Cover image: Joseph Brickey (1973–): Lehi Studying the Brass Plates, 2005.

This article is adapted from Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Freemasonry and the Origins of Latter-day Saints Temple Ordinances. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2022. Available at Eborn Books, FAIR Bookstore, and other Latter-day Saint booksellers—and online at

Joseph Smith’s prophetic gifts enabled him to reveal things that were both old (that is, rooted in antiquity) and new (that is, newly revealed). As one of many examples of such revelations having to do with the temple, we will now examine 2 Nephi 31–32, where Nephi provides “a few words … concerning the doctrine of Christ.”[1] 2 Nephi 31–32 is part of a set of significant scriptural passages in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon that describes the intimate relationship of the doctrine of Christ to the virtues of faith, hope, and charity (expressed, in this case, using the word “love”). These chapters and related passages are discussed more extensively elsewhere.[2]

In this article we will see how, in 2 Nephi 31–32, the relationship between the doctrine of Christ and faith, hope, and love is defined as a progression that successively highlights the different areas of the temple in which the ordinances and covenants relating to the three principal rounds of the ladder of heavenly ascent[3] are introduced: faith leads to justification through repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost in the temple courtyard; hope leads to sanctification,[4] symbolized by, among other things, the illumination of the menorah in the Holy Place; and love qualifies the disciple for the presence of God in the Holy of Holies and, eventually, exaltation. Note that faith, hope, and love are similarly highlighted in an exhortation to disciples to approach the temple veil in the book of Hebrews.[5]

Adapted from Michael P. Lyon (1952–2022): Sacred Topography of Eden and the Temple, 1994.[6] The outbound journey of the Creation and the Fall at left is mirrored in the inbound journey of the temple at right. Each major feature of Eden (that is, the river, the cherubim, the tree of knowledge,[7] the tree of life) corresponds to a symbol in the Israelite temple (that is, the bronze laver, the cherubim, the veil, the menorah). Likewise, the high priest is “cultic Adam.”[8]

The Path of the Aaronic High Priest Through the Israelite Temple

To grasp the gist of Nephi’s teachings, we need to understand that the course taken by the Israelite high priest through the temple symbolized the journey of the Fall of Adam and Eve in reverse. Specifically, as BYU professor Donald W. Parry has observed, just as the route of Adam and Eve’s departure from Eden led them eastward past the cherubim with the flaming swords and out of the sacred garden into the mortal world, so in ancient times the high priest would return westward, that is, from the mortal world, past the consuming fire, the cleansing water, the woven images of cherubim on the temple veils, and, finally, back into the presence of God.[9] “Thus,” according to Parry, the Israelite high priest has returned “to the original point of creation, where he pours out the atoning blood of the sacrifice, reestablishing the covenant relationship with God.”[10]

Importantly, the invariant sequence in which different ordinances were performed in Israelite temples was generally similar to the stages of the modern endowment that take place after the narrative of the Fall. As we read in the Latter-day Saint Bible Dictionary:[11]

It is noteworthy that when the three offerings were offered together, the sin always preceded the burnt, and the burnt the peace offerings. Thus, the order of the symbolizing sacrifices was the order of atonement [justification], sanctification [culminating in complete consecration], and fellowship with the Lord [exaltation].

Distinctive Features in Melchizedek Priesthood Rites of Nephite Temples?

Some Book of Mormon scholars believe that Nephite temple activities would have not only included the Aaronic priesthood ordinances of sacrifice just described, but also rites analogous to those originally associated with Israelite royal priesthood “after the order of Melchizedek.”[12] These Melchizedek priesthood rites seem to have enriched the Aaronic priesthood ordinances in at least three ways:

  1. Two-way vs. one-way temple journey
  2. Melchizedek priesthood investiture and “second sacrifice” at the altar of incense
  3. Meeting the Lord at the veil

1. Two-Way vs. One-Way Temple Journey. While the Aaronic high priest in later Israelite temples is depicted as moving only in an inbound direction toward the holy of holies, it might be presumed that Nephite temples included an outbound journey as well. For example, in line with Parry’s proposal that Israelite high priest’s westward journey of atonement represents a reversal of the Fall of Adam and Eve is evidence from elsewhere in antiquity that a story of Creation and of the victory of the god over primordial adversaries (an analogue to the story of the Fall) were standard elements of temple ritual.[13]

Consistent with this idea, both Latter-day Saint and non-Latter-day Saint scholars have proposed that the creation account of Genesis 1 may have been used within Israelite temple ceremonies.[14] Going further, Louis Ginzberg has reconstructed ancient Jewish sources to argue that the results of each day of Creation are symbolically reflected in temple furnishings.[15] From this perspective, when God finished the Creation, what came of it was an earthly temple that was laid out and furnished in symbolic likeness to the heavenly temple. That earthly temple, the result of Creation, was none other than “Eden.” Its Holies of Holies was the celestial top of the figurative mountain of God, and its Holy Place was a Garden of terrestrial glory located on its “eastern” slope.

Carrying this idea forward to a later time, Exodus 40:33 describes how Moses completed the Tabernacle. The Hebrew text exactly parallels the account of how God finished creation.[16] Genesis Rabbah comments on the significance of this parallel: “It is as if, on that day [that is, the day the Tabernacle was raised in the wilderness], I actually created the world.”[17] With this idea in mind, Hugh Nibley famously called the temple “a scale-model of the universe,”[18] a place for taking bearings on the cosmos and finding one’s place within it.

The idea that the process of creation provides a model for subsequent temple building and ritual[19] is found elsewhere in the ancient Near East. For example, this is made explicit in Nibley’s reading of the first, second, and sixth lines of the Babylonian creation story, Enuma Elish: “At once above when the heavens had not yet received their name and the earth below was not yet named. … The most inner sanctuary of the temple … had not yet been built.”[20] Consistent with this reading, the account goes on to tell how the god Ea founded his sanctuary (1:77),[21] after having “established his dwelling” (1:71, an analogue to the Creation account), “vanquished and trodden down his foes” (1:73, an analogue to God’s victory over the devilish serpent after the Fall of Adam and Eve[22]), and “rested” in his “sacred chamber” (1:75, an analogue to the Sabbath).

In the modern endowment—as also, it seems, in Nephite and early Christian equivalents of the temple ordinances—an explicit retelling of the Fall of Adam and Eve was the natural follow-on to the narrative of Creation. One purpose of relating the events of the Fall in modern temple ordinances is to make clear the absolute necessity of the later rites of atonement and investiture that are part of the bestowal of the fulness of the Melchizedek priesthood. However, even in the truncated Aaronic-priesthood version of the Israelite temple rites, the story of Adam and Eve seems to have implicitly informed the understanding of temple worshipers in ancient Israel.

For example, agreeing with Donald Parry’s proposal that Israelite temple rites were a reflection and reversal of the Fall, Leviticus scholar L. Michael Morales sees the Day of Atonement as an event that, for the children of Israel, “called upon both memory and faith: memory, a looking back to the first Adam’s failure and expulsion from divine Presence in Eden; faith, a looking forward to the remedy for that expulsion.”[23]

Layout of the Salt Lake Temple and Israelite Temples.[24] In some temples, the cardinal directions are represented figuratively rather than literally. Concept adapted from Nathan Richardson.

Conjectural Layout of Nephite Temples Showing Outbound and Inbound Directions. Nephite temples seem to have differed from Israelite temples in their: 1. two-way journey; 2. Melchizedek priesthood investiture; 3. meeting at the veil.

While the Old Testament description of the Day of Atonement depicts a one-way journey by priests into the temple, the (older) text of the Book of Mormon hints that the Melchizedek priesthood ordinances of the Nephites could have mirrored in a general way the two-way journey of modern temple worshipers. The figure above makes it clear how some early Latter-day Saint temples both reflected and adapted the overall layout of Israelite temples. In these temples, the areas representing “celestial”[25] (Holy of Holies) and “terrestrial”[26] (Holy Place) realms of sacredness of the endowment were doubled, as it were, to facilitate both the downward, “outward bound” journey of Adam and Eve from the Creation room to the Garden room (celestial to terrestrial) and their upward, “inward bound” return to the presence of God (terrestrial to celestial).

The second figure above shows how a “two-way” temple journey in Nephite temples—outward-bound followed by inward-bound—could have been accommodated without requiring a doubling of sacred spaces. In trying to imagine such a scenario, Latter-day Saint scholar David Calabro has argued, speculatively, that specific narrative features of Moses 2–6 could have been linked to architectural features of Solomon’s temple (or, for that matter, Nephite temples) in ways that reflect its relevance to the outward-bound sequence of the endowment.[27] In this conception, something like an earlier version of Moses 2–4, a narrative relating the Creation and the Fall, would have been dramatized as part of an outward-bound progression within the temple. Likewise, something like an earlier version of Moses 5 could have been staged near the altar of sacrifice, and Moses 6 near the laver. Going further, although Calabro did not explicitly discuss the possibility, it could be easily imagined that an older text roughly analogous to Moses 7 could have been used after that point to accompany the culminating inward-bound endowment sequence.[28]

The journey of the inward-bound sequence would have begun with faith and repentance (symbolized at the altar of sacrifice) and baptism (symbolized by the laver). This prepared worshipers who had been thus justified to enter the temple through its first curtain or “gate.” As they approached the veil by traversing the Holy Place, they would have encountered symbols of sanctification in the light of the lampstand, the temple shewbread, and the incense altar. Finally, having consecrated their all and called upon the Lord in prayer, worshipers would have been prepared to figuratively enter the presence of the Lord and continue their ritual preparations for exaltation.

2. Melchizedek Priesthood Investiture and “Second Sacrifice” at the Altar of Incense. While the initial blessing of justification comes exclusively by means of a substitutionary offering on the altar of sacrifice in the temple courtyard—“relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save”[29] —the culminating step of the process of sanctification in Melchizedek priesthood temple rites can be viewed as a joint effort,[30] symbolized by a “second sacrifice”[31] made on the altar of incense that stands before the veil. While that second sacrifice in modern temples is no less dependent on the “merits, and mercy, and grace”[32] of Christ and the ongoing endowment of His strengthening power, it requires in addition that individuals grow in their capacity to meet the stringent measure of self-sacrifice[33] enjoined by the law of consecration as exemplified by Nephi and his companions in their soul-saving labor on behalf of their “children” and “brethren”—“for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.”[34]

3. Meeting the Lord at the Veil. In Hugh Nibley’s interpretation of the Septuagint version of Exodus 29:42, the Lord promises that at the tent of meeting: “I shall make myself known to you that I might converse with you.”[35] However, as part of the general withdrawal of the Melchizedek priesthood ordinances from Israelite temples that is documented in ancient sources and modern revelation,[36] there was a loss of narrative, signs, and tokens relating to the higher priesthood that included the final atoning rites at the veil. According to Nibley, “the loss of the old ceremonies occurred shortly after Lehi left Jerusalem” and “the ordinances of atonement were, after Lehi’s day, supplanted by allegory.”[37] By way of contrast, in describing the temples that the Nephites built “after the manner of the temple of Solomon,”[38] Nibley wrote:[39]

Let us recall that Lehi and his people who left Jerusalem in the very last days of Solomon’s temple were zealous in erecting altars of sacrifice and building temples of their own. It has often been claimed that the Book of Mormon cannot contain the “fulness of the gospel,” since it does not have temple ordinances. As a matter of fact, they are everywhere in the book if we know where to look for them, and the dozen or so discourses on the Atonement in the Book of Mormon are replete with temple imagery.

From all the meanings of kaphar and kippurim[40] [Hebrew words relating to the atonement in Israelite temples] we concluded that the literal meaning of kaphar and kippurim is a close and intimate embrace, which took place at the kapporeth or the front cover or flap of the Tabernacle or tent [“later the veil of the temple”[41]].[42] The Book of Mormon instances are quite clear, for example, “Behold, he sendeth an invitation unto all men, for the arms of mercy are extended towards them, and he saith: Repent, and I will receive you.”[43] “But behold the Lord hath redeemed my soul from hell; I have beheld his glory, and I am encircled eternally in the arms of his love.”[44] To be redeemed is to be atoned. From this it should be clear what kind of oneness is meant by the Atonement—it is being received in a close embrace of the prodigal son, expressing not only forgiveness but oneness of heart and mind that amounts to identity.

Pompeo Batoni (1708-1787): The Return of the Prodigal Son, 1773.[45]

Nephi’s poignant de profundis psalm is rich with imagery that alludes to the temple scene described by Nibley above. At its climax, he cries: “O Lord, wilt thou encircle me around in the robe of thy righteousness!”[46] In his plea for deliverance, Nephi drew on the culture of the desert. Fleeing to the tent of a sheikh who will defend him against his enemies, the weary fugitive humbly kneels and tells his would be protector, “I am your suppliant.” Honor impels the sheikh to put the hem of his great hooded robe over the suppliant’s shoulder with a promise of protection, “This is your tent, this is your family. We’ll make a place for you.”[47]

Taken together, the scant, allusive, but suggestive evidence in the Book of Mormon[48] and the book of Hebrews[49] seem to confirm Nibley’s description of the older culminating rites of the Melchizedek Priesthood at the veil that symbolized sanctification through the once-and-for-all atonement of Jesus Christ rather than through the annual Day of Atonement rites of the Aaronic priesthood that were performed at the mercy seat. Similar ordinances constitute the ultimate symbolism of atonement we encounter in the culminating rites of the modern temple endowment as well as in some ancient Near East kingship ceremonies that go back four millennia.[50]

The relevant imagery in Hebrews 6:18-20, which suggests a literal encounter between the initiate and the Lord at the veil, should also be noted:[51]

Here, then, are two irrevocable acts … to give powerful encouragement to us, who have claimed his protection by grasping the hope set before us. That hope we hold. It is like an anchor for our lives, an anchor safe and sure. It enters in through the veil, where Jesus has entered on our behalf as a forerunner, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.

The terse prose of this verse bears some unpacking, in which we will draw largely on commentary from non-Latter-day Saint scholars. Anticipating the blessings described in the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood,[52] the author of Hebrews assures the Saints of the firmness and unchangeableness of God’s promises. The “two irrevocable acts” mentioned are “God’s promise and the oath by which He guarantees that promise,”[53] the latter constituting the means by which one’s calling and election is made “sure.”

In reading verses 18–20, we are meant to understand that so long as we hold fast to the Redeemer, who has entered “through the veil on our behalf … as a forerunner,” we will remain firmly anchored to our heavenly home, and the eventual realization of the promise “that where I am, there ye may be also.”[54] Undoubtedly, there is also the sense that “Jesus, the high priest, [stands] behind the veil in the Holy of Holies to assist those who [pass] through.”[55] “The anchor would thus constitute the link that ‘extends’ or ‘reaches’ to the safe harbor of the divine realms … providing a means of access by its entry into God’s presence.”[56] As Jesus was “exalted” … above the entire created order—to the heavenly throne at God’s right hand,” so “humanity will be elevated to the pinnacle of the created order”[57] as sons and daughters of God.[58] And as the Son received “all the glory of Adam,”[59] so “his followers will also inherit this promise if they endure … testing.”[60]

Correlation of Faith, Hope, and Love in 2 Nephi 31:19–20 to the Different Areas of the Temple.

Nephi’s Description of the Inbound Temple Journey

Now let’s return to Nephi’s teachings. For brevity’s sake, we’ll focus only on two verses from the longer passage: 2 Nephi 31:19–20. In prior verses, Nephi has already exhorted his readers to “follow the Son, with full purpose of heart”[61] and to enter the gate of “repentance and baptism by water.”[62] The altar of sacrifice and the laver that sit in the courtyard, outside the temple door, evoke these two themes. Nephi teaches that baptism, in turn, prepares his readers to receive “a remission of … sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost.”[63] Then, Nephi weaves the single mention of faith, hope, and love within these chapters into a masterful description of the culminating sequence of the pathway to eternal life that leads through the ancient temple (please refer to the numbered annotations in the figure above):

  1. Nephi begins with a description of the “gate of baptism” that most of his readers have probably already entered. They have “come thus far” through “unshaken faith” in Christ, being justified through “relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save.” The gate of baptism (1), the last requirement governing entrance through the temple door, brings us out of the telestial world[64] and into the terrestrial glory that fills the Holy Place of the temple.
  2. Nephi says that we must “press forward” (2)—which evidently means that we are to advance steadfastly along the high priestly way of the Holy Place toward greater light and knowledge.
  3. The lamp in the Holy Place symbolizes our quest to attain a “perfect brightness of hope” (3).
  4. Faithfulness to the last and most difficult law of consecration, symbolized by the incense offering at the altar in front of the second veil,[65] requires the development of charity, “a love of God and of all men” (4).
  5. The complete sanctification that is required of all who would enter the kingdom of heaven requires “feasting upon the word of Christ” and is symbolized by the temple shewbread (5).
  6. In scripture, “the end” (6) usually refers to the end of one’s probation, the moment when Saints will have been prepared to meet God at the veil.[66]

    a. Greek Orthodox Icon Depicting the Ladder of Virtues[67]; b. The Woman at the Tomb and the Ascension, ca. 400[68]; c. Anastasis, Daphni Monastery, near Athens, Greece, ca. 1080–1100.[69] These mutually illuminating images shed light on the significance of Christian conceptions of the culminating step of ritual ascent and its counterpart in actual heavenly ascent. In many depictions of the ladder of virtues, Christ is positioned at the top of the ladder taking the ascending disciple by the wrist (a). A similar gesture is shown in (b), where Christ is welcomed to heaven after His ascension. In describing (c), Nicoletta Isar brilliantly concludes that the gesture of the hand of Christ grasping the wrist of Adam, “an anchor…sure and stedfast”[70] that binds them together in unbreakable fashion, represents not only the “meeting ground of both life and death,” but also serves as a “visual metaphor of the … nuptial bond,”[71] an equally indissoluble union, “the conjugal harness by which both parts are yoked together.”[72] This metaphor is visually highlighted by the stigma on the hand of the Savior that is carefully positioned at the center of the image to overlay both the cross of Christ and the wrist of Adam.[73]
  7. In a divine, face-to-face encounter at the heavenly veil, those who have endured faithfully to the end of their probation will receive the sure oath of the Father: “Ye shall have eternal life” (7). An essay analyzing Joseph Smith’s 21 May 1843 discourse on 2 Peter 1—the context in which the Prophet’s mention of the three principal rounds of Jacob’s ladder appeared—identifies the oath described in 2 Nephi 31:20 (“Ye shall have eternal life”; compare Psalm 110:4[74]) as the “more sure word of prophecy” (defined in the discourse as being “the voice of Jesus saying my beloved thou shalt have eternal life”; see also chapter 12).[75] By equating these concepts, the teachings of Joseph Smith confirm that not only sacred gestures (such as those shown in figures 5-3 and 5-4 and also described in Hebrews 6:18–20[76]) but also sacred words are exchanged at the top of the ladder of exaltation. Thus, the Prophet endowed ritual teachings of temple ordinances with literal significance in the context of actual heavenly ascent.[77] With the ritual atonement being symbolically represented at the veil rather than in the Holy of Holies, the symbolism of the celestial room of modern temples is transformed from the solemn, solitary locus of annually repeated atoning ritual described in the Old Testament into a joyful meeting place that represents eternal “fellowship with the Lord.”[78]


In this article, we see again how the basic curriculum of Creation, Fall, and Atonement is beautifully echoed in the Book of Mormon and modern temples. These passages also highlight how the inbound covenant path emphasizes the three stages of justification, sanctification, and exaltation and are accompanied by the companion virtues of faith, hope, and charity. Our personal temple worship will be enriched as we contemplate how these three conceptual and experiential triads relate our temple journey along the covenant path to our journey through mortality.


al-Khalesi, Yasin M. The Court of the Palms: A Functional Interpretation of the Mari Palace. Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 8, ed. Giorgio Buccellati. Malibu, CA: Undena Publications, 1978.

Alexander, T. Desmond. From Eden to the New Jerusalem: An Introduction to Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2008.

Attridge, Harold W., and Helmut Koester, eds. Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hermeneia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible, ed. Frank Moore Cross, Klaus Baltzer, Paul D. Hanson, S. Dean McBride, Jr. and Roland E. Murphy. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1989.

Barker, Margaret. The Risen Lord: The Jesus of History as the Christ of Faith. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996.

Barney, Kevin L., ed. Footnotes to the New Testament for Latter-day Saints. 3 vols, 2007. (accessed February 26, 2008).

Bowen, Matthew L. “‘Where I Will Meet You’: The Convergence of Sacred Time and Sacred Space as the Etiological Function of the Tent of Meeting.” In Sacred Time, Sacred Space, and Sacred Meaning. Proceedings of the 2016 Temple on Mount Zion Conference, 5 November 2016, edited by Stephen D. Ricks and Jeffrey M. Bradshaw. Temple on Mount Zion 4, 1–42. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2020.

Bradley, Don. The Lost 116 Pages: Reconstructing the Book of Mormon’s Missing Stories. Draper, UT: Greg Kofford Books, 2019.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M. “The tree of knowledge as the veil of the sanctuary.” In Ascending the Mountain of the Lord: Temple, Praise, and Worship in the Old Testament, edited by David Rolph Seely, Jeffrey R. Chadwick and Matthew J. Grey. The 42nd Annual Brigham Young University Sidney B. Sperry Symposium (26 October, 2013), 49-65. Provo and Salt Lake City, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2013. ; (accessed June 21, 2021).

———. Creation, Fall, and the Story of Adam and Eve. 2014 Updated ed. In God’s Image and Likeness 1. Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014. (accessed December 29, 2022).

———. Temple Themes in the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood. 2014 update ed. Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014. ; (accessed November 29, 2020).

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M., and David J. Larsen. Enoch, Noah, and the Tower of Babel. In God’s Image and Likeness 2. Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2014.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M. “Now that we have the words of Joseph Smith, how shall we begin to understand them? Illustrations of selected challenges within the 21 May 1843 Discourse on 2 Peter 1.” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 20 (2016): 47-150.

———. “Faith, hope, and charity: The ‘three principal rounds’ of the ladder of heavenly ascent.” In “To Seek the Law of the Lord”: Essays in Honor of John W. Welch, edited by Paul Y. Hoskisson and Daniel C. Peterson, 59-112. Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation, 2017.

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M., and Matthew L. Bowen. “‘By the Blood Ye Are Sanctified’: The Symbolic, Salvific, Interrelated, Additive, Retrospective, and Anticipatory Nature of the Ordinances of Spiritual Rebirth in John 3 and Moses 6.” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 24 (2017): 123-316. Reprint, Updated and expanded in Stephen D. Ricks and Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, eds. Sacred Time, Sacred Space, and Sacred Meaning. Proceedings of the Third Interpreter Foundation Matthew B. Brown Memorial Conference, 5 November 2016, Temple on Mount Zion Series. Vol. 4. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2020, pp. 43-237. . ; ; ) ; (short) ; (complete); Finnish: (article); (endnotes). (accessed January 10, 2018).

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M., David J. Larsen, and Stephen T. Whitlock. “Moses 1 and the Apocalypse of Abraham: Twin sons of different mothers?” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 38 (2020): 179-290. (accessed September 11, 2021).

Bradshaw, Jeffrey M. “The Book of Moses as a Temple Text.” In Tracing Ancient Threads in the Book of Moses: Inspired Origins, Temple Contexts, and Literary Qualities, edited by Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, David R. Seely, John W. Welch and Scott Gordon, 421–68. Orem, UT; Springville, UT; Redding, CA; Tooele, UT: The Interpreter Foundation, Book of Mormon Central, FAIR, and Eborn Books, 2021. ; (accessed September 11, 2021).

Brown, William P. The Seven Pillars of Creation: The Bible, Science, and the Ecology of Wonder. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Calabro, David. “Joseph Smith and the architecture of Genesis.” In The Temple: Ancient and Restored. Proceedings of the 2014 Temple on Mount Zion Symposium, edited by Stephen D. Ricks and Donald W. Parry. Temple on Mount Zion 3, 165-81. Orem and Salt Lake City, UT: The Interpreter Foundation and Eborn Books, 2016. (accessed August 25, 2020).

———. “An early Christian context for the Book of Moses.” In Tracing Ancient Threads in the Book of Moses: Inspired Origins, Temple Contexts, and Literary Qualities, edited by Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, David R. Seely, John W. Welch and Scott Gordon, 505–90. Orem, UT; Springville, UT; Redding, CA; Tooele, UT: The Interpreter Foundation, Book of Mormon Central, FAIR, and Eborn Books, 2021.; (accessed September 5, 2021).

———. E-mail message to Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, July 2, 2022.

Charlesworth, James H. “Odes of Solomon.” In The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, edited by James H. Charlesworth. 2 vols. Vol. 2, 725-71. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1983.

Christian Symbols.  In Fish Eaters. (accessed September 29, 2008).

Dahl, Larry E., and Charles D. Tate, Jr., eds. The Lectures on Faith in Historical Perspective. Religious Studies Specialized Monograph Series 15. Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1990.

Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison. 1991. The Gospel According to St. Matthew. 3 vols. The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, ed. J. A. Emerton, C. E. B. Cranfield and G. N. Stanton. London, England: T&T Clark, 2012.

Faulconer, James E. The Life of Holiness: Notes and Reflections on Romans 1, 5-8. Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, Brigham Young University, 2012.

Fletcher-Louis, Crispin H. T. All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2002.

———. 2002. The Cosmology of P and Theological Anthropology in the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sira.  In Jewish Roots of Eastern Christian Mysticism, eds. Alexander Golitzin and Andrei A. Orlov. , (accessed July 2, 2010).

France, Richard Thomas. The Gospel of Matthew. The New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Gordon D. Fee. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2007.

Ginzberg, Louis, ed. The Legends of the Jews. 7 vols. Translated by Henrietta Szold and Paul Radin. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1909-1938. Reprint, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998.

Gregory Nazianzen. ca. 350-363. “Oration 39: Oration on the Holy Lights.” In Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. 14 vols. Vol. 7, 351-59. New York City, NY: The Christian Literature Company, 1894. Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.

Hafen, Bruce C. The Broken Heart. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1989.

———. “A disciple’s journey.” In Brigham Young University 2007-2008 Speeches, 291-305. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 2008. (accessed September 1, 2009).

———. Spiritually Anchored in Unsettled Times. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2009.

Hafen, Bruce C., and Marie K. Hafen. The Contrite Spirit: How the Temple Helps Us Apply Christ’s Atonement. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2015.

Hahn, Scott W. “Christ, Kingdom, and Creation: Davidic Christology and Ecclesiology in Luke-Acts.” Letter and Spirit 3 (2007): 167-90. (accessed July 2).

Hyde, Orson. 1857. “The way to eaternal life; practical religion; all are not Saints who profess to be; prison-house of disobedient spirits (A discourse by Elder Orson Hyde, delivered in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, March 8, 1857).” In Journal of Discourses. 26 vols. Vol. 5, 67-72. Liverpool and London, England: Latter-day Saints Book Depot, 1853-1886. Reprint, Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1966. (accessed January 3, 2017).

Isar, Nicoletta. Choros, The Dance of Adam: The Making of Byzantine Chorography. Leiden, The Netherlands: Alexandros Press, 2011.

Johnson, Luke Timothy. Hebrews: A Commentary. The New Testament Library, ed. C. Clifton Black and John T. Carroll. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.

Josephus, Flavius. 37-ca. 97. “The Antiquities of the Jews.” In The Genuine Works of Flavius Josephus, the Jewish Historian. Translated from the Original Greek, according to Havercamp’s Accurate Edition. Translated by William Whiston, 23-426. London, England: W. Bowyer, 1737. Reprint, Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1980.

Kearney, Peter J. “Creation and liturgy: The P redaction of Exodus 25-40.” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 89, no. 3 (1977): 375-87.

Kimball, J. Golden. “Discourse, 8 April 1906, Overflow Meeting in the Assembly Hall.” In Seventy-Sixth Annual Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; Held in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Utah, April Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Nineteen Hundred and Six, with a Full Report of All Discourses, edited by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 74-77. Salt Lake City, UT: The Deseret News, 1906. (accessed January 3, 2017).

———. “Discourse, 4 October 1930.” In One-Hundred and First Semi-Annual Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; Held in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Utah, October 3, 4, 5, 1930 with a Full Report of All Discourses, edited by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 58-61. Salt Lake City, UT: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1930. (accessed January 3, 2017).

Latter-day Saint Bible Dictionary.  In Latter-day Saint Scriptures. (accessed February 28, 2018).

Leder, Arie C. “The coherenece of Exodus: Narrative unity and meaning.” Calvin Theologcal Journal 36 (2001): 251-69. (accessed July 2).

Lee, Harold B. “Watch! Be ye therefore ready.” Improvement Era 68, no. 12 (December 1965): 1152-54. Reprint, Conference Report, October 1965, pp. 127-131. (accessed January 3, 2017).

Levenson, Jon D. “The temple and the world.” The Journal of Religion 64, no. 3 (1984): 275-98. (accessed July 2).

Lyman, Amasa M. 1857. “Mormonism and its results; internal light and development; decrease of evil; the fountain of light (A discourse by Elder Amasa Lyman, delivered in the Bowery, Great Salt Lake City, July 12, 1857).” In Journal of Discourses. 26 vols. Vol. 5, 34-40. Liverpool and London, England: Latter-day Saints Book Depot, 1853-1886. Reprint, Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1966. (accessed January 3, 2017).

Maxwell, Neal A.  2000. “Jesus, the perfect mentor.” Ensign 31, no. 2 (February 2001): 8-17.

McClellan, Daniel O. 2018. 2 Nephi 25:23 in linguistic and rhetorical context (Presentation at the conference ‘Book of Mormon Studies: Toward a Conversation,’ Utah State University, Logan, Utah, October 12-13, 2018).  In The Book of Mormon Studies Association. (accessed March 23, 2020).

———. 2020. Despite all we can do.  In LDS Perspectives Podcast. (accessed March 23, 2020).

Moffitt, David M. Atonement and the Logic of Resurrection in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 141, ed. M. M. Mitchell and D. P. Moessner. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2011.

Morales, L. Michael. Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord? A Biblical Theology of the Book of Leviticus. New Studies in Biblical Theology 27. Downers Grove, IL: Apollos, InterVarsity Press, 2015.

———. Exodus Old and New: A Biblical Theology of Redemption. Essential Studies in Biblical Theology, ed. Benjamin L. Gladd. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, InterVarsity Press, 2020.

Morrow, Jeff. “Creation as temple-building and work as liturgy in Genesis 1-3.” Journal of the Orthodox Center for the Advancement of Biblical Studies (JOCABS) 2, no. 1 (2009). (accessed July 2, 2010).

Nelson, Russell M. “Personal preparation for temple blessings (from a talk in the April 2001 General Conference of the Church).” In Hope in Our Hearts, edited by Russell M. Nelson, 101-10. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2009. (accessed July 7, 2018).

Neusner, Jacob, ed. Genesis Rabbah: The Judaic Commentary to the Book of Genesis, A New American Translation. 3 vols. Vol. 1: Parashiyyot One through Thirty-Three on Genesis 1:1 to 8:14. Brown Judaic Studies 104, ed. Jacob Neusner. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1985.

Nibley, Hugh W. “Meanings and functions of temples.” In Encyclopedia of Mormonism, edited by Daniel H. Ludlow. 4 vols. Vol. 4, 1458-63. New York City, NY: Macmillan, 1992. (accessed November 26).

———. “Assembly and atonement.” In King Benjamin’s Speech: ‘That Ye May Learn Wisdom’, edited by John W. Welch and Stephen D. Ricks, 119-45. Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998. Reprint, Nibley, Hugh W. “Assembly and Atonement.” In Eloquent Witness: Nibley on Himself, Others, and the Temple, edited by Stephen D. Ricks. The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 17, 420-444. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2008.

———. 1975. “The meaning of the temple.” In Temple and Cosmos: Beyond This Ignorant Present, edited by Don E. Norton. The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 12, 1-41. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1992.

———. 1975. The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment. 2nd ed. Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 16. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2005.

———. 1986. “Return to the temple.” In Temple and Cosmos: Beyond This Ignorant Present, edited by Don E. Norton. The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 12, 42-90. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1992. (accessed August 21, 2020).

———. 1986. Teachings of the Pearl of Great Price. Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), Brigham Young University, 2004.

———. 1986. “The greatness of Egypt.” In Eloquent Witness: Nibley on Himself, Others, and the Temple, edited by Stephen D. Ricks. The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 17, 271-311. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2008.

———. 1988. “The meaning of the atonement.” In Approaching Zion, edited by Don E. Norton. The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 9, 554-614. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1989.

———. 1989-1990. Teachings of the Book of Mormon. 4 vols. Provo, UT: FARMS, 2004.

Origen. ca. 234-240. Homilies on Luke: Fragments on Luke. Translated by Joseph T. Lienhard. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1996.

Parry, Donald W. “Garden of Eden: Prototype sanctuary.” In Temples of the Ancient World, edited by Donald W. Parry, 126-51. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1994. (accessed August 25, 2020).

Penrose, Charles W. 1883. “Sincerity Alone Not Sufficient; The Gathering Foretold; Inspired Writings Not All Contained in the Bible; Province of the Holy Ghost; The Reformers; Confusion of Sects; Apostate Condition of the World Foretold; How the Apostles Were Sent Out; Authority Required; What the Saints Should Do; Opposition to the Gospel, Ancient and Modern; Testimony (Discourse by Elder Chas. W. Penrose, delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Sunday Afternoon, May 20th, 1883).” In Journal of Discourses. 26 vols. Vol. 25, 39-50. Liverpool and London, England: Latter-day Saints Book Depot, 1853-1886. Reprint, Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1966.

Polen, Nehemia. “Leviticus and Hebrews… and Leviticus.” In The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology, edited by Richard Bauckham, Daniel R. Driver, Trevor A. Hart and Nathan MacDonald, 213-25. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009. (accessed July 2).

Ricks, Stephen D. “Liturgy and cosmogony: The ritual use of creation accounts in the ancient Near East.” In Temples of the Ancient World, edited by Donald W. Parry, 118-25. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1994.

Riddle, Chauncey C. “The new and everlasting covenant.” In Doctrines for Exaltation: The 1989 Sperry Symposium on the Doctrine and Covenants, 224-45. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1989. (accessed August 7, 2014).

Robinson, Stephen E. Believing Christ. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1992.

Romney, Marion G. “The oath and covenant which belongeth to the priesthood.” Conference Report, April 1962, 16-20. (accessed July 18, 2022).

Rona, Daniel. Israel Revealed: Discovering Mormon and Jewish Insights in the Holy Land. Sandy, UT: The Ensign Foundation, 2001.

Sandmel, Samuel, M. Jack Suggs, and Arnold J. Tkacik, eds. The New English Bible with the Apocrypha, Oxford Study Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1976.

Smith, Joseph, Jr., Andrew F. Ehat, and Lyndon W. Cook. The Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet Joseph. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Religious Studies Center, 1980. (accessed August 21, 2020).

Smith, Joseph, Jr. The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith. 2nd ed. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2002.

———. 1938. Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1969. (accessed October 29, 2021).

Smith, Mark S. The Priestly Vision of Genesis 1. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2010.

Speiser, Ephraim A. “The Creation Epic (Enuma Elish).” In Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, edited by James B. Pritchard. 3rd with Supplement ed, 60-72, 501-03. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972.

Spencer, Joseph M. “What can we do? Reflections on 2 Nephi 25:23.” Religious Educator 15, no. 2 (2014): 25-39. (accessed March 23, 2020).

Staheli, Donald L. “Obedience—Life’s greatest challenge.” Ensign 28, no. 5 (May 1998): 81-82.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Gospel Principles. Salt Lake City, UT: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2009.

Thomas, M. Catherine. “The Brother of Jared at the veil.” In Temples of the Ancient World, edited by Donald W. Parry, 388-98. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1994.

Vermes, Geza, ed. 1962. The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English Revised ed. London, England: Penguin Books, 2004.

Walton, John H. Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006.

———. The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009.

———. Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2011.

Warfield, Benjamin B. 1915. The Plan of Salvation. Five Lectures Delivered at the Princeton Summer School of Theology, June 1914. Revised ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1984. (accessed September 8, 2007).

Weinfeld, Moshe. “Sabbath, temple  and the enthronement of the Lord: The problem of Sitz im Leben of Genesis 1:1-2:3.” In Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l’honneur de M. Henri Cazelles, edited by André Caquot and Mathias Delcor. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 212, 502-12. Kevelaer: Butzon and Bercker, 1981.

———. “Sabbath, temple and the enthronement of the Lord: The problem of Sitz im Leben of Genesis 1:1-2:3.” In Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l’honneur de M. Henri Cazelles, edited by André Caquot and Mathias Delcor. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 212, 502-12. Kevelaer: Butzon and Bercker, 1981.

Whitney, Orson F. 1888. The Life of Heber C. Kimball. 2nd ed. Salt Lake City, UT: Stevens & Wallis, 1945.

Wilcox, Brad. 2011. His grace is sufficient.  In BYU Speeches.

Witherington, Ben, III. Letters and Homilies for Jewish Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Hebrews, James and Jude. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2007.

Wyatt, Nicolas. “Arms and the king: The earliest allusions to the Chaoskampf motif and their implications for the interpretation of the Ugaritic and biblical traditions.” In ‘There’s Such Divinity Doth Hedge a King’: Selected Essays of Nicolas Wyatt on Royal Ideology in Ugaritic and Old Testament Literature, edited by Nicolas Wyatt. Society for Old Testament Study Monographs, ed. Margaret Barker, 151-89. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2005.

Young, Brigham. 1857. “Necessity for a reformation a disgrace; intelligence a gift, increased by imparting; spirit of God; variety in spiritual as well as natural organizations; God the Father of the spirits of all mankind, etc. (Discourse delivered in Great Salt Lake City, 8 March 1857).” In Journal of Discourses. 26 vols. Vol. 4, 264-72. Liverpool and London, England: Latter-day Saints Book Depot, 1853-1886. Reprint, Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1966. (accessed January 3, 2017).


[1] 2 Nephi 31:2, emphasis added. See 2 Ne. 31:21; 32:6.

[2] For an extended discussion of all these passages and their implications, see J. M. Bradshaw, Faith, Hope, and Charity, pp. 81–90. David Calabro has suggested that it may be fruitful to look at the first part of 2 Nephi 31 “as Nephi listening to the ‘sod’ (divine council), perhaps even words spoken in the premortal council in heaven. Also, 2 Nephi 32, with the integration of the language (or speech) of angels teaching people to pray and access the Holy Ghost, could be seen as Nephi’s teachings about angelic ministry as reenacted in a Nephite endowment. Nephi is here expanding on what he lays out in chapter 31, and we do get a sense that Nephi is cautious about sharing too much, and even frustrated with his (future) audience not ‘getting it,’ which they would if they thought to ‘knock,’ ask for knowledge, or ‘search/understand great knowledge’” (D. Calabro, July 2 2022).

[3] See J. M. Bradshaw, Faith, Hope, and Charity.

[4] The hope experienced in the Terrestrial state of existence is not a “natural hope” for “bodily and worldly matters—the hope that our job will be rewarding, that our children will do well in school, that we will get a raise. Christian hope is the hope for salvation” (J. E. Faulconer, Life of Holiness, p. 207). Moreover, Christian hope is a palpable divine gift, not simply a vague and wistful longing. Those who have proven faithful are chosen or elected to inherit the kingdom “according to a preparatory redemption” (Alma 13:3; J. M. Bradshaw et al., By the Blood Ye Are Sanctified, 158–59, 172–73, 268-69n260) and obtain an initial hope of attaining it when God grants them the “earnest of the Spirit in [their] hearts.”207 By receiving and keeping all the laws and ordinances of the Gospel, this first, dim hope will be replaced by a “perfect brightness of hope”208 (as described by Nephi, 2 Nephi 31:20), “a more excellent hope” (as described by Mormon, Ether 12:32), or “the full assurance of hope” (as described in Hebrews 6:11). Thus, step by step, disciples are brought “unto the end” (Hebrews 6:11), at which point, according to Moroni, they “receive an inheritance in the place which [the Lord has] prepared” (Ether 12:32).

[5] After explaining that because of the blood of Jesus they now have reason to enter with “boldness … through the veil, that is his flesh” (vv. 19–20), the author exhorts the Saints to “approach … in an abundance of faith” (v. 22), “hold fast to the confession of hope” (v. 23), with an “aim of provoking love” (v. 24) (H. W. Attridge et al., Hebrews, p. 283). The development of the themes of faith, hope, and love is taken up more extensively in Hebrews 11–13.

Note that Joseph Smith could not have been aware of the triad of virtues that appeared in vv. 22–24, as the King James Bible, unlike most modern translations, uses “faith” in place of “hope” in v. 23.

[6] Published in D. W. Parry, Garden, pp. 134–135. We have modified Lyon’s original drawing by moving the Tree of Life to the top of the mountain. It was originally placed slightly downhill. For the rationale of this modification, see J. M. Bradshaw, Tree of Knowledge.

[7] For correspondences between the Tree of Knowledge and the veil, see J. M. Bradshaw, Tree of Knowledge.

[8] L. M. Morales, Who Shall Ascend, p. 175.

[9] See D. W. Parry, Garden, p. 135. Compare L. M. Morales, Exodus Old and New, pp. 99–101.

[10] D. W. Parry, Garden, p. 135. See also L. M. Morales, Who Shall Ascend, pp. 175–178.

[11] Latter-day Saint Bible Dictionary, Latter-day Saint Bible Dictionary, s. v. Sacrifices. Compare L. M. Morales, Exodus Old and New, pp. 97–98. President Nelson suggested that members study the Bible Dictionary entry on sacrifices, among others, to prepare for the temple (R. M. Nelson, Personal Preparation):

Spiritual preparation is enhanced by study. I like to recommend that members going to the temple for the first time read short explanatory paragraphs in the Bible Dictionary, listed under seven topics: “Anoint,” “Atonement,” “Christ,” “Covenant,” “Fall of Adam,” “Sacrifices,” and “Temple.” Doing so will provide a firm foundation.”

[12] See, for example, D. Bradley, Lost 116 Pages, p. 199.

[13] For example, N. Wyatt, Arms.

[14] For example, M. Weinfeld, Sabbath, pp. 508-510; S. D. Ricks, Liturgy; P. J. Kearney, Creation; J. Morrow, Creation.

[15] L. Ginzberg, Legends, 1:51. See also W. P. Brown, Seven Pillars, pp. 40-41; P. J. Kearney, Creation; C. H. T. Fletcher-Louis, Cosmology of P, pp. 10-11. According to Walton, “the courtyard represented the cosmic spheres outside of the organized cosmos (sea and pillars). The antechamber held the representations of lights and food. The veil separated the heavens and earth—the place of God’s presence from the place of human habitation” (J. H. Walton, Lost World of Genesis One, p. 82).

Note that in this conception of creation the focus is not on the origins of the raw materials used to make the universe, but rather their fashioning into a structure providing a useful purpose. The key insight, according to Walton, is that: “people in the ancient world believed that something existed not by virtue of its material proportion, but by virtue of its having a function in an ordered system… Consequently, something could be manufactured physically but still not ‘exist’ if it has not become functional. … The ancient world viewed the cosmos more like a company or kingdom” that comes into existence at the moment it is organized, not when the people who participate it were created materially (ibid., pp. 26, 35. See J. Smith, Jr., Teachings, 5 January 1841, p. 181, Abraham 4:1).

Walton continues:

It has long been observed that in the contexts of bara’ [the Hebrew term translated “create”] no materials for the creative act are ever mentioned, and an investigation of all the passages mentioned above substantiate that claim. How interesting it is that these scholars then draw the conclusion that bara’ implies creation out of nothing (ex nihilo). One can see with a moment of thought that such a conclusion assumes that “create” is a material activity. To expand their reasoning for clarity’s sake here: Since “create” is a material activity (assumed on their part), and since the contexts never mention the materials used (as demonstrated by the evidence), then the material object must have been brought into existence without using other materials (that is, out of nothing). But one can see that the whole line of reasoning only works if one can assume that bara’ is a material activity. In contrast, if, as the analysis of objects presented above suggests, bara’ is a functional activity, it would be ludicrious to expect that materials are being used in the activity. In other words, the absence of reference to materials, rather than suggesting material creation out of nothing, is better explained as indication that bara’ is not a material activity but a functional one (J. H. Walton, Lost World of Genesis One, pp. 43-44).

In summary, the evidence … from the Old Testament as well as from the ancient Near East suggests that both defined the pre-creation state in similar terms and as featuring an absence of functions rather than an absence of material. Such information supports the idea that their concept of existence was linked to functionality and that creation was an activity of bringing functionality to a nonfunctional condition rather than bringing material substance to a situation in which matter was absent. The evidence of matter (the waters of the deep in Genesis 1:2) in the precreation state then supports this view” (ibid., p. 53).

[16] Moses 3:1. See J. D. Levenson, Temple and World, p. 287; A. C. Leder, Coherence, p. 267; J. Morrow, Creation. Levenson also cites Blenkinsopp’s thesis of a triadic structure in the priestly concept of world history that described the “creation of the world,” the “construction of the sanctuary,” and “the establishment of the sanctuary in the land and the distribution of the land among the tribes” in similar, and sometimes identical language. Thus, as Polen reminds us, “the purpose of the Exodus from Egypt is not so that the Israelites could enter the Promised Land, as many other biblical passages have it. Rather it is theocentric: so that God might abide with Israel. … This limns a narrative arc whose apogee is reached not in the entry into Canaan at the end of Deuteronomy and the beginning of Joshua, but in the dedication day of the Tabernacle (Leviticus 9-10) when God’s Glory—manifest Presence—makes an eruptive appearance to the people (Leviticus 9:23-24)” (N. Polen, Leviticus, p. 216).

In another correspondence between these events, Mark Smith notes a variation on the first Hebrew word of Genesis (bere’shit) and the description used in Ezekiel 45:18 for the first month of a priestly offering (bari’shon): “‘Thus said the Lord: ‘In the beginning (month) on the first (day) of the month, you shall take a bull of the herd without blemish, and you shall cleanse the sanctuary.’ What makes this verse particularly relevant for our discussion of bere’shit is that ri’shon occurs in close proximity to ’ehad, which contextually designates ‘(day) one’ that is ‘the first day’ of the month. This combination of ‘in the beginning’ (bari’shon) with ‘(day) one’ (yom ’ehad) is reminiscent of ‘in beginning of’ (bere’shit) in Genesis 1:1 and ‘day one’ (yom ’ehad) in Genesis 1:5” (M. S. Smith, Priestly Vision, p. 47).

Hahn notes the same correspondences to the creation of the cosmos in the building of Solomon’s Temple (S. W. Hahn, Christ, Kingdom, pp. 176-177. See J. Morrow, Creation; J. D. Levenson, Temple and World, pp. 283-284; C. H. T. Fletcher-Louis, Glory, pp. 62-65; M. Weinfeld, Sabbath, pp. 506, 508):

As creation takes seven days, the Temple takes seven years to build (1 Kings 6:38). It is dedicated during the seven-day Feast of Tabernacles (1 Kings 8:2), and Solomon’s solemn dedication speech is built on seven petitions (1 Kings 8:31-53). As God capped creation by “resting” on the seventh day, the Temple is built by a “man of rest” (1 Chronicles 22:9) to be a “house of rest” for the Ark, the presence of the Lord (1 Chronicles 28:2; 2 Chronicles 6:41; Psalm 132:8, 13-14; Isaiah 66:1).

When the Temple is consecrated, the furnishings of the older Tabernacle are brought inside it. (R. E. Friedman suggests the entire Tabernacle was brought inside). This represents the fact that all the Tabernacle was, the Temple has become. Just as the construction of the Tabernacle of the Sinai covenant had once recapitulated creation, now the Temple of the Davidic covenant recapitulated the same. The Temple is a microcosm of creation, the creation a macro-temple.

[17] J. Neusner, Genesis Rabbah 1, 3:9, p. 35.

[18] H. W. Nibley, Meaning of Temple, pp. 14-15. See H. W. Nibley, Greatness, p. 301; T. D. Alexander, From Eden, pp. 37-42. Speaking of the temple and its furnishings, Josephus wrote that each item was “made in way of imitation and representation of the universe” (F. Josephus, Antiquities, 3:7:7, p. 75). Levenson has suggested that the temple in Jerusalem may have been called by the name “Heaven and Earth,” paralleling similar names given to other Near East temples (see J. H. Walton, Lost World of Genesis One, pp. 180-181 n. 12).

[19] H. W. Nibley, Return, pp. 71–73. See also J. H. Walton, Ancient, pp. 123–127; H. W. Nibley, Meanings and Functions, pp. 1460–1461; S. D. Ricks, Liturgy. For more on the structure and function of the story of Creation found in Genesis 1 and arguably used in Israelite temple liturgy, see J. H. Walton, Lost World of Genesis One; M. S. Smith, Priestly Vision. W. P. Brown, Seven Pillars provides perspectives on other biblical accounts of creation. See J. H. Walton, Genesis 1, pp. 17–22 for a useful table that highlights similarities and differences among creation accounts in the ancient Near East. See W. P. Brown, Seven Pillars, pp. 21–32.

[20] H. W. Nibley, Teachings of the PGP, p. 122. The term giparu, rendered by Nibley as “inner sanctuary” (ibid., p. 122; compare E. A. Speiser, Creation Epic, 1:1, 2 6b, pp. 60–61), has been translated variously in this context by others as “bog,” “marsh,” or “reed hut.” The latter term more accurately conveys the idea of an enclosure housing the sanctuary or residence of the en(t)u priest(ess) of the temple. For more about the temple connotation of the Babylonian reed hut and its significance for the story of the flood in the Bible and other ancient flood accounts, see J. M. Bradshaw et al., God’s Image 2, pp. 216-221.

[21] See E. A. Speiser, Creation Epic, p. 61 n. 4.

[22] See, for example, N. Wyatt, Arms.

[23] L. M. Morales, Who Shall Ascend, p. 184. For Christians, of course, a complete and permanent remedy to the consequences of the Fall could be made possible only through “the last Adam’s [that is, Jesus’] re-entry into God’s abode with His own blood for Atonement” (ibid., p. 184).

[24] Image adapted from Nathan Richardson, Temples and Atonement, 3a.

[25] See Doctrine and Covenants 76: 51-76, 92-95.

[26] See Doctrine and Covenants 76: 71–80, 97.

[27] See D. Calabro, Joseph Smith and the Architecture. For more on the general idea of the Book of Moses as a temple text, see J. M. Bradshaw, Book of Moses as a Temple Text.

Narrative features of the Book of Moses described by Calabro that would have been relevant to its use as a temple text include lamination of discourse frames; verbs of motion, repeated themes, and wordplays that relate to temple architecture; and narrative displacement.

As a specific example, consider that the mention that “the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam” occurs in Moses 5:9, while the story of his baptism is “put in the mouth of Enoch, several pages later” (D. Calabro, Joseph Smith and the Architecture, p. 173). Calabro hypothesizes that its “position in chapter 6 conforms to the setting of the ritual, near the laver, where instruction about baptism is appropriate.” Similarly, Adam and Eve are taught the law of sacrifice only after they have been driven out of the Garden, allowing those who, according to Calabro’s conjecture, were participating in temple ritual to be situated near the altar of sacrifice before the presentation of that law.

[28] Complicating the picture somewhat, Calabro has argued eloquently (primarily on the basis of New Testament ideas and language in the Book of Moses) for the intriguing suggestion that the Book of Moses, as we have it today, may be rooted in a first- or second-century Christian baptismal liturgy (D. Calabro, Early Christian Context). Going further, however, Calabro suggests that the early Christian source for our modern Book of Moses may have been adapted from even more ancient sources that could have been used in a different performative context— for example, within early Israelite temples. In brief, the idea is that just as Joseph Smith restored the text in modern times, an early Christian text may also have been a restoration of an earlier temple text, although reformulated in language appropriate to its use in a later setting. Calabro’s intriguing hypothesis still leaves open the possibility that the Book of Moses, in an earlier form could be conceived as a temple text for ritual use in royal investiture, analogous to temple rites restored by the Prophet Joseph Smith (J. M. Bradshaw et al., Moses 1 and the Apocalypse of Abraham (journal), 2:861n52).

[29] 2 Nephi 31 :19.

[30] Although we enter the gate of repentance and baptism by exercising “unshaken faith,” “relying wholly upon the merits” of Christ (2 Nephi 31:19), it is intended that we grow spiritually through a combination of our efforts and His strengthening power in gradual fashion until, someday, we come to “be like him” (1 John 3:2; Moroni 7:48). Certainly, there is truth in Stephen Robinson’s emphasis on the difference in magnitude between the “61 cents” we contribute toward our salvation and the unfathomably costly contribution that Jesus Christ made on our behalf (S. E. Robinson, Believing, pp. 31–34). However, there are major differences between Latter-day Saint beliefs and extreme versions of “grace-alone oriented” theologies—as exemplified by Charles Spurgeon’s famous line: “If there be but one stitch in the celestial garment of our righteousness which we ourselves are to put in, we are lost” (cited in B. B. Warfield, Plan, p. 51).

Just as Jesus Christ will put all enemies beneath his feet (1 Corinthians 15:25–26), so Joseph Smith taught that each person who would be saved must also, with His essential help, gain the power needed to “triumph over all [their] enemies and put them under [their] feet” (J. Smith, Jr., Teachings, 14 May 1843, p. 297. See also 17 May 1843, p. 301; 21 May 1843, p. 305), possessing the “glory, authority, majesty, power, and dominion which Jehovah possesses” (L. E. Dahl et al., Lectures, 7:9, p. 98. See 7:16—note that it is not certain whether Joseph Smith authored these lectures).

As Chauncey Riddle explains (C. C. Riddle, New, p. 228), “the covenant of baptism is [not only ] our pledge to seek after good and to eliminate all choosing and doing of evil in our lives, [but] also our receiving the power to keep that promise,” that is, through the gift of the Holy Ghost. For Latter-day Saints, Jesus Christ is not only their Redeemer but also their literal prototype, the One who demonstrates the process of probation that all people must pass through as they follow Him (Matthew 4:19; 8:22; 9:9; 16:24; 19:21; Mark 2:14; 8:24; 10:21; Luke 5:27; 9:23, 59, 61; 18:22; John 1:43; 10:27; 12:26; 13:36; 21:19, 22).

[31] B. C. Hafen, Anchored, p. 22. On the idea of the “second sacrifice” that is represented in a later part of the temple endowment, Elder Hafen writes (B. C. Hafen, Disciple’s Journey. See also B. C. Hafen, Anchored, pp. 22-23, 82):

As we approach the second barrier of sacrifice, we move symbolically from the moon to the sun. All of the moon’s light is reflected from the sun—it is borrowed light [See Book of Abraham, explanation of Facsimile 2, Figure 5].

Heber C. Kimball used to say that when life’s greatest tests come, those who are living on borrowed light— the testimonies of others—will not be able to stand (O. F. Whitney, Kimball, May 1868, pp. 446, 449–450; J. G. Kimball, 8 April 1906, pp. 76–77; J. G. Kimball, 4 October 1930, pp. 59–60; H. B. Lee, Watch, p. 1152. Compare B. Young, 8 March 1857, pp. 265–266; A. M. Lyman, 12 July 1857, pp. 36–38; O. Hyde, 8 March 1857, pp. 71–72; C. W. Penrose, 20 May 1883, p. 41. See also Matthew 25:1–13). We need our own access to the light of the Son.

Baptism represents the first sacrifice. The temple endowment represents the second sacrifice. The first sacrifice was about breaking out of Satan’s orbit. The second one is about breaking fully into Christ’s orbit, pulled by His gravitational power. The first sacrifice was mostly about giving up temporal things. The second one is about consecrating ourselves spiritually, holding back nothing. As Elder Maxwell said, the only thing we can give the Lord that He didn’t already give us is our own will (See N. A. Maxwell, Mentor, p. 17).

Seeking to be meek and lowly, disciples gladly offer God their will. As our children sing, “I feel my Savior’s love. … / He knows I will follow him, / Give all my life to him” (Children’s Songbook, “I feel my Savior’s love,” pp. 74–75). And then what happens? In President Benson’s words, “When obedience ceases to be an irritant and becomes our quest, in that moment God will endow us with power” (cited in D. L. Staheli, Obedience, p. 82).

[32] 2 Nephi 2:8.

[33] Those who have been “ordained priests, after his [the Lord God’s] holy order, which was after the order of his Son” are commanded to “teach … the people” so that “the people might know in what manner to look forward to his Son for redemption” (Alma 13:1–2). I would suggest that this teaching was intended to be not only by precept but also by their personal example of self-sacrifice in likeness of the Son, who is described Himself as a “great high priest” in Hebrews 4:14. As Harold Attridge notes (H. W. Attridge et al., Hebrews, p. 284):

Before [the author of Hebrews] sounds the familiar note of Christ’s exalted status [which is, incidentally, the theme of the first verses of Alma 13], our author reverts to the results of the self-sacrificial act by which that status is achieved.

It is in this sense that the Lord can say, despite the fact that it is His sacrifice that ultimately makes us holy, “sanctify yourselves” (for example Exodus 19:22; Leviticus 11:44, 20:7; Numbers 11:18; Joshua 3:5, 7:13; 1 Samuel 16:5; 1 Chronicles 15:12, 14; 2 Chronicles 29:5, 15, 34; 30:3, 8, 15, 24; 31:18; 35:6; Isaiah 66:17; Doctrine and Covenants 43:11, 16; 88:68, 74; 133:4, 62. See also John 17:19; 2 Timothy 2:21).

[34] 2 Nephi 25:23. Compare Moroni 10:32–33. In my view, the word “after” should not be read mistakenly in a temporal sense, but rather in line with the atemporal Old English sense of “more away, further off” (See Greek apotero)—meaning essentially that “all we can do” is always necessary but never sufficient. We are saved by grace despite all we can do. This is similar in spirit to Stephen E. Robinson’s line of thinking (S. E. Robinson, Believing, pp. 91–92):

I understand the preposition “after” in 2 Nephi 25:23 to be a preposition of separation rather than a preposition of time. It denotes logical separateness rather than temporal sequence. We are saved by grace “apart from all we can do,” or “all we can do notwithstanding,” or even “regardless of all we can do.” Another acceptable paraphrase of the sense of the verse might read, “We are still saved by grace, after all is said and done.”

For additional discussion of this verse in the context of general discussions of divine grace, see B. C. Hafen, Broken, pp. 155-156; B. Wilcox, His Grace; J. M. Spencer, What Can We Do?. Two excellent studies by Jared Ludlow and Daniel O. McClellan have gone further to place the scripture in its required literary context (D. O. McClellan, 2 Nephi 25:23 in linguistic and rhetorical context (Presentation at the conference ‘Book of Mormon Studies: Toward a Conversation,’ Utah State University, Logan, Utah, October 12-13, 2018); D. O. McClellan, Despite All We Can Do).

Although Alma 24:10–11 defines “all we could do” [note the past tense, emphasis added] solely in terms of repentance, I am of the opinion that one of the purposes of the process of sanctification is to allow us to grow in holiness, gradually acquiring a capacity for doing “more”—specifically, becoming “good” like our Father (see Matthew 19:17; Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19) and “doing good” (Acts 10:38, emphasis added) like the Son, an evolution of our natures jointly enabled by the Atonement and our exercise of moral agency.

Despite all this, of course, it must never be forgotten that even repentance itself, which is “all we can do” at the time we first accept Christ, would be impossible had not the merciful plan of redemption been laid before the foundation of the world (Alma 12:22–37). And, of course, it is His continuous grace that lends us breath, “preserving [us] from day to day, … and even supporting [us] from one moment to another” (Mosiah 2:21).

[35] H. W. Nibley, Atonement, p. 560. For an extensive and insightful study of this and related verses, see M. L. Bowen, “Where I Will Meet You” especially vv. 6–9.

[36] See, for example, Doctrine and Covenants 84:19–26. For more on this topic, see J. M. Bradshaw, Temple Themes in the Oath, pp. 99–109.

[37] H. W. Nibley, Atonement, p. 567.

[38] 2 Nephi 5:16.

[39] H. W. Nibley, Atonement, pp. 567-568. Compare the ritual embrace in Egyptian temple rites (H. W. Nibley, Message (2005), pp. 445-449). See J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, Endnote 6-38, p. 504.

[40] See, for example, Nibley’s discussion of the meaning of these terms, in H. W. Nibley, Atonement, p. 558–562.

[41] H. W. Nibley, Assembly, p. 124. Justifying his interpretation, Nibley writes (H. W. Nibley, Atonement, p. 560):

The kapporeth is usually assumed to be the lid of the Ark, yet it fits much better with the front, since one stands before it.

Nibley gives further arguments for his interpretation in ibid., p. 610n13.

[42] For related material from Egyptian, Jewish, and Christian sources, see J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, Endnote 6-37, p. 503.

[43] Alma 5:33.

[44] 2 Nephi 1:15.

[45] Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, with the assistance of Florian Kugler and Christa Hummel

[46] 2 Nephi 4:22.

[47] H. W. Nibley, Teachings of the Book of Mormon, 16, 1:199.

[48] Not only in 2 Nephi 31–32, but also, for example, the experience of the brother of Jared (see M. C. Thomas, Brother of Jared) and in the visionary experience with veil symbolism that, according to an account by Fayette Lapham, took place in a Nephite tabernacle that was apparently described in the lost pages of the Book of Mormon (see D. Bradley, Lost 116 Pages, pp. 252–253).

[49] See, for example, Hebrews 6:18–20; 10:19-23, discussed in more detail in chapter 9 of the present volume.

[50] Y. M. al-Khalesi, Palms, p. 67.

[51] In the translation of S. Sandmel et al., New English Bible. See also Ether 12:4. Photograph of this figure is in the public domain. See Original is in the Bayerisches Nationalmuseum München. For more information on this image, see J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, p. 473.

[52] Doctrine and Covenants 84:33-48. See also M. G. Romney, Oath, p. 17.

[53] K. L. Barney, NT Footnotes, 3:82 n. d. See also M. G. Romney, Oath, p. 17.

[54] John 14:3. See also Hebrews 4:14; H. W. Attridge et al., Hebrews, pp. 118-119.

[55] M. Barker, Risen, pp. 42-43. See also Gregory Nazianzen, Oration 39, 16, p. 358; Origen, Luke, Homily 24 on Luke 3:15-16, p. 103; 1 Corinthians 3:13.

[56] H. W. Attridge et al., Hebrews, p. 184. See pp. 185, 222-224. See also L. T. Johnson, Hebrews, pp. 172-173.

Comparing the symbol of the anchor to an image in Virgil, Witherington concludes that he was “thinking no doubt of an iron anchor with two wings rather than an ancient stone anchor” (B. Witherington, III, Letters, p. 225). The shape of the anchor recalls both the covenant and the oath by which the former is “made sure” (2 Peter 1:10).

The symbol of the anchor evokes the tradition of pounding nails into the Western Wall of the Jerusalem Temple. Rona writes: “Older texts reveal a now forgotten custom of the ‘sure nails.’ This was the practice of bringing one’s sins, grief, or the tragedies of life to the remains of the temple wall and ‘nailing’ them in a sure place. The nails are a reminder of Isaiah’s prophecy [22:23-25] that man’s burden will be removed when the nail in the sure place is taken down” (D. Rona, Revealed, p. 194). Christian use of anchor imagery goes back to “the first century cemetery of St. Domitilla, the second and third century epitaphs of the catacombs” (Christian Symbols, Christian Symbols). Although the anchor is frequently depicted in connection with a figure representing the Hope afforded by Jesus Christ, it is, from the perspective of those who aspire to a place in God’s presence, an even more appropriate companion to the crowning blessings associated with the requirement of Charity, as shown in a stained glass panel by Ward and Hughes from the cathedral in Lichfield, England J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, Figure 6-13, p. 472). In 2 Nephi 31:20, Nephi associates this “love of God and of all men” with the ultimate attainment of both a “perfect brightness of hope” and the sure promise of the Father (“Ye shall have eternal life”).

[57] D. M. Moffitt, Atonement, pp. 300-301.

[58] See John 1:12; Doctrine and Covenants 11:28-30; 39:4; 42:52.

[59] This phrase, applied by Moffit to Jesus Christ and His followers, originated with the Jews in Qumran. See, for example, G. Vermes, Complete, Rule of the Community (1QS), 4:22-26, p. 103. For a more detailed study of the meaning of this concept in the context of the theology of the Qumran Community and of early Christians, see C. H. T. Fletcher-Louis, Glory.

[60] D. M. Moffitt, Atonement, p. 301. Wherefore,” says Moroni, “whoso believeth in God might with surety hope for a better world, yea, even a place at the right hand of God, which hope cometh of faith, maketh an anchor to the souls of men, which would make them sure and steadfast, always abounding in good works, being led to glorify God” (Ether 12:4, emphasis added). Note that these ordinances provide only a “hope for a better world,” and not yet the actual entrance into it.

[61] 2 Nephi 31:13.

[62] 2 Nephi 31:17.

[63] 2 Nephi 31:17.

[64] Doctrine and Covenants 76: 81-90, 98-106.

[65] J. M. Bradshaw et al., By the Blood Ye Are Sanctified, pp. 92–99.

[66] This verse from the Book of Mormon, of course, refers to the actual blessing of eternal life at the end of one’s probation rather than to the symbolic representation of that blessing that is experienced in earthly ordinances. Regarding the process of enduring to the end, Hafen and others observe: (B. C. Hafen et al., Contrite Spirit, pp. 57–58)

Sometimes . . . we refer to the first principles as if they represented the entire process of discipleship. When we do that, “endure to the end” can sound like an afterthought, as if our baptism and confirmation have hooked us like a trout on God’s fishing line, and so long as we don’t squirm off the hook, He will reel us safely in. Or some assume that “endure to the end” simply describes the “no worries” stage of life, when our main job is to just enjoy frequent trips to our cozy retirement cottage while refraining from doing anything really bad along the way.

But there is more. As President Russell M. Nelson has said, “Enduring to the end … means the endowment and sealing ordinances of the holy temple” (“Begin with the end in mind,” Seminar for New Mission Presidents, June 22, 2014. [For a summary of Elder Nelson’s talk, see S. J. Weaver, “Begin Missionary Work.”]). And Noel and Sydney Reynolds have taught that “endure to the end” is a gospel principle that is paired with the temple endowment, just as repentance is paired with baptism (personal communication, May 17, 2014). Nephi offered a similarly expansive view of “enduring”—we should “endure to the end, in following the example of the Son of the living God” (2 Nephi 31:16). The first principles will always be first—yet they are but the foundation for pressing on toward the Christlike life: “Therefore not leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, … [and] baptisms” (JST Hebrews 6:1–2; emphasis added).

[67]. Found in Thessaloniki, Macedonia. Licensed from Image ID: BM2KC6.

[68]. Public Domain.‌,

[69]. N. Isar, Choros, plate 65.

[70]. Hebrews 6:19., see vv. 18–20.

[71]. N. Isar, Choros, p. 73.

[72]. Ibid., p. 73. Compare the first century Odes of Solomon 42:8: “Like the arm of the groom over the bride So is my yoke over those who know me” (J. H. Charlesworth, Odes, 42:8, p. 771.

[73]. Compare N. Isar, Choros, p. 52.

[74] To see how Joseph Smith wove together Psalm 110:4, Hebrews 6:19–20, and 1 Peter 1 in alluding to the ritual grasp and actions associated with the oath of the Father, see J. M. Bradshaw, Temple Themes in the Oath, pp. 60–62.

[75] See J. M. Bradshaw, Now That We Have the Words, especially pp. 79–80. In his comments relating to 2 Peter 1, Joseph Smith further explained that (J. Smith, Jr., Teachings, 14 May 1843, pp. 298-299):

Though [the Saints addressed by Peter] might hear the voice of God and know that Jesus was the Son of God, this would be no evidence that their election and calling was made sure (2 Peter 1:10), that they had part with Christ, and were joint heirs with Him. Then they would want that more sure word of prophecy (2 Peter 1:19), that they were sealed in the heavens and had the promise of eternal life in the kingdom of God.

Then, having this promise sealed unto [us is] an anchor to the soul, sure and steadfast. Though the thunders might roll and lightnings flash, and earthquakes bellow, and war gather thick around, yet this hope and knowledge would support the soul in every hour of trial, trouble, and tribulation. Then knowledge through our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the grand key that unlocks the glories and mysteries of the kingdom of heaven…

Then I would exhort you to go on and continue to call upon God until you make your calling and election sure for yourselves, by obtaining this more sure word of prophecy, and wait patiently for the promise until you obtain it.

The only other allusion to this scripture made by Joseph Smith I’m aware of is the following, made in a letter to his uncle Silas on 26 September 1833 (J. Smith, Jr., Writings 2002, p. 323, spelling and punctuation modernized, emphasis added):

Paul said to his Hebrew brethren that God being more abundantly willing to show unto the heirs of his promises the immutability of his council “confirmed it by an oath.” He also exhorts them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

“Notwithstanding we (said Paul) have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us, which hope we have as an anchor of the soul both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil.” Yet he was careful to press upon them the necessity of continuing on until they as well as those who inherited the promises might have the assurance of their salvation confirmed to them by an oath from the mouth of Him who could not lie, for that seemed to be the example anciently and Paul holds it out to his brethren as an object attainable in his day. And why not? I admit that, by reading the scriptures of truth, saints in the days of Paul could learn beyond the power of contradiction that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had the promise of eternal life confirmed to them by an oath of the Lord, but that promise or oath was no assurance to them of their salvation. But they could, by walking in the footsteps and continuing in the faith of their fathers, obtain for themselves an oath for confirmation that they were meet to be partakers of the inheritance with the saints in light.

[76] Joseph Smith explicitly tied the imagery of Hebrews 6:18–20 to the idea of making one’s calling and election sure (J. Smith, Jr., Writings 2002, 26 September 1833, p. 323; J. Smith, Jr. et al., Words, 14 May 1843, p. 201; J. Smith, Jr., Teachings, 14 May 1843, pp. 298–99).

[77] In 2 Nephi 33:9, following an expression of charity for all people, Nephi reiterates that there is no other way than the one he has just outlined: “But behold, for none of these can I hope except they shall be reconciled unto Christ, and enter into the narrow gate [through the faith that leads to repentance and baptism], and walk in the strait path [of hope] which leads to life [eternal life, conferred at the veil], and continue in the path until the end of the day of probation [the requirement to endure to the end].”

[78] Latter-day Saint Bible Dictionary, Latter-day Saint Bible Dictionary, s. v. Sacrifices.