Section 85 (Modern D&C 98)

Faith: Mormonism
Text: Doctrine and Covenants
Volume: 1835 Edition
Author: Joseph Smith

Overview

Given in August 1833 during a period of intense persecution in Missouri, this revelation attempts to provide a theological framework for suffering and self-defense. Joseph Smith speaks in the voice of the Lord to comfort the Saints, assuring them that their prayers are heard and that their afflictions will work for their good. The text pivots to political theology, explicitly endorsing the US Constitution and instructing Saints to support legal, constitutional principles and wise leaders. The core of the text establishes a complex ethical code regarding violence and forgiveness, often called the 'Law of Retaliation.' It commands the Saints to renounce war and proclaim peace, but provides a specific, three-stage protocol for dealing with enemies. Believers are to bear attacks patiently three times to accrue divine reward. However, upon a fourth attack, if the enemy does not repent, the Saints are justified in self-defense and commanded *not* to forgive unless restitution is made. The text claims this law was anciently given to Nephi, Abraham, and others. It places a heavy emphasis on obedience as a prerequisite for divine protection ('if ye observe to do whatsoever I command you'), linking physical safety and spiritual worthiness directly to strict adherence to these new statutes.

Key Figures

  • The Lord (Jesus Christ)
  • Joseph Smith
  • Nephi (referenced as receiving this law)
  • Abraham (referenced as receiving this law)
  • Isaac
  • Jacob

Doctrines Analyzed

Key theological claims identified in this text:

1

The Law of Justified Retaliation

Assertion

Believers must bear persecution patiently three times; on the fourth offense, they are justified in retaliation and commanded to withhold forgiveness absent restitution.

Evidence from Text

but if he trespass against thee the fourth time, thou shalt not forgive him... and if thou reward him according to his works, thou art justified

Evangelical Comparison

In Evangelical theology, based on Matthew 5:38-48 and Romans 12:19, personal vengeance is prohibited, and forgiveness is a command independent of the offender's restitution (Mark 11:25). This text introduces a 'three-strikes' legalism where forgiveness becomes prohibited ('thou shalt not forgive him') after a certain threshold of unrepentant abuse. This transforms forgiveness from a grace-based posture of the heart into a transactional legal process, directly opposing the spirit of Christ's command to love enemies without qualification.

2

Conditional Divine Protection

Assertion

God's protection from 'the gates of hell' is contingent upon strict obedience to all commandments.

Evidence from Text

if ye observe to do whatsoever I command you, I the Lord will turn away all wrath... and the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.

Evangelical Comparison

The text posits a covenant of works where safety and spiritual security are earned through strict observance ('whatsoever I command'). In contrast, Evangelical theology asserts that the 'gates of hell' do not prevail against the Church because of Christ's identity and victory (Matthew 16:18), not the moral perfection of the saints. This doctrine places the burden of security on the believer's ability to obey, rather than God's promise to keep.

3

Divine Constitutionalism

Assertion

The US Constitution is divinely justified and believers are commanded to support it.

Evidence from Text

that law of the land, which is constitutional... is justifiable before me... I the Lord justifieth you... in befriending that law

Evangelical Comparison

While Christians are called to be good citizens, this text elevates the US Constitution to a quasi-scriptural status, asserting that God specifically justifies this legal document. This reflects 19th-century American exceptionalism codified as theology. Evangelicalism maintains a distinction between the Kingdom of God and earthly political structures, whereas this text merges American civic duty with divine mandate.

Comparative Analysis

Status: Yes

Theological Gap

The fundamental theological gap lies in the nature of the New Covenant. Evangelicalism understands the New Covenant as a regime of grace where the believer, having received infinite mercy, extends mercy without limit (Matthew 18:21-35). This text re-introduces a Levitical-style legal code ('Law of Retaliation') that quantifies forgiveness. It creates a scenario where a believer is commanded by God *not* to forgive ('thou shalt not forgive him'), a concept alien to the teaching of Jesus in the Gospels. Furthermore, it ties spiritual justification to political allegiance (the Constitution) and strict obedience to these new laws, moving away from Sola Fide.

Shared Values with Evangelicalism

  • Trust in God during suffering
  • Value of peace over war
  • Importance of honest government leaders
  • Belief in the afterlife (mansions)

Friction Points

1 Major

Sola Scriptura

Adds binding laws regarding war and forgiveness not found in the Bible, claiming they were given to biblical patriarchs.

2 Critical

Sola Fide

Makes divine protection and 'worthiness' contingent on strict obedience to commandments and enduring trials.

3 Critical

Christian Ethics

Commands believers to withhold forgiveness after the fourth offense, contradicting Christ's command to love enemies.

4 Minor

Kingdom of God

Conflates the Kingdom of God with support for a specific secular political document (US Constitution).

Semantic Warnings

Terms that have different meanings between traditions:

"Justified"

In This Text

Vindicated in taking action (specifically violent self-defense) or approved by God for supporting a specific law.

In Evangelicalism

Declared righteous before God solely through faith in Christ (Romans 5:1).

Example: Text: 'thou art justified' in rewarding an enemy according to his works. Bible: 'Justified by his blood' (Romans 5:9).

"Worthy"

In This Text

Qualifying for God's presence through abiding in covenants and enduring trials.

In Evangelicalism

A status granted by Christ's imputed righteousness, not personal endurance (Revelation 4:11 - only God is truly worthy).

Example: Text: 'that you may be found worthy.' Bible: 'Counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer' (2 Thess 1:5 - context is suffering for faith, not earning status).

Soteriology (Salvation)

Salvation Defined: Finding 'life eternal' by laying down one's life for the cause and abiding in the covenant.

How Attained: Through faithfulness, obedience to commandments ('line upon line'), and enduring to the end (potentially martyrdom).

Basis of Assurance: The 'seal and testament' that prayers are heard, contingent on the believer's obedience.

Comparison to Sola Fide: The text explicitly links being 'found worthy' to abiding in the covenant 'even unto death.' This is a works-righteousness model where human endurance secures eternal status, contrasting with Ephesians 2:8-9 where salvation is a gift, not of works.

Mandates & Requirements

Explicit Commands

  • Rejoice evermore and give thanks
  • Observe and befriend the constitutional law of the land
  • Seek diligently for honest and wise men to rule
  • Forsake all evil and cleave unto all good
  • Renounce war and proclaim peace
  • Bear persecution patiently three times
  • Warn the enemy in the name of the Lord
  • Do not forgive the enemy on the fourth trespass unless they repent and restore four-fold

Implicit Obligations

  • Political activism (seeking specific types of leaders)
  • Record keeping of offenses (to know when the 'fourth' trespass occurs)
  • Acceptance of Joseph Smith's revelations as equal to Biblical law

Ritual Requirements

  • None explicitly detailed in this text, though 'covenant' observance is mentioned.

Evangelism Toolkit

Practical tools for engagement and dialogue:

Discovery Questions

Open-ended questions to promote reflection:

  1. In verse 7, the text says 'thou shalt not forgive him' if an enemy trespasses a fourth time. How do you reconcile this with Jesus's command in Matthew 5 to 'love your enemies' without conditions?
  2. The text says safety depends on observing 'whatsoever I command.' Do you feel a burden to be perfectly obedient to ensure God's protection?
  3. Verse 1 mentions a 'seal and testament' that prayers will be granted. How does this compare to the biblical idea that God answers prayers according to His will, not just our covenant performance?

Redemptive Analogies

Bridges from this text to the Gospel:

1

The desire for Justice

Gospel Connection:

We all long for justice when wronged. The Gospel answers this not by asking us to execute vengeance after 3 strikes, but by pointing to the Cross where God executed justice on Christ for our sins, freeing us to forgive others.

Scripture Bridge: Romans 12:19 ('Vengeance is mine... saith the Lord') -> 1 Peter 2:23 (Christ entrusted himself to him who judges justly).

Spiritual Weight

Burdens this text places on adherents:

1 Legalism/Record-Keeping Moderate

The believer must mentally track offenses to know if they are in the 'forgive' phase or the 'retaliate' phase. This turns relationships into a legal calculation rather than a flow of grace.

2 Uncertainty/Fear Severe

Protection is conditional on 'observing to do whatsoever I command.' Any personal failure in obedience opens the believer up to the fear that God will allow the 'gates of hell' to prevail against them.

3 Burden of Vengeance Moderate

The text places the responsibility of executing judgment on the believer after the fourth offense ('thou art justified' to reward him). This burdens the believer with the role of judge, which the Bible says belongs to God alone.

+ Epistemology

Knowledge Source: Prophetic Revelation (Joseph Smith speaking as God).

Verification Method: Obedience to the text is claimed to yield 'life eternal' and 'glory', serving as experiential verification.

Evangelical Contrast: Biblical epistemology relies on the illuminated Word of God (Psalm 119:105) and the witness of the Spirit consistent with Scripture (Acts 17:11). This text demands acceptance of new extra-biblical laws based on the authority of the revelator.

+ Textual Criticism

Dating: August 6, 1833

Authorship: Joseph Smith

Textual Issues: This text was canonized as Section 98 in modern editions. It reflects the specific historical context of the Missouri persecutions (1833).