The short answer
The 1835 revelation added the names of Peter, James, and John. Joseph Smith had already mentioned receiving priesthood through angels in 1832. In 1834 Oliver Cowdery described both a vision and receiving baptismal authority under an angel’s hand. Those records show how the accounts became more specific. They leave the date of the visit by Peter, James, and John open.
Three records to compare
- 1832. Joseph’s unfinished history outlines priesthood received through angels and separately mentions high priesthood. The outline gives no names for the three apostles. Read the 1832 outline
- 1834. Oliver describes seeing and hearing an angel, being wrapped in a vision, and receiving authority under the angel’s hand. He is describing the conferral connected with baptism. Read Cowdery’s letter
- 1835. The printed revelation adds the named visitors and their role in conferring authority. Compare it with the early sacrament text, whose copyist mentions an angel in the heading but gives no such ordination account. Early copy · Expanded print
Ask what the gap shows
If someone says the 1835 addition proves invention, ask what we would expect to find if Joseph and Oliver were recording an earlier experience in more detail. The short sacrament text gives useful evidence about the wording, and Cowdery’s 1834 testimony gives evidence about what he was already saying publicly. Both belong in the comparison.
Why the dates matter
If your question is whether Jesus can authorize others while retaining His own priesthood, start with the case on Hebrews 7.
Latter-day Saints believe John the Baptist gave Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery authority to baptize and that Peter, James, and John later conferred greater authority. The objection is that the surviving sources from 1829 contain no account of those visits, while specific details appear years later. Lane Thuet, writing for Mormonism Research Ministry, argues that the later details were added to supply an origin for the Church’s authority. Priesthood Restored or Retrofit? · Joseph Smith Papers, earliest documents
Grant Palmer makes a more specific argument. He reads the records as a progression from authority conveyed through the Spirit, to a vision involving angels, to an encounter with named resurrected figures. He takes the increasing physical detail as evidence that the story developed. That is the argument to test against the wording of the records. Palmer’s interview, publisher transcript at 1:15:53–1:16:34
What the surviving sources say
| Record | What it establishes |
|---|
| Sacrament revelation, dictated around August 1830 | The surviving 1831 copy gives instructions about the sacrament. Its heading mentions an angel stopping Joseph as he went to buy wine. The text contains no account of John the Baptist or the three apostles conferring authority. A short version also appeared in the 1833 Book of Commandments. |
| Joseph Smith’s 1832 history | The unfinished history opens with an outline that mentions receiving priesthood through angels and separately refers to receiving high priesthood. It gives no names or date for the later visitors. |
| Cowdery’s 1834 published account | Cowdery recalls an unnamed angel descending and conferring priesthood in connection with baptism. He describes hearing and seeing the angel, receiving priesthood under his hand, and being wrapped in a vision. |
| Expanded revelation published in 1835 | The expanded text names John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John. It says the three ordained Joseph and Oliver as apostles. The Joseph Smith Papers identifies it as the first clear documentary reference to the three visiting and conferring keys. |
| Joseph Smith’s 1842 letter, Doctrine and Covenants 128:20 | Joseph places Peter, James, and John along the Susquehanna between Harmony and Colesville. The passage gives a location and gives no calendar date. |
What the chronology can bear
Cowdery’s account complicates the progression Palmer proposes. Cowdery uses visionary language and describes receiving authority under an angel’s hand in the same 1834 account. Those details already coexist before the 1835 publication. Cowdery is describing baptismal authority here. His account leaves the separate question of what happened with Peter, James, and John to other sources. Cowdery’s 1834 letter
The 1835 expansion is real. The sacrament text gained a passage identifying the visitors and describing authority they conferred. The earlier record of the Church exercising authority and Joseph’s 1832 reference to angels both predate that addition. To decide whether the new passage reflects a developing story or later recording of an experience, ask what evidence would distinguish the two. The date of first clear documentation gives us a date for the claim in writing. Articles and Covenants, circa April 1830 · Joseph Smith Papers, 1835 text and editorial notes
The dates of the records and the dates of the reported visits are separate questions. A later document can describe an earlier event, and the delay gives historians reason to ask about memory, disclosure, and how a story developed. The Church’s own history says the surviving sources cannot date the appearance of Peter, James, and John precisely. Restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood
A response you could give
“You’re right that the 1835 text added the names. Joseph already mentioned priesthood through angels in 1832. In 1834 Oliver described a vision and receiving baptismal authority under the angel’s hand. I believe their testimony. I’d ask what evidence favors invention over later recording, especially since the surviving documents leave the exact date of the visit by Peter, James, and John open.”
