Gramps,
Please would you explain whether the creatures described in Ezekiel chapter one and elsewhere in the Bible (seen in visions as lacking imagery like that of God or humans) are symbolic or literal? Did the prophet Joseph Smith ever clarify these types of questions?
Chris
Chris,
The restored gospel actually gives us a surprisingly helpful answer.
According to Latter-day Saint doctrine, there are literal heavenly beings associated with these visions, but many of the details seen by the prophets are symbolic and intended to teach spiritual truths rather than provide a biological description of what these beings literally look like.
One of the greatest blessings of the Restoration is that Joseph Smith addressed questions that had puzzled Bible readers for centuries. One of those questions involved the mysterious “beasts” described in the book of Revelation, and his explanation helps us better understand similar visions in Ezekiel.
In Doctrine and Covenants section 77, Joseph Smith received inspired answers to questions about the book of Revelation. One question asked:
“What are we to understand by the four beasts, spoken of in the same verse?”
The Lord answered:
“They are figurative expressions, used by the Revelator, John, in describing heaven, the paradise of God… showing forth the glory of the classes of beings in the order or sphere of their creation.” (Doctrine and Covenants 77:2)
That answer is extremely important. Notice that the revelation does not say the beings themselves are imaginary. Instead, it says John used “figurative expressions” to describe heavenly realities.
In other words, the creatures are connected to real beings, but the prophetic description is symbolic. The symbols communicate truths about God’s creations, His glory, and His divine order.
This principle fits very well with Ezekiel’s vision. Ezekiel wasn’t trying to write a zoology textbook about heaven. He was describing a glorious spiritual vision using earthly language that could never fully capture what he saw.
Think about how difficult it would be to describe colors that no one on earth has ever seen or dimensions beyond our experience. Prophets often rely on symbols because heavenly realities simply don’t fit neatly into human vocabulary.
Ezekiel’s creatures each have four faces: a man, a lion, an ox, and an eagle (Ezekiel 1:10). Throughout scripture, these animals often symbolize different divine qualities. While interpretations vary, many Latter-day Saint scholars have suggested they represent characteristics such as intelligence, majesty, strength, service, swiftness, and divine power.
Likewise, the many eyes seen on the wheels and the creatures are commonly understood as symbols of complete awareness, knowledge, and watchfulness. The wheels themselves may represent God’s work moving throughout creation or His ability to accomplish His purposes everywhere.
Although we cannot always identify every symbol with certainty, the overall message is clear: God’s kingdom is perfectly organized, alive with intelligence, and filled with glory.
Isaiah also saw heavenly beings called seraphim.
“They had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.” (Isaiah 6:2)
Then, in Revelation chapter 4, John saw four living creatures full of eyes in front and behind. Their descriptions resemble Ezekiel’s vision in several ways.
Rather than viewing these as conflicting accounts, Joseph Smith’s inspired explanation in Doctrine and Covenants 77 provides a key to understanding them all. The prophets witnessed real heavenly scenes, but they described them in symbolic language inspired by God.
Joseph Smith also taught an important principle about visions generally. Prophets often see things “after the manner of” symbolic representation, as spiritual truths are communicated through images that the human mind can grasp. Not every detail should be interpreted as a literal physical characteristic.
That doesn’t make the visions less real. In fact, it may make them more meaningful.
We see this pattern throughout scripture. Jesus described Himself as the Lamb of God, the Door, the Vine, and the Bread of Life. No Christian believes those titles deny His literal existence. Instead, the symbols reveal different aspects of His divine mission.
Similarly, when John describes Christ with a sharp, two-edged sword proceeding from His mouth (Revelation 1:16), Latter-day Saints understand that this symbolizes the power of God’s word rather than suggesting Jesus literally carries a sword in His mouth.
The same approach helps us understand Ezekiel’s remarkable vision.
Joseph Smith also emphasized that every living thing has a spirit. Doctrine and Covenants 77 teaches that the beasts John saw represented actual living creations of God that glorify Him. The revelation states they were “enjoying their eternal felicity.” This reminds us that God’s creations extend far beyond what we currently understand.
Exactly what those heavenly beings are like in their eternal state has not been fully revealed. The Church does not have an official interpretation of every detail in Ezekiel’s vision, and faithful Latter-day Saints may differ on some of the symbolism. What Joseph Smith’s revelation does provide is an inspired framework: there are real heavenly beings, but the prophetic descriptions employ figurative language.
Ultimately, Ezekiel chapter 1 is not meant to satisfy our curiosity about the appearance of heavenly creatures nearly as much as it is intended to fill us with awe at God’s majesty.
The climax of Ezekiel’s vision isn’t really the creatures or the wheels. It is the glorious throne of God and the radiant appearance of the Lord’s glory above everything else (Ezekiel 1:26-28). The unusual imagery directs our attention upward to God’s power, holiness, and sovereignty.
That is probably the most important lesson to remember. The symbols are fascinating, and it’s natural to wonder about them. But their purpose is to teach us about the greatness of God, the order of heaven, and the reality of His divine kingdom.
Thanks to Joseph Smith and the Restoration, we don’t have to choose between saying these visions are purely imaginary or insisting every detail is literally anatomical. The revealed answer is both simpler and richer. The heavenly beings are real, but the prophets often described them through inspired symbols that communicate eternal truths beyond the limits of ordinary language.
That perspective allows us to appreciate the beauty of Ezekiel’s vision without being distracted by trying to picture four-faced creatures as though they were standing before us. Instead, we can focus on the message the Lord intended—that heaven is real, God reigns in glory, and His creations, however marvelous they may be, all testify of His majesty.
]]>
Gramps,
Why was God absent from giving revelation to the Jews during the 400 year intertestamental period (in between Malachi & John the Baptist)? What happened or caused it? I had wondered about that. Also, why did the Nephites, in stark contrast, still have revelation from God during that time? Thanks.
Beverly
Beverly,
Many Christians have heard about the “400 years of silence”—the period between the prophet Malachi in the Old Testament and the appearance of John the Baptist in the New Testament. During those centuries, no new books of scripture were added to the Bible, and no recognized prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, or Malachi existed. This naturally raises an interesting question: Did God stop speaking?
For members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an even more fascinating question follows: If there was little or no recorded revelation among the Jews during that time, why were the Nephites in the Book of Mormon still receiving prophets and revelation?
The answer teaches us an important lesson about how God works with His children.
First, it helps to understand what people mean by the “400 years of silence.” The last book of the Old Testament, written by the prophet Malachi, is generally dated around the fifth century BC. John the Baptist began his ministry about four centuries later. During that time, the Bible records no new prophets ministering to the covenant people in Judea and no additional books of scripture being written.
However, the lack of recorded scripture does not necessarily mean God completely withdrew from His people. Throughout those centuries, He continued to direct events in remarkable ways.
The Jewish people survived foreign domination under several powerful empires. The spread of the Greek language following the conquests of Alexander the Great eventually allowed the gospel to be preached across much of the known world using a common language. Later, the Roman Empire established roads and relative peace, making missionary travel far easier as Jesus Christ’s Apostles took the gospel to many nations. Looking back, it becomes clear that the Lord was preparing the world for the coming of His Son, even if He was not calling Old Testament-style prophets whose writings became part of the Bible.
So why weren’t there recognized prophets in Judea during that time?
The scriptures teach that revelation and prophetic leadership are closely tied to priesthood authority and to people’s willingness to receive God’s word. Throughout the Old Testament, periods of spiritual darkness often followed widespread rejection of the Lord and His prophets.
The prophet Amos foretold such a time:
“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).
Many Latter-day Saints understand this prophecy to have multiple fulfillments, including the period leading up to Christ’s mortal ministry. Likewise, Hosea warned Israel:
“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee” (Hosea 4:6).
While these passages do not explicitly refer to the intertestamental period, they illustrate an important principle: when people repeatedly reject divine guidance, the Lord may withdraw prophets for a time. Even so, He never abandons His covenant people.
In fact, the Lord was anything but absent. He continued preparing the world for the Savior’s birth and ministry. His timing has always been perfect, even when His hand is not immediately obvious.
This is where the Book of Mormon provides remarkable insight.
While there may have been no recognized prophetic ministry in Jerusalem, the Lord had established another covenant people in the Americas through the prophet Lehi around 600 BC. From that point forward, He continued calling prophets to lead the Nephites and record His dealings with them.
Those prophets included Nephi, Jacob, Enos, Jarom, Omni, Mosiah, King Benjamin, Alma, Helaman, Nephi the son of Helaman, Samuel the Lamanite, Mormon, and Moroni. Throughout the centuries, often called the “silent years,” revelation continued among the Nephites.
Why?
One reason is that the Lord had preserved priesthood authority among them. Beginning with Lehi, an unbroken prophetic line was established by divine calling. As long as faithful prophets remained and the people were willing to receive revelation, the heavens remained open.
Another reason was the unique mission of the Nephite record itself. The Lord intended the Book of Mormon to come forth in the latter days as another testament of Jesus Christ. To accomplish that purpose, He continued revealing His will to prophets who faithfully recorded His words.
The Book of Mormon also teaches an important truth that expands our understanding of revelation. Through the prophet Alma, we read:
“For behold, the Lord doth grant unto all nations, of their own nation and tongue, to teach his word” (Alma 29:8).
Likewise, the Lord declared:
“I command all men, both in the east and in the west…that they shall write the words which I speak unto them” (2 Nephi 29:11).
These scriptures remind us that God’s work has never been confined to one nation or one continent. If revelation became limited among one covenant people for a season, that did not mean the Lord stopped speaking altogether. He continued guiding His children elsewhere according to His wisdom and purposes.
Could there have been faithful individuals among the Jews who received personal revelation during those 400 years? Certainly. The absence of recorded scripture does not mean righteous people were left entirely without God’s influence. Faithful men and women undoubtedly prayed, received answers, and were guided by the Holy Ghost. However, there is no biblical evidence of a recognized succession of covenant prophets comparable to those found before Malachi or among the Nephites during the same period.
The Restoration beautifully answers the question of the “400 years of silence.” While many assume heaven was quiet between the Old and New Testaments, the Book of Mormon reveals that God was still revealing His will through living prophets on another continent. The heavens had not closed. Rather, the Lord was accomplishing His purposes in different places according to His perfect plan.
President Russell M. Nelson taught:
“One of the things the Spirit has repeatedly impressed upon my mind since my new calling as President of the Church is how willing the Lord is to reveal His mind and will. The privilege of receiving revelation is one of the greatest gifts of God to His children.”
That same principle applies throughout history. Whether He was speaking through prophets in ancient Israel, through Nephite prophets in the Americas, or through living prophets today, the Lord has always been willing to reveal His will to those prepared to receive it.
President Nelson also reminded us:
“If Joseph Smith’s transcendent experience in the Sacred Grove teaches us anything, it is that the heavens are open and that God speaks to His children.”
The “silent years” ultimately remind us not that God stopped communicating, but that His work is far greater and more expansive than we sometimes realize. His love, His purposes, and His willingness to reveal truth have never been limited by time, geography, or circumstance. Just as He prepared the world for the coming of Jesus Christ, He continues to guide His Church and His children today through continuing revelation.
]]>
Gramps,
The scriptures are full of instances in which glorified, resurrected beings appear to mortals in less-than-glorified form (e.g., Christ on the road to Emmaus). Can God the Father do this as well? Is there any reason why He couldn’t or wouldn’t ever appear as anything less than His fully glorified self?
For example, could God the Father appear as an old man, walk and talk with a mortal being, shake their hand, etc.? Or would this somehow violate His divine nature?
Josh
Josh,
The honest answer is that the Lord has never directly revealed the answer to that question. Because of that, it’s important to distinguish between what the scriptures clearly teach and what we can reasonably infer. While we should avoid presenting speculation as doctrine, there are scriptural principles that help us think about the possibility.
One of the clearest examples comes from the resurrected Savior Himself. After His Resurrection, Jesus walked for several miles with two disciples on the road to Emmaus. They discussed recent events, talked about the scriptures, and even shared a meal together, yet neither disciple realized they were speaking with the risen Lord.
Luke explains simply, “But their eyes were holden that they should not know him” (Luke 24:16). Only later, after Jesus blessed and broke bread, were “their eyes… opened, and they knew him” (Luke 24:31).
The account doesn’t suggest that Jesus had ceased to be a glorified, resurrected being. Rather, for His own purposes, He was not immediately recognized. Whatever the exact mechanism, the story demonstrates that a resurrected being’s glory or identity is not always fully revealed to those around Him.
The same principle appears again only a short time later. When Mary Magdalene encountered the resurrected Savior outside the empty tomb, she initially mistook Him for the gardener (John 20:15). Once again, someone who knew Jesus well did not immediately recognize Him. Whether that was because of Mary’s grief, the circumstances, or the Lord intentionally withholding His identity for a time, the account reminds us that resurrection does not necessarily entail constant public recognition.
The Book of Mormon provides another interesting example. The Three Nephites were translated rather than resurrected, but they were nevertheless changed so they could remain on the earth and continue their ministry. Mormon records that “they are among the Gentiles, and the Gentiles know them not” (3 Nephi 28:27). The Lord also declared that they would become “as the angels of God” (3 Nephi 28:30). Their ministry shows that heavenly servants can move among ordinary people without drawing attention to who they really are.
Even angels frequently appear in very ordinary ways. Abraham welcomed three visitors before realizing that one of them represented the Lord (Genesis 18). Lot received heavenly messengers who appeared simply as men (Genesis 19). Throughout scripture, God’s messengers often look remarkably ordinary until the Lord chooses to reveal more about them.
Taken together, these examples establish an important principle. Heavenly beings are not necessarily required to manifest all of their glory every time they appear to mortals. The Lord seems able to reveal as much—or as little—as accomplishes His purposes.
That brings us back to the original question: Does that principle apply to Heavenly Father?
The Restoration teaches plainly that the Father is not merely a spirit or an unknowable force. He is a glorified, resurrected being with a tangible body. Doctrine and Covenants 130:22 declares, “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also.”
Likewise, Joseph Smith taught, “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man” (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith).
Because the Father possesses a real, tangible body, there is certainly nothing unusual about the idea that He could physically walk, speak, sit, or shake hands. In fact, Joseph Smith’s First Vision leaves little doubt that the Father is a personal Being who can be seen and heard. Joseph testified, “I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description” (Joseph Smith—History 1:17).
Other prophets experienced similar manifestations. Stephen saw the Father and the Son before his martyrdom (Acts 7:55–56), and Moses was brought into God’s presence after being spiritually prepared to endure His glory.
That preparation is an important part of the discussion. After Moses’ vision, he explained, “Mine own eyes have beheld God; but not my natural, but my spiritual eyes… for my natural eyes could not have beheld” (Moses 1:11). Likewise, the Lord taught, “No man has seen God at any time in the flesh, except quickened by the Spirit of God” (Doctrine and Covenants 67:11).
These passages teach that when God reveals His full glory, mortals ordinarily must be spiritually strengthened to endure the experience. However, they do not say that God is incapable of appearing in a different manner if He chooses. They simply describe the circumstances surrounding the revelations recorded.
At this point, we arrive at the limits of what has actually been revealed. The scriptures never tell us that Heavenly Father has appeared disguised as an ordinary man, nor do they say that He never could. There simply isn’t a revelation that directly addresses the question.
That means we should be careful not to go beyond what the Lord has revealed. President Dallin H. Oaks has frequently reminded members of the Church to avoid speculation when revelation is silent. That counsel fits this subject well.
Still, it’s also fair to recognize what the scriptures do teach. They consistently demonstrate that glorified heavenly beings can control how much of themselves they reveal. The resurrected Savior was not always recognized. Angels often appeared as ordinary men. The Three Nephites minister unnoticed among the people. Those examples don’t prove that Heavenly Father has done the same thing, but they do show that there is nothing inherently contradictory about a glorified being interacting with mortals without displaying overwhelming glory.
It’s also worth remembering that the Father often accomplishes His work through His Son, through angels, and through authorized servants. Personal appearances by the Father are relatively rare in scripture, not because He is unable to appear, but because He has established an order through which much of His work is carried out. When He has chosen to reveal Himself directly, those experiences have generally been moments of profound revelation, such as the First Vision or His declaration at the Savior’s baptism and on the Mount of Transfiguration.
In the end, the safest conclusion is also the simplest one. We know that Heavenly Father is an exalted, glorified being with a tangible body of flesh and bones. We know He has appeared to prophets in glory. We also know that other glorified heavenly beings have, at times, interacted with mortals without immediately revealing who they were.
Whether Heavenly Father has ever chosen to veil His glory in a similar way is something the Lord has not revealed. There is no doctrinal reason to declare it impossible, but neither is there any revealed doctrine that says He has done so. Faithful Latter-day Saints can comfortably acknowledge that distinction, recognizing that some questions simply await further revelation.
Until then, perhaps the greater lesson is not how God appears, but that He does appear according to His own wisdom and purposes. Whether through His Son, through angels, through the Holy Ghost, or on the rare occasions when He has manifested Himself personally, Heavenly Father has always found ways to reveal Himself to His children when doing so accomplishes His divine purposes.
]]>
Gramps,
Does time exist in the next life?
Bruce
Bruce,
Latter-day Saint doctrine does not fully explain how time works in the next life. However, the scriptures and teachings of modern prophets do provide several clues. Those clues suggest that while our experience of time will likely be very different from what we know now, there is still sequence, progression, and purpose in eternity.
One of the scriptures that often starts this discussion is found in the Doctrine and Covenants. While explaining the nature of God’s knowledge, the Lord revealed:
“The Lord God… all things are present before mine eyes.” (Doctrine and Covenants 38:2)
This verse tells us that God sees all things at once. He is not limited by the past, present, and future the way we are. That doesn’t necessarily mean time doesn’t exist for God. Rather, it means that God’s knowledge is not limited by time. He perfectly sees the beginning, the middle, and the end.
Another important scripture is found in the Book of Abraham:
“Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was…” (Abraham 3:22)
A few verses later, the Lord teaches that one revolution of the star Kolob is equal to one thousand years according to the earth’s reckoning (Abraham 3:4). This is fascinating because it suggests that time can be measured differently depending on where you are. God’s way of measuring time is not the same as ours.
Peter taught something similar in the New Testament:
“One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” (2 Peter 3:8)
Peter wasn’t giving us a mathematical formula. Instead, he was emphasizing that God is not constrained by the clock the way we are. His perspective is eternal.
Some people assume that because eternity has no end, there can be no time. But the scriptures suggest otherwise. Consider what happens after resurrection. We know that people continue to learn, serve, worship, and grow. Temple sealings continue to have an eternal effect. Families continue forever. God’s work of bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of His children continues (see Moses 1:39).
All of those activities involve sequence. One event happens after another. We make choices. We gain experience. We continue to progress. That strongly suggests that some form of time—or at least order and progression—still exists.
President Russell M. Nelson has repeatedly taught that “time is running out” and has called the gathering of Israel the most important work taking place on earth today.
Elder Neal A. Maxwell frequently spoke about eternity and God’s perspective. He explained:
“God does not live in the dimension of time as do we.” (The Pearl of Great Price Student Manual)
Although Elder Maxwell acknowledged that we do not fully understand how God experiences time, he emphasized that God’s eternal perspective is far greater than ours.
One important point to remember is that eternal life does not mean simply existing forever. Eternal life means becoming like our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. That kind of growth implies continual learning and development.
The Lord declared:
“This is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” (Moses 1:39)
Work involves action. Glory involves accomplishment. These ideas suggest movement and progression rather than complete stillness.
Joseph Smith also taught that learning continues beyond this life:
“Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.
And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life… he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.” (Doctrine and Covenants 130:18–19)
This is another indication that life after death is active rather than static. We continue to grow in knowledge and understanding. Growth naturally involves progression from one point to another.
So, will we have calendars, clocks, or twenty-four-hour days in the celestial kingdom? The scriptures simply do not say. Those are mortal ways of measuring time based on the rotation of the earth and the movement of the sun. Since resurrected beings will not be living under the same physical conditions, it seems unlikely that time will be measured exactly as it is now.
Instead, the scriptures seem to point toward something much greater. God’s children will continue to progress, learn, create, and serve in ways that are perfectly ordered according to His eternal purposes. There is a sequence without the pressures of mortality. There is progression without deadlines. There is purpose without decay.
Perhaps the best way to think about it is this: our experience of time will probably change dramatically, but eternity is not described as endless inactivity. Rather, it is described as endless life, endless joy, endless learning, and endless opportunities to become more like our Heavenly Father.
In the end, we simply do not know all the details. The Church has no official doctrine explaining exactly how time functions after this life. What has been revealed is enough for us to know that God lives above the limitations we experience, that He sees all things perfectly, and that His faithful children will continue to progress forever.
That truth is both comforting and exciting. Whatever “time” looks like in eternity, we can trust that Heavenly Father has prepared a future far more wonderful than we can currently imagine.
]]>
Gramps,
In the Book of Luke, it states that “And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.” (Luke 22:43)
From this verse, do we have any clue who the angel is that comforted Jesus Christ in Gethsemane? Thank you for answering my question.
Regards,
Arcee
Arcee,
One of the most moving moments in the New Testament takes place in the Garden of Gethsemane. It was there that Jesus Christ began the infinite and eternal sacrifice that would make salvation possible for every one of God’s children. As He took upon Himself the sins, pains, sorrows, sicknesses, and grief of all mankind, He experienced suffering beyond anything we can truly comprehend. In the middle of Luke’s account, we find a brief statement that has caused many readers to wonder about an intriguing question:
“And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.” (Luke 22:43)
The verse is only a single sentence, yet it naturally leads us to ask: Who was this angel?
The honest answer is that we simply don’t know. Neither the Bible nor modern revelation identifies the angel by name, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has never officially taught who this heavenly messenger was. While there have been various ideas over the years, they remain nothing more than personal opinions because the Lord has not revealed the answer.
Although that may seem a little disappointing, it also teaches us an important principle. Sometimes the scriptures leave out details because they are not the main point of the story. Rather than focusing on the angel’s identity, Luke seems more interested in helping us understand that Heavenly Father did not leave His Beloved Son completely alone during the greatest suffering ever experienced.
The angel’s appearance also reminds us that although Jesus was the Son of God, He was living a fully mortal life. He willingly accepted all the limitations and pains that come with mortality. Luke goes on to describe the intensity of that suffering:
“And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.” (Luke 22:44)
Latter-day Saints understand that Gethsemane was a vital part of the Savior’s Atonement. It was there that He began taking upon Himself everything that would ever afflict the human family. The prophet Alma explained why this was necessary:
“And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind…that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities.” (Alma 7:11-12)
Knowing this makes Luke’s brief comment about the angel even more meaningful. The Father did not remove the suffering or lessen the demands of the Atonement. Jesus still had to drink the bitter cup completely. Instead, Heavenly Father sent divine strength so that His Son could continue to accomplish the mission He had willingly accepted before the foundation of the world.
Naturally, people have wondered who that angel might have been. Some have suggested Gabriel, who was Noah in mortality. Others have wondered if it was Michael, who is Adam, or perhaps another righteous prophet who had already entered the spirit world. Since angels often appear throughout scripture to deliver messages, provide comfort, and strengthen the servants of God, these ideas are understandable. The problem is that the scriptures never identify the angel, and no modern prophet has revealed his identity.
It is certainly interesting to wonder, but it is even more valuable to focus on what the Lord has chosen to teach us through the account.
In fact, Luke’s emphasis seems to be less on who the angel was and more on what the angel did. The angel came to strengthen the Savior. That simple act teaches something beautiful about the character of our Heavenly Father. Even while requiring His Son to complete the infinite Atonement, the Father was fully aware of His suffering. He did not abandon Him. He sent heavenly help at exactly the right moment.
This wasn’t the first time angels had ministered to Jesus during His earthly ministry. After His forty-day fast and temptation in the wilderness, Matthew records:
“Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.” (Matthew 4:11)
Throughout the scriptures, angels are sent to comfort, teach, protect, warn, and strengthen God’s children. Modern revelation confirms that their ministry continues today. Doctrine and Covenants 13:1 teaches that angels are involved in calling people to repentance and helping fulfill the Father’s covenants with His children.
We’ve been told by many of our Church leaders that the Lord has declared that He will have ‘a place prepared’ for His faithful Saints and that angels are engaged in helping accomplish His work.
Someday we may learn the identity of the angel who strengthened Jesus in Gethsemane. Until then, it is enough to know that Heavenly Father was perfectly aware of His Son’s suffering and provided the strength He needed to complete His divine mission.
That same principle offers hope to each of us. There are times when Heavenly Father does not immediately remove our burdens or answer our prayers as we hope. Instead, He often gives us the strength to endure, just as He strengthened His Son. That strength may come through the Holy Ghost, the scriptures, priesthood blessings, loving family members, faithful friends, or quiet spiritual impressions that remind us we are not alone.
The angel in Gethsemane remains unnamed, but his brief appearance points us to something far greater than his identity. It reminds us that heaven is aware of suffering, that God does not forget His children, and that His strength is available precisely when it is needed most. In the end, that message is far more important than knowing the angel’s name.
]]>
Gramps,
I know that children under the age of 8 do not need to be baptized and are saved in the Celestial Kingdom. If a child is baptized at age 8 or older, is the baptism (membership & to follow Jesus) to cleanse any sins after turning 8 that have been committed? It couldn’t be any sins before 8 as those are saved (like I mentioned before).
Robert
Robert,
Baptism is not about washing away sins committed before the age of accountability. Those sins are not counted against them in the first place. Instead, baptism marks the beginning of personal accountability before God. It cleanses sins committed after a person becomes accountable, and it begins a covenant relationship with Jesus Christ that is meant to last a lifetime.
The Lord has revealed that children are not accountable for sin until they reach the age of eight. In modern revelation, He said:
“Little children are redeemed from the foundation of the world through mine Only Begotten.” (Doctrine and Covenants 29:46)
He also declared:
“Children shall be baptized for the remission of their sins when eight years old, and receive the laying on of the hands.” (Doctrine and Covenants 68:27)
At first glance, those two verses might seem difficult to reconcile. If children are already redeemed, why are they baptized “for the remission of their sins” at age eight?
The answer lies in understanding what changes at age eight.
Before that age, children are innocent. They make mistakes, sometimes serious ones, but God does not hold them accountable in the same way He does someone who understands right from wrong. The Prophet Mormon taught this principle very clearly when he wrote to his son Moroni:
“Little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world.”
He went on to explain that it is “solemn mockery before God” to baptize little children because they are already made alive through Christ’s mercy (see Moroni 8:8-12).
In other words, baptism is unnecessary before accountability because there is nothing for which they need remission. Christ’s grace has already covered them completely.
Everything changes when a child reaches the age of accountability.
The age of eight is not considered a magical birthday where a child suddenly becomes perfect at understanding every moral issue. Rather, the Lord has established it as the time when individuals become responsible before Him for their own choices.
From that point forward, when they knowingly choose to do wrong, those sins become their responsibility. Those are the sins that baptism washes away.
So if an eight-year-old has lied, disobeyed, been unkind, or committed other sins after becoming accountable, baptism provides remission of those sins through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Nothing from before accountability needs cleansing because those actions were never charged against them in the first place.
Baptism is also much more than simply having sins forgiven. It is the moment a person formally enters into a covenant with God.
When we are baptized, we promise to take upon ourselves the name of Jesus Christ, keep His commandments, and serve Him throughout our lives. In return, Heavenly Father promises forgiveness, the companionship of the Holy Ghost after confirmation, and continued access to the blessings of Christ’s Atonement as we repent.
King Benjamin beautifully described this covenant when he taught that those who enter it become “the children of Christ” because they have spiritually been born again (see Mosiah 5:7).
That helps explain why even someone who has never committed what we might think of as a “serious” sin still needs baptism. Baptism is not only about erasing the past. It is about beginning a new life as a covenant disciple of Jesus Christ.
President Russell M. Nelson taught:
“Once we make a covenant with God, we leave neutral ground forever.” (The Everlasting Covenant,” General Conference, October 2022)
That statement reminds us that baptism changes our relationship with God. It marks the beginning of covenant discipleship rather than simply providing a one-time cleansing from sin.
Another important principle is that baptism does not eliminate the need for future repentance. Even after baptism, everyone continues to make mistakes. The difference is that we now have access to the covenant path. As we repent sincerely, partake of the sacrament each week, and strive to follow Christ, the cleansing power of His Atonement continues to bless our lives.
The sacrament, in many ways, renews the baptismal covenant we first made. That is why members of the Church partake of the sacrament every Sunday. It allows us to remember the Savior, recommit ourselves to Him, and continue receiving His grace.
This also helps answer another question people sometimes ask. What if someone is baptized at age nine, ten, or even much later in life?
The principle is exactly the same.
Every accountable person is baptized for the remission of sins. For someone baptized later, that includes every sin committed after reaching accountability and before baptism, assuming sincere repentance accompanies that ordinance. Again, nothing before accountability needs to be remitted because Christ had already covered those years.
The Savior Himself provided the perfect example. Although Jesus was completely sinless, He was still baptized. When John the Baptist questioned why the Savior needed baptism, Jesus explained that it was “to fulfil all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15).
If the sinless Son of God chose baptism to show obedience to His Father and establish the pattern for all mankind, then baptism clearly represents much more than simply washing away sins. It is an act of obedience, humility, covenant-making, and discipleship.
So was your understanding correct?
Yes.
Children who die before the age of accountability are saved through the mercy and grace of Jesus Christ. They do not need baptism because they have committed no sins for which they are accountable.
When a child is baptized at age eight or later, the baptism does not remove sins committed before accountability. Those were already covered by the Savior’s Atonement. Instead, baptism brings the remission of any sins committed after reaching the age of accountability and initiates a lifelong covenant relationship with Jesus Christ.
Ultimately, baptism is less about looking backward than looking forward. It marks the moment we willingly choose to follow the Savior, take His name upon us, receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, and begin walking the covenant path that leads back to our Heavenly Father.
That is why the baptism of an eight-year-old is such a joyful occasion. It is not because the child was previously lost and is finally being rescued. Rather, it is because an innocent child is now choosing to become a disciple of Jesus Christ and enter into sacred covenants that, through the Savior’s grace, can eventually lead to eternal life.
]]>
Gramps,
Why do we study the Old Testament?
Karen
Karen,
]]>
Gramps,
Why was section 101 of the original printing of the D&C changed regarding monogamy vs polygamy? Specifically, verse 4, which states that we do not believe in polygamy. Also, why were early church leaders practicing polygamy while our own scripture teaches against it?
Kyle
Kyle,
The first thing to understand is that the original Doctrine and Covenants section 101 is not the same section 101 found in today’s Doctrine and Covenants. In the 1835 edition, section 101 was an “Article on Marriage” that the Church adopted for publication. Unlike most sections of the Doctrine and Covenants, it was not presented as a revelation received by Joseph Smith, but as a statement explaining the Church’s beliefs and practices regarding marriage.
Verse 4 stated:
“Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death…”
At face value, that certainly sounds like an outright rejection of plural marriage.
Readers can examine the original document for themselves in the 1835 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, preserved by the Joseph Smith Papers.
So why was it later removed?
In 1876, under the direction of President Brigham Young, the Doctrine and Covenants was reorganized. The “Article on Marriage” was removed, and the revelation now known as Doctrine and Covenants 132 was added to the canon. Section 132 was dictated by Joseph Smith on July 12, 1843, and records the revelation on eternal marriage and explains the commandment to practice plural marriage under specific circumstances.
This naturally leads to the harder question.
If Joseph Smith had already received the revelation on plural marriage, why publish a statement saying the Church believed only in monogamy?
According to the Church’s official Gospel Topics essay, Joseph Smith appears to have learned about the principle of plural marriage as early as 1831 while studying the Old Testament. However, the revelation was not written down until 1843, and the practice was introduced only gradually and confidentially to a small group of trusted followers. During the 1830s, nearly every Church member was living in a monogamous marriage and knew nothing about plural marriage.
The Church’s Gospel Topics essay explains:
“Latter-day Saints believe that monogamy—the marriage of one man and one woman—is the Lord’s standing law of marriage.“
The essay also acknowledges that plural marriage was introduced gradually and that many details remain uncertain because participants were instructed to keep the practice confidential.
From that perspective, many LDS historians believe that the 1835 marriage statement accurately described the Church’s public practice. The Saints generally were not practicing plural marriage, and Church leaders were also responding to accusations that the Church promoted “spiritual wifery” and sexual immorality—charges they vigorously denied.
At the same time, the historical record creates understandable questions.
Evidence accepted by the Church indicates that Joseph Smith likely entered into at least one plural marriage during the mid-1830s and later introduced the practice more broadly in Nauvoo. If that is the case, then at least some Church leaders were practicing plural marriage while the 1835 marriage statement remained in the Doctrine and Covenants.
For many readers, this is the most difficult part of the story.
Some conclude that the statement appears inconsistent with what was happening privately. Others believe the statement reflected the Church’s public practice, while confidential instructions had been given only to a limited number of people under what Joseph Smith believed was a divine command. The Church acknowledges that many details of this period remain incomplete because the practice was intentionally kept confidential.
It is important to recognize that faithful Latter-day Saint historians do not claim this history is free of difficult questions. Whether one accepts the Church’s explanation or finds some aspects unresolved, there is broad agreement that the transition from the 1835 “Article on Marriage” to Doctrine and Covenants 132 represents one of the most complex periods in Restoration history. Understanding the historical context—including the gradual introduction of plural marriage, the practice’s confidential nature, and the later canonization of Section 132—helps explain why many sincere members have wrestled with these events while continuing to seek understanding through study and faith.
Another important point is that monogamy has always been presented as God’s normal pattern for marriage in LDS doctrine.
This surprises many people.
The clearest example comes from the Book of Mormon.
Jacob taught:
“For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none.” (Jacob 2:27)
Only three verses later, however, the Lord provides an important exception:
“For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.” (Jacob 2:30)
Current Church teaching understands this exception as the scriptural basis for the temporary commandment to practice plural marriage during certain historical periods.
Doctrine and Covenants 132 teaches that Joseph Smith was commanded to restore this ancient practice, much as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and other Old Testament prophets had lived it under God’s direction. Church leaders have consistently taught that plural marriage was never intended to become the permanent pattern for the Church but was a temporary commandment given for purposes known to the Lord.
That period officially ended when President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto in 1890, announcing that the Church would no longer enter into new plural marriages. Today, plural marriage is not authorized in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and anyone who enters into a plural marriage is subject to Church discipline.
So how should Latter-day Saints view the apparent contradiction between the 1835 marriage statement and later revelations?
Many faithful members conclude that the two documents were addressing different situations. The 1835 “Article on Marriage” described the Church’s public practice and was not itself a revelation. Doctrine and Covenants 132, on the other hand, records a revelation that Church leaders believed authorized an exception to the normal rule of monogamy for a limited period under prophetic direction.
Others acknowledge that the historical tension is real and that not every question has a complete answer. The Church itself notes that many details surrounding the early practice of plural marriage remain unknown because the historical record is incomplete.
What is clear today is the Church’s current position. Monogamy is the Lord’s standing law of marriage. Plural marriage was practiced only under what early Church leaders believed was a temporary divine command, and it has not been authorized in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for well over a century. Understanding that distinction helps explain why the 1835 “Article on Marriage” was eventually replaced by Doctrine and Covenants 132, even though the history surrounding that transition continues to invite careful study and thoughtful discussion.
]]>
Gramps,
During his investigation of a church to join and the First Vision as a 14-year-old, Joseph Smith said that “in process of time [his] mind became somewhat partial to the Methodist sect, and [he] felt some desire to be united with them” (Joseph Smith History 1:8). So do the Methodist Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have similarities with each other?
Jacob
Jacob,
The Methodist Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (often called the LDS Church) have very different histories and beliefs, but they also share more in common than many people realize. If you’ve ever wondered whether the two churches are similar, the answer is yes—in some important ways. At the same time, there are also major differences that set them apart.
Understanding both the similarities and differences can help us better appreciate each faith without assuming they teach exactly the same things.
One of the biggest similarities is that both churches teach that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world. Methodists and Latter-day Saints believe that Jesus was born of Mary, lived a perfect life, performed miracles, died for our sins, and rose again on the third day. Both encourage their members to follow Christ’s teachings, love God, serve others, and prepare for eternal life.
Latter-day Saints often point to the Savior’s own invitation:
“Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28)
Likewise, Methodists place Christ at the center of their worship and discipleship.
President Dallin H. Oaks has encouraged Latter-day Saints to treat people of all faiths with kindness and respect while remaining true to their own beliefs. He taught:
“As followers of Christ, let us follow Him by forgoing contention and by using the language and methods of peacemakers.” (Alive in Christ)
That counsel applies well to conversations between Latter-day Saints and Methodists. We can appreciate shared beliefs while respectfully acknowledging our differences.
Both churches emphasize that faith should be more than something practiced on Sunday. Members are encouraged to pray regularly, study the scriptures, attend church, and develop a personal relationship with God.
Latter-day Saints hold family prayer, family scripture study, and home-centered gospel learning as important parts of daily life. Many Methodist families practice similar habits through personal devotion, Bible reading, and prayer.
Both traditions also encourage members to rely on God’s grace as they strive to become better disciples.
Service is another area where the two churches are remarkably similar.
Methodists have long been known for hospitals, schools, disaster relief, and local outreach. Likewise, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints places tremendous emphasis on caring for those in need.
King Benjamin taught:
“When ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God.” (Mosiah 2:17)
Both churches encourage members to volunteer, donate to humanitarian causes, help neighbors, and care for the poor. While the programs may differ, the desire to follow Christ by serving others is shared by both faiths.
Both Methodists and Latter-day Saints teach that families are important and that parents have a responsibility to teach their children about God.
Latter-day Saints place particular emphasis on the eternal nature of families through temple sealings, while Methodists generally believe family relationships continue to have great spiritual significance but do not teach eternal marriage in the same way.
Even though their doctrines differ, both churches encourage strong marriages, loving homes, and raising children with Christian values.
The two churches also share many moral values. Members of both churches are encouraged to live honest, moral, and compassionate lives. They teach forgiveness, kindness, integrity, sexual purity, and caring for others.
Latter-day Saints follow the Word of Wisdom, which includes abstaining from alcohol, tobacco, coffee, tea, and harmful drugs. Most Methodist congregations do not prohibit alcohol in the same way, although many encourage moderation or abstinence depending on local traditions.
Despite these differences, both churches encourage members to make choices that honor God and bless their families.
While there are many similarities, there are also significant doctrinal differences.
Perhaps the biggest difference is authority.
Latter-day Saints believe that after the deaths of the original apostles, priesthood authority was lost from the earth during what they call the Great Apostasy. They believe Jesus Christ restored His original Church through the Prophet Joseph Smith, including priesthood authority, apostles, prophets, and additional scripture.
The Church explains this belief by saying:
“Members believe The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a restoration of the Church originally established by Jesus Christ during His mortal lifetime. Part of that restoration includes living prophets and apostles.”
Methodists do not share this belief. They see themselves as part of the broader Christian tradition that has continued from the time of Christ without the need for a complete restoration.
Another major difference involves scripture.
Methodists generally use the Bible alone as their scriptural authority.
Latter-day Saints accept the Bible but also believe God has revealed additional scripture through the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.
The two churches also differ in their understanding of God.
Methodists generally teach the traditional doctrine of the Trinity—that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God in three persons.
Latter-day Saints believe that Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct divine beings who are perfectly united in purpose and will. This understanding comes from modern revelation as well as from passages such as the Savior’s baptism, in which the Father speaks from heaven while the Holy Ghost descends like a dove (Matthew 3:16–17).
Methodist churches do not have temples like those found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
For Latter-day Saints, temples are sacred houses of the Lord where members participate in ordinances such as eternal marriage, proxy baptisms for deceased ancestors, and other sacred covenants. Weekly worship services, however, are held in meetinghouses rather than temples.
Methodism began in the 1700s through the ministry of John Wesley, who sought to renew spiritual commitment within the Church of England. Over time, Methodism became its own Christian denomination with congregations around the world.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized in 1830, following Joseph Smith’s testimony that Jesus Christ had restored His original Church through modern revelation.
Although the two movements developed independently, both began during periods of religious revival and emphasized sincere personal conversion and devoted Christian living.
President Dallin H. Oaks once observed that followers of Christ should strive for “cooperation and mutual respect” with those of other faiths while remaining faithful to the revealed truth. That perspective reflects the Church’s approach to interfaith relationships today.
So, Are They Similar?
From an LDS perspective, the Methodist Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints share many Christian values. Both encourage faith in Jesus Christ, prayer, scripture study, repentance, service, moral living, and strong families. Members of both churches strive to become better disciples and to bless the lives of those around them.
At the same time, Latter-day Saints recognize important doctrinal differences involving priesthood authority, modern prophets, additional scripture, temples, and the nature of God. These beliefs are foundational to the restored gospel and distinguish The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from Methodism and other Christian denominations.
In the end, the similarities are meaningful because they reflect a shared desire to follow Jesus Christ. The differences are equally important because they shape how each church understands God’s plan, His authority, and the way He continues to guide His children. Recognizing both allows for respectful conversations and greater appreciation of the sincere faith found in both traditions.
]]>
Gramps,
Will black people become white when they reach heaven, or after the resurrection?
Michele
Michele,
I will admit that I was quite taken aback and felt a slight cringe at the question. I will attempt to answer it in the same spirit in which I am hoping it was asked.
According to the current doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, there is no teaching that a person’s race or skin color changes after death, at the resurrection, or in the celestial kingdom.
So where did this idea come from? Like many misconceptions, it has a complicated history involving scripture, speculation, and statements by some past Church leaders. Understanding the difference between official doctrine and historical opinions helps answer the question clearly.
The Church teaches that every person is a beloved child of Heavenly Parents. Our eternal worth has never depended on race, skin color, nationality, or ethnicity. President Russell M. Nelson taught:
“The Creator of us all calls on each of us to abandon attitudes of prejudice against any group of God’s children.”
That message reflects the Church’s current and consistent teaching that all people are equal before God.
One reason people ask this question is that passages in the Book of Mormon mention skin color. For example, 2 Nephi 5 describes the Lamanites receiving “a skin of blackness,” while 3 Nephi 2 later says that some Lamanites became “white.” For many years, some members assumed these verses referred to literal skin color and even believed they suggested that righteous people would eventually become physically white.
However, today’s Church does not teach that interpretation as doctrine.
Earlier editions of the Book of Mormon described the Lamanites as becoming “a white and delightsome people.” It currently says they became “a pure and delightsome people.” That wording matches 2 Nephi 30:6.
Many Latter-day Saint scholars also point out that scripture frequently uses colors symbolically. Throughout the Bible, words like white, black, light, and darkness often represent purity, holiness, sin, knowledge, or spiritual conditions rather than literal skin color. While faithful Latter-day Saints may disagree about every detail of these passages, there is no official doctrine teaching that exalted people undergo a racial transformation.
Another reason for the confusion is that some Church leaders in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries expressed opinions linking righteousness to lighter skin. Those statements reflected assumptions that were common in American society at the time. While those leaders sincerely believed what they taught, the Church has made it clear that not every statement by a Church leader constitutes official doctrine.
In 2013, the Church published the Gospel Topics essay Race and the Priesthood, which directly addressed these historical ideas. The essay states:
“Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse… or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else.”
That statement is significant because it officially rejects theories that associate skin color with righteousness or divine favor.
The Church’s teachings about the Resurrection also give us no reason to believe that race will disappear. The Resurrection restores our bodies to a perfected, immortal condition. Alma taught that “all things shall be restored to their proper and perfect frame” (Alma 40:23). The scriptures describe resurrected bodies as being immortal, free from disease, pain, and death, but they never say that God changes someone’s ethnicity or racial characteristics.
President Joseph Fielding Smith explained that the Resurrection restores the body in a perfected condition. Perfection refers to freedom from death, disease, and corruption—not to conforming everyone to one physical appearance.
In fact, the restored gospel celebrates diversity rather than eliminating it. John saw in a vision that people from “all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues” would stand before God (Revelation 7:9). Nothing in that description suggests that those differences will disappear in eternity. Instead, it emphasizes that God’s family includes people from every background.
Perhaps the strongest scriptural statement comes from the Book of Mormon itself:
“The Lord denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female… and all are alike unto God.” (2 Nephi 26:33)
This verse does not promise that people become physically alike. Instead, it teaches that they are already equal in God’s eyes. Our value has never depended on the color of our skin.
When we think about eternal life, the scriptures focus on something far more important than appearance. They teach that our hearts, our covenants, and our relationship with Jesus Christ determine our eternal destiny. The Resurrection removes the effects of death. The Atonement of Jesus Christ makes it possible for us to become spiritually clean. Exaltation changes our nature through Christ, not our race.
So, will black people become white in heaven or after the Resurrection?
According to the doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the answer is no. There is no official teaching that race or skin color changes in eternity. Historical statements suggesting otherwise are not part of the Church’s current doctrine and have been specifically rejected when based on theories of racial superiority or divine disfavor.
The restored gospel teaches something much more beautiful. Every person—regardless of race or ethnicity—is literally a child of God with infinite worth. Through Jesus Christ, we are invited to become pure, holy, and like our Heavenly Father. That transformation is spiritual, not racial.
In the end, heaven is not about everyone looking the same. It is about everyone becoming one in Christ while retaining the eternal identity God has given each of His children.
]]>
Gramps,
What happened to the fish and sea creatures during the flood? Noah doesn’t mention them. Do we just assume they survived because they were in the water?
Peggy
Peggy,
Latter-day Saint doctrine doesn’t provide an official answer about what happened to aquatic life during the Flood. However, the scriptures and teachings of Church leaders offer a few principles to help us consider the question.
The first thing to notice is that God’s instructions to Noah focused on air-breathing land animals. The Lord said:
“And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark” (Genesis 6:19).
As you continue reading the account, the emphasis is consistently on creatures that lived on land and breathed air. Birds, cattle, creeping things, and beasts were gathered into the ark because they could not survive a worldwide flood outside of it.
The account never instructs Noah to collect fish or other aquatic creatures. That’s an important observation because if preserving sea life had required Noah’s intervention, we would likely expect the Lord to mention it.
Some readers, therefore, conclude that fish and other sea creatures simply survived in the water. That is certainly one possibility. Since they already lived in aquatic environments, many assume they would not have needed the protection of the ark.
However, the scriptures stop short of actually saying that.
In fact, some passages describing the Flood use language that focuses specifically on creatures that lived on land. For example, Genesis 7:22 says:
“All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.”
That wording seems intentional. It highlights the destruction of terrestrial life rather than providing a detailed account of every creature living in the oceans.
Latter-day Saints also accept the account in the Book of Moses, which similarly emphasizes that the wicked people and the creatures living upon the earth perished while Noah and those with him in the ark were preserved. (Noah Gospel Topics)
Could some aquatic life have died during the Flood? Certainly. Even if fish were not required to enter the ark, the Flood would have dramatically changed the earth. Freshwater and saltwater environments could have been affected, sediment stirred up, and many aquatic habitats altered. The scriptures simply don’t tell us how those environmental changes affected marine life.
Because of that silence, it is wise not to claim more certainty than the scriptures provide.
There is another principle from restored doctrine that offers some comfort, however. Latter-day Saints believe that God’s concern extends to all of His creations, not just human beings.
Doctrine and Covenants 29:24 teaches:
“All things shall become new, even the heaven and the earth, and all the fullness thereof, both men and beasts, the fowls of the air, and the fishes of the sea.”
This remarkable passage specifically mentions the fishes of the sea as part of God’s future renewal of the earth.
President Joseph Fielding Smith taught:
“The animals, the fishes of the sea, the fowls of the air, as well as man, are to be re-created, or renewed, through the resurrection, for they too are living souls.” (Conference Report, October 1928, p. 100.)
He also wrote:
“Every creature on the earth, whether it be man, animal, fish, fowl, or other creature, that the Lord has created, is redeemed from death on the same terms that man is redeemed.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol. 2, pp. 48–51.)
Those statements are significant because they remind us that fish are not an afterthought in God’s plan. They are part of His creations and, according to President Smith, are included in the redemption of the earth.
The Prophet Joseph Smith also taught that animals have spirits and are part of God’s eternal creations. Speaking about John’s vision in Revelation, he said:
“John heard the words of the beasts giving glory to God, and understood them.”
He continued by explaining that God glorifies Himself in saving the creations He has made, including beasts, birds, fish, and mankind. (History of the Church, 5:343–344)
These teachings don’t answer exactly what happened during the Flood, but they do show that Heavenly Father cares about aquatic creatures.
Some Latter-day Saints have also connected the Flood with the symbolic cleansing or “baptism” of the earth. Elder Bruce R. McConkie wrote:
“In the days of Noah the Lord sent a universal flood which completely immersed the whole earth and destroyed all flesh except that preserved on the ark. … This flood was the baptism of the earth.” (Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed., “Flood of Noah.”)
Whether one accepts every aspect of that interpretation or not, it still doesn’t answer the question of individual fish species. The purpose of those teachings is to emphasize the cleansing of the earth rather than explain marine biology.
So where does that leave us?
The honest answer is that we simply don’t know exactly what happened to every fish and sea creature during Noah’s Flood.
Sometimes the most faithful answer is also the simplest one: the Lord chose not to reveal every detail. The scriptures tell us what we need to know to understand Noah’s faith, God’s justice, His mercy in preserving life, and His covenant with humanity afterward. Questions about the fish are interesting, but they aren’t central to the message of the Flood.
So yes, it’s reasonable to assume many aquatic creatures survived because they lived in the water. Just remember that this is an inference—not an official doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Where revelation is silent, it’s usually best for us to be silent too.
]]>
Gramps,
Abraham was told he was among the noble. Who are the noble spirits? How do we know if we are among the noble?
Shasta
Shasta,
One of the most fascinating passages in scripture is found in the Book of Abraham. Before Abraham was born, the Lord showed him a vision of the premortal life. In that vision, Abraham saw countless spirits and learned something remarkable about some of them.
The Lord said:
22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;
23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born. (Abraham 3:22-23)
This raises two common questions. Who are these “noble and great ones”? And how do we know if we are among them?
The scriptures teach that the “noble and great ones” were spirits who distinguished themselves in the premortal life. Although we are not told exactly what made them noble, they had demonstrated faithfulness and righteousness before coming to earth. Because of that faithfulness, some were foreordained to fulfill important responsibilities during mortality.
Abraham was one of them. The prophet Jeremiah was another. The Lord told Jeremiah:
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. (Jeremiah 1:5)
Neither Abraham nor Jeremiah was guaranteed success simply because they were foreordained. They still had to exercise faith, repent, and remain true throughout their lives.
The Prophet Joseph Smith taught:
“Every man who has a calling to minister to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the Grand Council of heaven before this world was.” (History of the Church, 6:364; also published in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 365.)
The restored gospel makes an important distinction between foreordination and predestination. Foreordination is an opportunity—not a guarantee.
That means Abraham still had to choose faithfulness throughout his life. The same is true for every one of us.
Elder Steven R. Bangerter taught during the April 2024 General Conference:
“Foreordination does not guarantee that you will receive certain callings or responsibilities. These blessings and opportunities come in this life as a result of your righteous exercise of agency, just as your foreordination in your premortal life came as a result of righteousness.” (Foreordained to Serve)
The Church also reminds us:
“The doctrine of foreordination applies to all members of the Church, not just to the Savior and His prophets.”
That means every disciple of Jesus Christ came to earth with divine gifts, opportunities, and a purpose. While our foreordination may differ from person to person, each of us has been given opportunities to help build the Lord’s kingdom.
So how do we know if we were among the “noble and great ones”? The honest answer is that most of us simply do not know.
The Lord revealed Abraham’s premortal identity because it was directly connected to his mission. Jeremiah received a similar revelation because it related to his prophetic calling.
For most members of the Church, the Lord has not revealed whether they were specifically among those described in Abraham’s vision.
Some patriarchal blessings mention premortal faithfulness or foreordination, while many do not. A patriarchal blessing is personal revelation, but it is not intended to tell us everything about our premortal life.
The good news is that the Lord can help us understand His purposes for us. Elder Steven R. Bangerter taught:
“As you seek to know and do the will of God, He will reveal your divine potential and the work He would have you do.”
That doesn’t necessarily mean the Lord will tell us whether we were specifically among the “noble and great ones.” More often than not, He reveals what we need to know as we faithfully seek His guidance. Through personal revelation, our patriarchal blessings, the gift of the Holy Ghost, and opportunities to serve, He gradually helps us discover our divine identity and purpose.
Doctrine and Covenants 121:34 reminds us:
Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen.
Every one of us has agency. Every one of us must choose whether to follow Jesus Christ regardless of what opportunities may have been prepared for us before birth.
Elder Bangerter also quoted President Russell M. Nelson, who said to the youth of the Church:
“Our Heavenly Father has reserved many of His most noble spirits—perhaps, I might say, His finest team—for this final phase. Those noble spirits, those finest players, those heroes, are you.” (Worldwide Youth Devotional, “Hope of Israel,” June 3, 2018)
President Nelson’s statement was intended to inspire Latter-day Saints to recognize the sacred privilege and responsibility of living during the gathering of Israel. While it suggests that many faithful spirits have been reserved for the latter days, it does not mean we should speculate about our premortal status or compare ourselves with others. Instead, it should motivate us to live in a way worthy of the opportunities the Lord has given us.
President Russell M. Nelson has also taught:
“The Lord loves effort because effort brings rewards that can’t come without it.” (Accomplishing the Impossible: What God Does, What We Can Do)
Whether we were among the noble and great ones in Abraham’s vision is far less important than whether we are striving to become noble disciples of Jesus Christ today.
Every day we keep our covenants, repent, serve others, study the scriptures, and follow the Savior, we are becoming the kind of sons and daughters our Heavenly Father desires us to become.
One day, perhaps after this life, we may learn more about our premortal experiences. Until then, the Lord has given us everything we need to know. He knows us. He loves us. He prepared us for mortality, and He invites each of us to fulfill our divine potential.
In the end, the best evidence that we have a noble heritage is not that someone tells us we were noble before birth. It is that we faithfully choose Jesus Christ today.
That is what truly makes a person noble.
]]>