verses. One must admit that the language is rather difficult to work through.

The relationship between the several books and the single book of life which began in verse 6 here begins to be fleshed out more carefully. In verse 7, the relationship was merely claimed, and by a reference to a rather vague phrase in the previous letter/section: "that in all your recordings it may be recorded in heaven." The "it may be recorded" of this earlier statement is now strengthened: "whatsoever you bind[/record] on earth shall be bound[/recorded] in heaven." The relationship, then, between the many books on earth and the single book in heaven seems, through the priesthood, to be absolute. Thus, although it might seem to be a bit unnecessary to have the book in heaven open if judgment is based on the books on earth, in fact it seems this relationship between heaven and earth is key to what Joseph is saying in this letter.

If the book of life is only written upon or altered by power of the priesthood, an implicit question to consider might be whether sins are recorded in the book of heaven. Ordinances are the only thing that seem to be discussed in terms of what is written in the book of life, so perhaps we are only justified in thinking about something like a list of names being written in the book of life of those who have received ordinances by the power of the priesthood. If this is the case, then perhaps the description of the book in heaven as the "book of life" is telling: it only records the names of those who will be granted life in heaven.

• D&C 128:9. The next verse only complicates things more, since the priesthood becomes there a question of doing something "in authority, in the name of the Lord." In other words, it is to write (to be an author or to have author-ity), and to do it "in the name of the Lord," that is, apparently, as the Lord, or as a proxy for Him. There seems to be at work in every priesthood ordinance a sort of translation: the person performing the ordinance is transcribed as Christ, as the Lord, acting and speaking in His name, and hence, acting as if Him. What makes it a law (a lex, a written or read thing) is precisely this translation of oneself and the fact that there is "kept a proper and faithful record of the same." There seems to be a proliferation of writing references throughout this business, and it becomes more and more complex--even as it becomes simpler and simpler--with every word.

However, the point of verse 9 is not to explicate the priesthood further so much as it is to lessen the shock of the doctrine: this "may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of," but it is the same thing ever given when the priesthood is given. And it is "according to the decrees of the great Jehovah." The language is quite clear that this is as shocking as can be, but it perhaps should not be. In other words, this all amounts to a complete rereading of the scriptures, and that is why it is as familiar as possible and yet the most shocking thing of all. Verse 10 will offer just such a rereading explicitly.

• D&C 128:12. This verse seems to state that "the ordinance of baptism for the dead" existed before the "ordinance of baptism by water" for the living, which was then later "instituted to form a relationship" with the previously existing baptism for the dead. This adds even more detail to D&C 128:5, where we read that baptism for the dead was ordained before the foundations of the world. As baptism symbolizes death and rebirth, baptism for the dead is an ordinance created to both makes possible and forshadows the resurrection of those who die without hearing the gospel. According to the timeline given here, baptism for the living would have been instigated at a later date to allow the living to also receive this foreshadowing. Baptism for the living and the dead are not the only priesthood ordinances that serves as a physical foreshadowing of future events and blessings (cf. Alma 13:2).

• D&C 128:15. This verse makes it clear that fathers and children cannot be saved without each other, and that this ordinance of baptism for the dead was instigated to allow children to save their fathers, and perhaps for fathers to also save their dead children. The themes outlined in this section clearly relate baptism for the dead to other patriarchal priesthood practices outlined in Moses 6:1-5.

• D&C 128:17: Heart of the fathers. The earliest quotation of this scripture is in Malachi 4:6. There, as here, the word "heart" is singular. The scripture is also referred to in 3 Nephi 25:6, where "heart" is also singular: "the heart of the fathers." On the other hand, in Luke 1:17 and D&C 27:9, 98:16, and 110:15, the quotation is plural: "the hearts of the fathers."

Unanswered questions

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:12: This ordinance? Two ordinances are mentioned at the beginning of this verse--baptism by water and resurrection (for more info on resurrection as a priesthood ordinance, see below). Which of these ordinances is the one that was "instituted to form a relationship with the ordinance of baptism for the dead?
• Form a relationship? What might the Lord mean when he says that the ordinance of baptism by water (or resurrection?) was instituted to "form a relationship" with the ordinance of baptism for the dead? Does this indicate that baptism for the dead (or resurrection) existed before baptism for the living? Why might such a relationship have been desirable?

• D&C 128:14: Key of knowledge. What does the phrase "key of knowledge" mean here? In what sense is knowledge related to the sealing power? How does this help us understand the nature of knowledge?

• D&C 128:17. Is it significant that Malachi refers to the heart (singular) of the fathers rather than the hearts (plural) of the fathers? (See the lexical notes for this verse, below.)

• D&C 128:18. There must be a welding link between the fathers and the children or the earth will be cursed. Given what the scriptures teach about binding, record, priesthood, etc., what might one say about the nature of that welding link?

• D&C 128:18. If we understand the nature of that welding link, what might that say about our relations to our children and our parents? to our history? to our culture?

Resources

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• Resurrection is a Priesthood Ordinance. This was taught by President Brigham Young (Journal of Discourses, 15:137-139) and then reaffirmed by President Spencer W. Kimball in an April 1977 General Conference Talk.

Notes

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.

Previous page: Verses 128:1-5                      Next page: Verses 128:19-25

Home > Doctrine & Covenants > Section 128 > Verses 128:19-25
Previous page: Verses 128:6-18                      This is the last page for Section 128

This page would ideally always be under construction. You are invited to contribute.

Summary

This section should be very brief. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Relationship to Section 128. The relationship of Verses 128:19-25 to the rest of Section 128 is discussed at D&C 128.

Story.

Message. Themes, symbols, and doctrinal points emphasized in Verses 128:19-25 include:

Discussion

This section is for detailed discussion such as the meaning of a symbol, how a doctrinal point is developed throughout a passage, or insights that can be further developed in the future. Contributions may range from polished paragraphs down to a single bullet point. The focus, however, should always be on understanding the scriptural text consistent with LDS doctrine. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:20: A voice of the Lord in the wilderness. This phrase occurs several other places in scripture, most likely originating in Isa 40:3 and being applied to John the Baptist (cf. Matt 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4; John 1:23). Interestingly, D&C 88:66 adds the following note of explanation after using this phrase: "in the wilderness, because you cannot see him."

Unanswered questions

This section is for questions along the lines of "I still don't understand ..." Please do not be shy. The point of these questions is to identify things that still need to be addressed on this page. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for life application

This section is for prompts that suggest ways in which a passage can influence a person's life. Prompts may be appropriate either for private self reflection or for a class discussion. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Prompts for further study

This section is for prompts that invite us to think about a passage more deeply or in a new way. These are not necessarily questions that beg for answers, but rather prompts along the lines of "Have you ever thought about ..." Prompts are most helpful when they are developed individually, thoughtfully, and with enough background information to clearly indicate a particular direction for further study or thought. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

• D&C 128:20. Is there a connection between the voice of Michael on the banks of the Susquehanna river, and the voice of Peter, James, and John in the wilderness? Are these separate events?

Resources

This section is for listing links and print resources, including those that are also cited elsewhere on this page. A short comment about the particular strengths of a resource can be helpful. Click the link above and to the right to edit or add content to this heading. →

Notes

Footnotes are not required but are encouraged for factual assertions that average readers cannot easily evaluate for themselves (such as the date of King Solomon’s death or the nuanced definition of a Greek word). In contrast, insights rarely benefit from footnoting, and the focus of this page should always remain on the scriptures themselves rather than what someone has said about them. Links are actively encouraged on all sections of this page, and links to authoritative sources (such as Strong's Bible Concordance or the Joseph Smith Papers) are preferable to footnotes.

Previous page: Verses 128:6-18                      This is the last page for Section 128