The Heart of the Matter
When Latter-day Saints and Evangelicals talk about ongoing revelation, we often spend a lot of energy debating peripheral issues — like whether Revelation 22:18–19 supports the closing of the biblical canon. But that misses the heart of the matter.
Latter-day Saints do not simply believe in an open canon; they believe in an open-ended and expandable covenant — one in which conditions, commandments, and requirements can be added or subtracted through new revelation.
This means that Latter-day Saints have a much higher burden than merely showing that the Bible allows for another prophet like Isaiah or Jeremiah. They must show that the Bible anticipates the ongoing revision (or even replacement) of the New Covenant that Christ established.
But this is something the Bible not only doesn’t support — it flatly contradicts.
I previously argued that the the cross changed everything and left no room for a Restoration. This post expands on a related issue, what the fixed nature of Christ’s covenant means for claims of ongoing revelation.
Prophets as Covenant Guardians
When we look back at the Old Testament, it’s striking that the prophets were not innovators. Moses gave the law at Mount Sinai and established the Mosaic Covenant with his people, as set out in the Five Books of Moses.
Subsequent prophets, priests, and kings did not feel free to innovate or make additions or changes to this covenant. Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the others did not come along to add new rules or modify the system. They were covenant prosecutors and protectors, calling Israel back to faithfulness. Their cry was not, “Here is something new,” but “Return to the LORD your God.”
Malachi’s prophetic word at the very end of the Old Testament is emblematic of this:
“Remember the law of my servant Moses, the statutes and rules that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel.” (Malachi 4:4)
Amos’s complaint against Israel is similar:
“They have rejected the law of the LORD, and have not kept his statutes, but their lies have led them astray.” (Amos 2:4)
God used prophets to point out how the people of Israel had failed to live up to their covenant, to warn them of destruction, and to call them to repentance. But never to annul, change, or amend God’s law.
Many Old Testament prophets did look forward to a new covenant (as did Moses in Deuteronomy 30:1–10). They predicted a day when God would establish a covenant with all of Israel, unlike the one at Sinai (Jeremiah 31:31–34; Ezekiel 36:25–27; Isaiah 42:6; 49:8). But these prophets did not feel free to annul or change the covenant (Malachi 3:6; 4:4; Amos 2:4). That would need to wait for the death of Christ on the cross.:4; Amos 2:4). That would need to wait for the death of Christ on the cross.
This was consistent with the Old Testament pattern of covenants writ large. From Adam to Noah, from Abraham to Moses, and through David, God revealed His redemptive purposes in stages — each covenant building upon rather than annulling the one before it, with all pointing forward to something greater: the ultimate and unrepeatable fulfillment in Christ.
The New Testament Pattern
On Calvary, Jesus didn’t just die as a moral example or a martyr. He established a new covenant. His blood was the seal of that covenant — a decisive, once-for-all act of redemption that changed the entire framework of God’s relationship with His people.
“For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.” (Hebrews 9:15)
The New Testament Apostles as Christ’s witnesses didn’t feel free to add to or change Christ’s covenant either. They were “ministers of a new covenant.” 2 Cor 3:6 And the New Testament writings that they authored or comissioned are the foundational documents of that covenant, explaining and applying the grace that has been revealed in Him.
The Apostles bore authoritative testimony to the Covenant that Christ had inaugurated. That’s why we see repeated warnings throughout the New Testament urging us to stand firm to the covenant that Christ established without additions:
Galatians 1:8–9
“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”
2 Timothy 1:13–14
“Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me… Guard the good deposit entrusted to you, by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us
2 Thessalonians 2:15
“So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.”
Jude 3:3
“Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.“
The Permanence of a Covenant
Paul sets out the theology behind covenants in his letters to the Galatians and Romans. Paul establishes two key principles
- Covenants are generally permanent and not set aside, annulled or added to
- Christ’s death on the Cross is what allowed Israel to be released from the Mosaic covenant in order to be under Christ’s new covenant.
In Galatians, Paul draws a really telling parallel between God’s covenant promises and human contracts:
“ To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.” (Galatians 3: 15-18)
We can draw a couple of key points from this text:
- Covenants, once ratified, cannot be annulled or amended casually. Paul uses human covenants as an analogy: when a testator dies, the covenant or will is fixed.
- The Mosaic Law did not “cancel” God’s promise to Abraham. The law and the covenant promise coexisted until the time came for the fulfilment of the promise which would bring about the end of the law on the basis of Christ’s sacrifice. And importantly, Christ’s death did not nullify God’s promises to Israel but fulfilled them and brought them to their intended goal in Him.
In Romans, Paul speaks about how the death of Christ, and our burial and death in him, is what allows us to be freed from the demands of the law. Paul again makes another earthly analogy to marriage:
“Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress. Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.” Romans 7:1–4
Because Christ has died and we “were baptized into his death” (Romans 6:3), we are freed from the demands of the old covenant and can enter into the new covenant of his grace.
In other words, a covenant once established is not casually exited. For Israel, it was only the death of Christ that could set aside the demands of the existing law.
Hebrews similarly establishes that Christ died so that he might be the “mediator of a new covenant” since this covenant could not have been enacted without “the blood of Christ.” (Hebrews 9:14-15).
Hebrews 8 speaks unmistakably about the superiority of this new covenant.
Together, these passages show that Christ’s covenant is fixed, final, and immutable.
To set apart, add, or annul the covenant of grace that Christ made on the cross would require Christ to be crucified once again on the cross–something that is impossible.
This is a really big deal.
This is the reason we must reject any claim to add new commandments, ordinances, or conditions to that covenant after the Cross.
Paul warns that if you are seeking justification under any other covenant, then “Christ is become of no effect unto you” (Galatians 5:4). When we add to the covenant of grace, we “set aside the grace of God.” (Galatians 2:21). These are sobering warnings.
Evaluating Claims of Ongoing Revelation
This is why the biblical warnings about guarding the deposit of faith (Jude 3; 2 Timothy 1:13–14; Galatians 1:8–9) are so significant. They explicitly reject the idea that new revelation can amend or expand the covenant of grace. If Christ’s covenant is complete, then any claim that additional revelation adds new commandments, ordinances, or salvific conditions represents an accretion and distortion that takes away from the power of Christ’s death on the cross.
Anyone who comes along and preaches must therefore be evaluated by their consistency with that covenant of grace. The key question is not, “Does God still speak?” but, “Does this message align with the covenant already sealed in Christ’s blood?”
If prophets were to arise today with the same Spirit and urgency as Isaiah or Jeremiah, they would not be adding new commandments or new ordinances. They would be calling us back to the Gospel covenant — to the grace, repentance, and obedience that flow from it. Their message would apply the Word, not amend it.
The Latter-day “New” Covenant
That’s where the modern Latter-day Saint idea of “continuing revelation” runs into a theological collision.
Latter-day Saints do not simply see the Doctrine & Covenants as extra guidance or commentary, but as a new set of covenantal documents establishing a new covenant in the Latter-days— i.e. a set of new commandments, ordinances, and institutional instructions that can modify, supplement, or replace what God has already established in the New Testament. For instance, LDS Scholars have noted that D&C 59 contains a new version of the Ten Commandments that reestablishes those commandments for the new covenent.
Latter-day Saints may describe temple or baptismal covenants as just a restoration of Christ’s covenant. But in practice these add new conditions for exaltation that Scripture never ties to salvation under grace. The content of what was supposedly ‘restored’ — new priesthood orders, food and drink laws, and temple rites, contradicts the New Testament’s Covenant of Grace.
The LDS model furthermore assumes a covenant still in flux — an “ongoing restoration” that can add temples, ordinances, and commandments to achieve the Celestial kingdom. But the biblical pattern doesn’t allow for a covenant that keeps evolving. In the Bible, covenants are sealed and ratified, and God’s later speech to His people is always aimed at reminding them to obey, repent of sin, and walk in the covenant already given. Prophets never annul or alter an existing covenant; they apply and enforce it.
If this was the case in the Old Testament, it is even more fully the case in the New Testament. Christ’s covenant is final because it is perfect and perfected by the once-and-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross. As I argued previously, the finished work of the cross simply leaves no room for a restoration.
This isn’t a disagreement about sola scriptura per se. Even if God were to speak authoritatively to a prophet or apostle to guide, convict, or comfort His people, he would not rewrite the terms of salvation. LDS leaders by contrast do not show fidelity to the covenant that Christ has already given.
The question, then, is not whether revelation continues — it’s what kind of revelation continues. Christians believe that God speaks today through His Word and Spirit, in perfect harmony with the covenant that has already been established and sealed forever in Christ. If God were to choose to send a new prophet, we can expect complete harmony and consistency with what has already been revealed. Once the covenant of grace was sealed by Christ’s blood, there could be no further expansion that changes its terms — only its proclamation and application to the ends of the earth.
And that, for the Christian, is the greatest possible assurance: nothing needs to be added, because everything necessary for life and godliness has already been given (2 Peter 1:3).