Possible Significance
The evidence presented above suggests that the timing of Elijah’s return may have been arranged to occur on the best anniversary of Easter, calendrically speaking, in history. But for what reason?
The Lord’s possible intent in such a matter may be beyond our understanding (see Isa. 55:8–9); on the other hand, the scriptures are given to us to search for understanding, and in that spirit it may be acceptable to offer the following four possibilities.
1. Timing of the Last Dispensation. This is the dispensation of the fulness of times. When did it begin? At the First Vision? At the organization of the Church? One clue to answering this question was provided by the Prophet Joseph Smith, who taught that the sealing power of Elijah has been given in every true dispensation of the gospel (D&C 128:9), and that it “is necessary in the ushering in of the dispensation of the fulness of times, which is now beginning to usher in.” (D&C 128:18.)
Thus, apparently this dispensation could not have fully begun before 3 April 1836, when the keys of Elijah were restored. But by July 1837 the dispensation apparently was in progress, when the Lord called it “the dispensation of the fulness of times” and referred to “the keys of the dispensation” which had been restored. (D&C 112:30–32.) Finally, Elijah’s own declaration seems to favor the significance of the 3 April 1836 date, for it was then that he declared, “The keys of this dispensation are committed into your hands.” (D&C 110:16.)
But why would the bestowal of the keys of the dispensation of the fulness of times have been timed to coincide with a special anniversary of the Resurrection? One possible reason is that one use of the phrase “fulness of time” referred to the time when the law of Moses would be fulfilled. Lehi prophesied that “in the fulness of time he [the Redeemer] cometh to bring salvation unto men.” (2 Ne. 2:3.) Paul clarified the meaning: “When the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son to redeem them that were under the law.” (Gal. 4:4–5.) Thus, the “fulness of time” apparently referred to the time that man would be redeemed, which was completed at the resurrection of the Redeemer.
At his return, Elijah stated that “the time has fully come” for Malachi’s prophecy to be fulfilled (D&C 110:14), suggesting that the prophecy of Elijah’s return was to be fulfilled at a specified time. Perhaps he also implied that the time had fully come to begin the fulness of times.
Thus, on Sunday, 3 April 1836, apparently the time had fully come to open the dispensation of the fulness of times on a special anniversary of the fulness of time of the Resurrection.
2. Timing of the “Elijah Period.” As discussed earlier, the Prophet Joseph Smith taught that “the spirit of Elias is first, Elijah second, and Messiah last.” This teaching suggests three distinct periods in Church history.
Perhaps 3 April 1836 can be thought of as the close of the “Elias period” or preparatory phase of Church history, when finally all the forerunners had restored their keys in the spirit of Elias. (See D&C 27:5–13; D&C 128:20–21.) This period could have been closed when Elias himself, perhaps the same Elias who holds the keys of the restoration of all things (D&C 27:6), returned immediately before Elijah.
Then the next period could have commenced with the long-awaited advent of Elijah’s return. The Church would then enter into an era of temple work and building up the kingdom, having had all of the preparatory keys restored. The “Elijah period” would then end with the coming of the great day of the Lord.
3. Restoration of the Temple. The Lord used the symbolism of comparing his body to the temple. (John 2:21.) It seems very fitting that the restoration of the power and glory of the temple should occur on such a noteworthy anniversary of the restoration of the body of the Savior to power and glory. Note that the words resurrection and restoration are used interchangeably in the Book of Mormon (as in Alma 40–41), which is not surprising because resurrection is a type of restoration.
Further, one can note the calendrical similarity of the events of the week prior to April 3, according to the chronology presented in Part 1. On Sunday, 27 March a.d. 33, the body of Jesus was anointed (“dedicated”?) for burial. (John 12:1–7.) Similarly, the Kirtland Temple was dedicated on Sunday, 27 March 1836. (D&C 109.) Moreover, during the week following both of these dedications, the ordinance of the washing of feet was introduced and the sacrament of the Lord’s supper was observed. (See History of the Church, 2:410–40.)
4. Body of the Church Restored. The Lord’s church has also been compared to his physical body. After discussing the interdependence of various members of the physical body, Paul concluded, “Now ye are the body of Christ,” and explained that all positions in the Church are important. (1 Cor. 12:12–31.)
The organization of the Lord’s church in the latter days occurred on 6 April 1830. Apparently, this “birth” of the ecclesiastical “body of Christ” occurred on the anniversary of the birth of his physical body, 6 April 1 b.c. Thus, a correspondence is suggested between the birth of the Savior and the birth of his church.
It is proposed that on Easter Sunday, 16 Nisan, 3 April a.d. 33, the physical body of Christ was restored, clothed with a fulness of power and glory. (See Alma 40:23.) On Easter Sunday, 16 Nisan, 3 April a.d. 1836, the ecclesiastical body of Christ was restored, clothed with a fulness of priesthood authority. Thus, a correspondence is suggested between the restoration of the body of the Savior to a fulness of power and the restoration of the body of the Church to the fulness of the Melchizedek Priesthood.
This article has attempted to show that the dates of the principal events in the Savior’s life and the date of Elijah’s return in this last dispensation are remarkably rich in significance. The restoration of the keys of this dispensation was an extremely important event which occurred on a very special anniversary of the proposed resurrection date for our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. On Easter, may we not only remember the restoration of the Savior’s physical body, but also the restoration of the fulness of the priesthood to the body of his church.
Realignment Intervals
To understand the concept of a “realignment interval,” consider a wristwatch. (Figure 1.) It has a second hand, a minute hand, and an hour hand to keep track of three different time intervals. The starting point of the day occurs when all three hands point exactly straight up. A realignment interval for the watch is completed when all three hands again point straight up, that is, after exactly twelve hours.
Realigning the hands of a watch is simple because there are an exact number of seconds in a minute and an exact number of minutes in an hour. Thus, the first realignment interval encountered is a perfect lineup, and there is no reason to search for more accurate intervals.
Figure 1. The interval of time necessary for all three hands on the wristwatch to turn around to the straight up position is an example of a “realignment interval.”
A calendar can be thought of as a clock that keeps track of longer periods or cycles of time—the sun and moon are like the hands of the clock. Note that our word “watch” (meaning clock) is the same as that formerly used to describe a time period determined by “watching” the sky (as in Matt. 24:43). A problem that arises is that sometimes the cycles do not “come out even.” For instance, the solar year, in which the seasons repeat, equals 365.2422 days rather than a whole number of days such as 365. A question fundamental in the construction of any calendar is how to align the different cycles. The solution lies in finding an interval that is approximately a whole number of all the cycles.
The problem can be represented by the device drawn in Figure 2a. The large pulley has a circumference equal to 365.2422 times that of the smaller one. If each one has an arrow painted on it that points exactly vertical, after how many revolutions will both arrows be pointing straight up again?
Because the circumference is an irrational number of days, as is the case with most astronomical periods, the two pointers never again point straight up exactly simultaneously. There are only approximate solutions; the longer one is willing to wait, the more accurately they will align.
For example, after 365 revolutions of the small wheel, the larger one almost (but not quite) finishes a rotation, so a first approximation to a year is 365 days. But after 1,461 revolutions of the small pulley, one might notice that the large one has more nearly completed exactly four turns (years). That gives an average year of 1,461 divided by 4 = 365.25 days, which is the reason we add a leap day every 4 years. Our Gregorian calendar is based on the observation that 146,097 days very nearly equal 400 years, giving an approximate year of 146,097 divided by 400 = 365.2425 days.
