D&C 116: One Sentence That Sends You to Daniel

On Monday night at home evening I handed Caleb the scriptures and told him section 116 was short. He got as far as "Spring Hill is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-" and stopped, looked at the rest of the word the way you look at a dish someone else brought, and said he'd just go with Spring Hill. Lily finished it for him in about one breath. We moved on to the treats.

I'd read it myself the Friday before, right after writing about section 115. That chapter is a long set of instructions for Far West. Then comes this one. It's a single sentence, and you can be through it before the kettle clicks off.

What the one verse says

Here it is whole.

Spring Hill is named by the Lord Adam-ondi-Ahman, because, said he, it is the place where Adam shall come to visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit, as spoken of by Daniel the prophet.

Doctrine and Covenants 116:1

The Church's heading calls the section an extract from Joseph Smith's history, recounting a revelation given near Wight's Ferry, at a place called Spring Hill in Daviess County, Missouri, in May or June 1838. So the sentence isn't the Lord speaking in the first person. It's the history reporting what he said, and you can hear the reporter in the "said he" tucked into the middle.

The verse names a place and gives a reason. No command, no date, nothing for the Saints at Spring Hill to do on Thursday. And the reason has an "or" in it: two events in one place with no word on which one is meant. I've heard this verse taught with the "or" quietly dropped and only the Adam half kept. The reporter in the "said he" kept both.

Where Daniel comes in

The verse ends by pointing off the page: "as spoken of by Daniel the prophet." The only way to find out what the sitting is, is to go and read Daniel, so I did. Chapter 7 is where the phrase lives.

In verse 9 Daniel writes, "I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit." Verse 10 goes on, "the judgment was set, and the books were opened." So the sitting in Daniel is a court coming to order, which is a different thing from visiting.

Verse 22 is the one I'd never connected to this section.

Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.

Daniel 7:22

The sentence before it, verse 21, says the horn "made war with the saints, and prevailed against them." So in Daniel the saints are being beaten until the Ancient of days comes. I don't know whether anyone at Spring Hill in 1838 had that in mind, and nothing in the verse says so. But it's the chapter the verse hands you, and it has beasts in it, a horn, thrones, a court and a long explanation. Verse 18 gives the saints the kingdom from the interpreter's side, and verse 17 has already told Daniel that the beasts are four kings.

Daniel himself doesn't come away calm. In verse 15 he's "grieved in my spirit," and in verse 28 he says "I kept the matter in my heart." Next to a one-verse section, that reads to me like a man who got more than he could sum up.

Adam, or the Ancient of Days

Most people who ask about this verse are really asking whether the Ancient of Days is Adam. The answer isn't in the verse, which is part of why I'm spending a section on it.

D&C 27:11 lists "Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days" among the people the Lord says he will drink with. That puts the phrase beside Adam's name, and it's why many readers take them as one person. Section 116 puts "Adam shall come to visit his people" on one side of its "or" and "the Ancient of Days shall sit" on the other. Two things, or two ways of saying one thing. The sentence doesn't tell me which.

Daniel 7 doesn't settle it either. In verse 13 "one like the Son of man" comes "to the Ancient of days," and "they brought him near before him." That's two figures in the scene, and neither is Adam by name. I can say that much. Who each one is, Daniel 7 leaves for someone else to say.

A name used before the reason was given

Two earlier revelations already use the name: D&C 107:53 has Adam calling his righteous descendants "into the valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman," and D&C 78:15 speaks of the Lord "who hath established the foundations of Adam-ondi-Ahman." Then D&C 117:8, from July of the same year, asks whether there isn't room enough "on the mountains of Adam-ondi-Ahman." A valley, then foundations, then mountains. Each time the name is simply used, as though the reader knew it. In 117 it's a rebuke to men over property in Kirtland, and there it's ordinary geography, "the land where Adam dwelt." Section 116 is the one place I found where the name arrives with a reason.

The reason is in the future tense, with Adam who "shall come to visit" and the Ancient of Days who "shall sit," and neither one comes with a date.

When I was Elders Quorum president in our old ward, there was a widow named Verna Pettit who kept a quilt folded at the foot of the bed in her spare room. She called it Merle's room. Merle was her son, and he lived in Oregon and hadn't been down in eleven years. Most Saturdays I carried her groceries in, and most Saturdays she told me Merle was coming in the spring, the way you'd tell someone the paper comes at six. She changed the sheets on that bed twice a year. I never asked how she knew, and I don't think there had been a phone call. We moved wards before I found out, and I couldn't tell you whether he ever came.

I think of her when I read "shall come to visit." A person can call a room by a name for a visit that has no date and still mean it. The verse does that with a place.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where is Spring Hill, and when was this given?

The Church's heading puts it at Spring Hill in Daviess County, Missouri, near Wight's Ferry. It gives the date as May or June 1838, which is the range I'd use unless you have a source for a single day. The section is an extract from Joseph Smith's history.

Does D&C 116 say Adam will come back to Missouri?

The verse says the place is where Adam "shall come to visit his people, or the Ancient of Days shall sit." That's the whole claim. The verse has no date in it and no event, and the "or" stays open. If you've heard more than that, it came from somewhere other than this sentence.

Is the Ancient of Days Adam?

D&C 116 gives no answer, and D&C 27:11 puts the phrase right after Adam's name in a list, and plenty of readers take that as an identification. Daniel 7 has the Ancient of days sitting while another figure is brought near him. I'd read both before deciding, and read 27 from its start, since the list is long and Adam is one name in the middle of it.

Should I read Daniel 7 first?

I would, since section 116 takes half a minute and Daniel is where the time goes. Try verses 9 through 14 and then 21 and 22. Verse 14 is where the one like the Son of man is given dominion and glory and a kingdom, and I'd want that in my head before I decided what the sitting is for.

A question for you

Daniel 7:9 and 10 have the Ancient of days sit while the books are opened, and verse 22 has judgment given to the saints and the time come that they possess the kingdom. Section 116 puts a visit on one side of its "or" and that sitting on the other. If you had to say which half the verse leans on, which would you pick and what do you do with the half you set down?

— D.