A challenge is thrown up by Joseph Smith & Oliver Cowdery’s revelation of April 3, 1836 n the temple at Kirtland, Ohio. See D&C 110
Are they two different people according to Joseph or one and the same ?
LDS Critics suggest Joseph slipped up by claiming they are two separate individuals. Elias is the Greek form of Elijah. The name Elias only appears in the New Testament. Paul states “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace” 1 Cor 14:33.
D&C 110:12 “Elias appeared, and committed the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, saying that in us and our seed all generations after us should be blessed.”
v13 After this vision had closed, another great and glorious vision burst upon us; for Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death, stood before us, and said:14 Behold, the time has fully come, which was spoken of by the mouth of Malachi—testifying that he [Elijah] should be sent, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord come—15 To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse.
What can we be sure of: Joseph is saying two different personages visited him and Oliver with separate keys.
What is the problem? They are one and the same person. There is no Elias in the Old Testament at all let alone at the time of Abraham.
Who can shed extra light? Jesus makes a referefnce to Elias as do the Gospels
Matthew 17:1-4 At the transfiguration King James version (as used by Joseph Smith) it speaks of Moses & Elias appearing. Later, arguably more accurate translations identify the characters as Moses & Elijah. This passage reinforces the criticism of them being the same person.
In modern translations Luke 1:17 refers to John the Baptist going before The Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, (KJV refers to Elias) with the theme of turning hearts to parents and their children. Given that the Malachi 4:5,6 theme of hearts is used then only the name Elijah should correctly be used and any reference here to another individual named Elias is not substantiated.
As above the comparable version of Matthew 11:11:14 refers to John the Baptist as being the Elijah who was to come. KJV Elias.
In the context above FAIR Mormon and the LDS Bible Dictionary correctly claim that Elijah / Elias can be referred to as individual performing a role as an Elijah / Elias as shown by the references to John the Baptist.
FAIR concludes that there are four options aa to the identity of the Elias referred to in D&C Sec 110. John The Baptist which it immediately discounts as he has his own identity and restored the Aaroni Priesthood D&C 13:1 Unknown Prophet from the time of Abraham suggested in the LDS Bible Dictionary mused by Bruce R McConkie. Abraham himself who was McConkie’s favoured possibility. Noah this suggestion is quite convoluted so I won’t get in the weeds with it.
I see the role of modern prophets and revelation as bringing added light and knowledge to the cauldron of religious confusion.
The first question I ask myself is this. Was our understanding of who Elias /Elijah was and the role employed as a title easier to understand if we consider that Elias is just the Greek form of Elijah and that is whom the New Testament exclusively refers to?
In other words the only reason we are examining this topic is because Joseph Smith referred to them as separate characters.
This revelation D&C 110, referring to Elias who could have been John the Baptist, Abraham, a prophet at the time of Abraham we don’t know about or Noah does not bring clarification through modern revelation. In fact it introduces the opposite, it creates a problem. Apologists, including the revered doctrinal apostle McConkie are required to undertake a range of cerebral gymnastics to find solutions that the prophet of the restoration has created for them. If I were Jesus sending an ancient messenger with important keys I would have him declare his true identity then all further criticisms could be avoided. ie “I am Elias a prophet in the days of Abraham, I am passing on to you the keys that I gave to Abraham, that are his, they are in his name and of his seed but he didn’t really have them I do.” That makes it so much clearer as to his identity. We can choose to accept or reject the existence of such an Elias. But that then produces another conundrum to be solved, why is Abraham referred to as having keys but really they are Elias’s. No wonder Bruce R was keener on the Abraham being Elias option. In which case, why the H***! didn’t he just say I am Abraham, why is Jesus allowing his messengers to create confusion.
One of the reasons I lost my LDS faith is that the apologetics are so tenuous and so numerous that their collective paucity eventually overstretched my boundaries of credibility.