Covenants vs. Commandments

This concept gathers Kyle’s question, raised while reading Joseph Smith — Rough Stone Rolling, about how covenants relate to commandments in Latter-day Saint theology. It arises in the book’s treatment of plural marriage as “covenant-bound rule under revelation.” Bushman writes that to Joseph’s mind “revelation functioned like law” — the early revelations were literally called “commandments” and “required obedience,” while the marriage revelation bound “partners to each other by covenant,” making adultery a breach of the New and Everlasting Covenant rather than merely of a moral code. The same strict standard held under plural marriage as under monogamy, “except that revelation set the standard.”

Kyle’s annotation pushes on the distinction in practical terms: “Are non-temple marriages considered lesser than temple marriages? The New and Everlasting Covenant includes ordinances sealed by the Priesthood — so is a civil marriage still considered adultery?” The book frames the marriage covenant as preparing the Saints “less for wedded bliss than for heavenly rule” — covenant as the binding instrument of God’s government, distinct from a commandment as a directive to obey.

Where this appears

• Joseph Smith — Rough Stone Rolling — plural marriage as covenant-bound rule, revelation functioning as law, and Kyle’s question on temple vs. civil marriage under the New and Everlasting Covenant