Christ and the Ancient of days are often conflated in medieval theology and iconography because of the textual variant in Dan 7:13 OG that depicts the humanlike one approaching "as," instead of "up to," the Ancient of days. This conflation informs the imagery used to describe the divine figure in Rev 1:7, and it led to a long dispute in some Christian communities over the nature of these figures. In the Coptic Fourteenth Vision of Daniel of the eight-twelfth century, for example, the Son of Man and the Ancient of Days are understood to be identical (DiTommaso 179-84). And the conflation of these figures did not stop there: in the nineteenth-century Mormon book of Doctrine and Covenants 27.11, a list of those who have received the gospel includes "Michael, or Adam, the father of all, the prince of all, the ancient of days," which conflates the biblical characters of the first human and the chief angel (J. Smith 41). Joseph Smith clarified this teaching: "Daniel in his seventh chapter speaks of the Ancient of Days; he means the oldest man, our Father Adam, Michael, he will call his children together and hold a council with them to prepare for the coming of the Son of Man. He [Adam] is the father of the human family. . . . The Son of Man stands before him, and there is given him glory and dominion. Adam delivers up his stewardship to Christ" (Nyman 111). Thus Smith interprets Dan 7 as a transmission of authority from Adam/Michael to Jesus as rightful ruler of the earth.