Priesthood Line Of Authority

[MormonMason]

1 Timothy 2

5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Hasn't anyone told you yet that the Aaronic and Melchezidek preisthood aren't present among the members of the NT church, at least according to the Bible, but I know that the Bible is missing many plain and precious truths that were removed by the Catholic great and abominable church.

The Melchizedek Priesthood was indeed amongst the early Church at one time. It was called the royal priesthood. (Melchizedek was a king and so is Christ, so the name "royal priesthood" is an apt and fitting title for it). Remember that Jesus appointed and/or ordained his apostles. We also know from various early Christian writings like the Didache that the early Church had prophets as high priests.

We also know the Aaronic priesthood was amongst them because there were Bishops, levitical priests and Levites who were members of the early Church. In addition, if there was a restoration, this must only have been possible if these things were in the early Church in some dispensation or other.

It remains for the critics to demonstrate fully that a restoration did not take place.

[Billy]

The Melchizedek Priesthood was indeed amongst the early Church at one time. It was called the royal priesthood. (Melchizedek was a king and so is Christ, so the name "royal priesthood" is an apt and fitting title for it). Remember that Jesus appointed and/or ordained his apostles. We also know from various early Christian writings like the Didache that the early Church had prophets as high priests.

Royal priesthood and Melchezedek priesthood are not the same.

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

Technically it does not say that Melchizedek had the Melchizedek priesthood, rather that he was a priest of the most high God. But this is splitting hairs, besides Christ and Melchizedek who had the Melchizedek priesthood in the Biblical account?

We also know the Aaronic priesthood was amongst them because there were Bishops, levitical priests and Levites who were members of the early Church.

It remains for the critics to demonstrate fully that a restoration did not take place.

When did the Aaronic priesthood change from a hereditary priesthood to one that could be given to any of the 12 tribes of Israel (i.e not restricted to the line of Aaron within the tribe of Levi)?

[Billy]

The OP was on how to obtain his Priesthood line of authority. You tried to derail it by first questioning the LDS Priesthood and then bring in comments that had nothing to do with obtaining a line of authority.

Actually I thought that my comment was fairly on track. I mentioned the verse from Timothy which states that there is only one mediator between man and God and that is Christ Jesus. By adding layers of authority you are derailing that direct line between you and God.

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

And I find it highly arrogant of you to come into this site and profess LDS are wrong and you are right..."

But it is not arrogant for LDS posters to say that I am wrong and that you are right? This goes both ways, don't you think?

[MormonMason]

Royal priesthood and Melchezedek priesthood are not the same.

Oh, but they are. It is the priesthood of kings. But, I know that your theological expectations and scriptural wrestings would never allow you to accept such a proposition. I'd need to see a bit mroe evidence from you to reject the idea that the royal priesthood and Melchizedek priesthood are not one and the same.

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

Technically it does not say that Melchizedek had the Melchizedek priesthood, rather that he was a priest of the most high God. But this is splitting hairs, besides Christ and Melchizedek who had the Melchizedek priesthood in the Biblical account?

No, the passages of scripture as a whole show that the priesthood was held by Melchizedek and that Christ also was ordained in the fixed succession of said priesthood. The taxei of the priesthood means a fixed succession. One can only have or be part of a succession if there are other individuals who held the same, such as it was with the priests of Aaron. The difference is that the priests of Aaron were for the most part a lineal succession whereas the Melchizedek priesthood was not.

In addition, before there was an Aaronic priesthood, there were those who were priests of God. (See Exodus 19:21-22). The Aaronic Priesthood received first mention at its creation in Exodus 28. Pray tell, what priesthood did they hold if at the time there was to speak of no Aaronic priesthood? Remember that the Bible only mentions two priesthoods, the Aaronic and the Melchizedek. If it was not the Aaronic priesthood (and it wasn't), which priesthood could it have been?

When did the Aaronic priesthood change from a hereditary priesthood to one that could be given to any of the 12 tribes of Israel (i.e not restricted to the line of Aaron within the tribe of Levi)?

Holders of the Melchizedek priesthood can officiate in the offices of the Aaronic priesthood. In addition, I'd imagine that the lineal requirement passed away, at least for a time, at the time the Law of Moses was fulfilled by Christ and after the resurrection.

Modern day revelation confirms that but also states that those who were descendents of Aaron hold the direct right to this Aaronic priesthood. The real issue is one thing--either God revealed this information or he did not.

[MormonMason]

Actually I thought that my comment was fairly on track. I mentioned the verse from Timothy which states that there is only one mediator between man and God and that is Christ Jesus. By adding layers of authority you are derailing that direct line between you and God.

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

...

This has not a whit to do with the issue of priesthood succession. It might have bearing were LDS to teach that priesthood holders were mediators of some sort, not that you falsely interpret the concept of priesthood succession in the LDS faith as somehow underlying such a view. You seem to be confusing Roman Catholic ideas on succession of bishops with those of the LDS faith. If you truly were a member of the Church in even a nominal sense for any length of time, you would not be confused in this manner.

[SolarPowered]

... as soon as I figure out how to report someone...

There is a "! REPORT" button in the bottom left corner of each post.

[Billy]

Oh, but they are. It is the priesthood of kings. But, I know that your theological expectations and scriptural wrestings would never allow you to accept such a proposition. I'd need to see a bit mroe evidence from you to reject the idea that the royal priesthood and Melchizedek priesthood are not one and the same.

No doubt that Christ came down the royal line of Judah as it states in Hebrews, and it also states that within the tribe of Judah nothing concerning priesthood is spoken.

Heb 7:14 "14For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood."

No, the passages of scripture as a whole show that the priesthood was held by Melchizedek and that Christ also was ordained in the fixed succession of said priesthood.

Where do you get this idea of a "fixed succession of said priesthood" from? There is nowhere in the Bible that states that any other person held this priesthood. Psalms 110 mentions Melchezedek, but this is a Messianic Psalm.

Heb 7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest. . ."

Notice the word similitude in the above verse indicates similar but not the same.

Similitude

1 a: counterpart , double b: a visible likeness : image

2: an imaginative comparison : simile

3 a: correspondence in kind or quality b: a point of comparison

In addition, before there was an Aaronic priesthood, there were those who were priests of God. (See Exodus 19:21-22). The Aaronic Priesthood received first mention at its creation in Exodus 28. Pray tell, what priesthood did they hold if at the time there was to speak of no Aaronic priesthood? Remember that the Bible only mentions two priesthoods, the Aaronic and the Melchizedek. If it was not the Aaronic priesthood (and it wasn't), which priesthood could it have been?

You are presupposing that it has to be one or the other.

"Priest - The Heb. kohen, Gr. hierus, Lat. sacerdos, always denote one who offers sacrifices.

At first every man was his own priest, and presented his own sacrifices before God. Afterwards that office devolved on the head of the family, as in the cases of Noah (Gen. 8:20), Abraham (12:7; 13:4), Isaac (26:25), Jacob (31:54), and Job (Job 1:5)." http://www.ccel.org/e/easton/ebd/ebd/T0003000.html#T0003001

Gen 14:18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem [a] brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High,

Genesis 41:45 . . .priest of On, [a] to be his wife. And Joseph went throughout the land of Egypt.

Genesis 41:50 . . .priest of On

Genesis 46:20 . . .priest of On.

Genesis 47:22 . . .land of the priests, because they received a regular allotment from Pharaoh

Genesis 47:26 . . .Pharaoh. It was only the land of the priests that did not become Pharaoh's.

Exodus 2:16 . . .Now a priest of Midian had seven daughters (Jethro)

Exodus 3:1 . . .Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian

Exodus 18:1 . . . Now Jethro, the priest of Midian

First 9 priests that show up in the Bible from Gen 1-Exodus 18. Other than Melchizekek do you recognize any of the main players in the History of the Bible. Don't you find it odd that you do not see Adam, Seth, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph in this list?

Also you say that it has to be either the Aaronic or Melchizedek priesthood, what priesthood did the priest of On have? Or how about Moses' father in law Jethro, what priesthood did he have?

[Kreno]

So, I was reading in the other thread about the line of priesthood authority. I know my father has a copy, and I had seen it. HOWEVER, It led me to ask, where can I get mine? So, I called Dad and he said that I could contact SLC and get a copy from the church.

So, I pose this question to you, the readers.

Who do I call to get my hands on a copy of my Priesthood Line of Authority?

Point of contact? Phone number? Etc?

Thanks in advance.

Check your ward clerk. He can get you a copy.

[jadams_4242]

Ummm..........given the name Ruby...........I thought you were a person lacking in Y-chromosomes.

While Salt Lake should have the info on file, it'd probably be easier to contact either the Stake clerk or the person who ordained you.

I got mine from the latter.

Thats how i found mine.

[RubyHunter]

Yeah, the RUBY part is from a screen name I used years ago. I'm a legit guy. I have a wife. two kids. Etc. I'm active. Kids are kinda active. Wife thinks its a waste. BUT, I'm the important part of that one for this questions purposes. Anyways, I got the information I needed, and I'm outta this thread. Thanks guys.

[MormonMason]

ANIJEN: Thank you VERY much.

ERAYR: Thank you VERY much.

BILLY: /sigh Just go away, your rhetoric isn't appriciated and as soon as I figure out how to report someone, you're on the list for it.

One must be logged-in. Once that is accomplished, just click the button I have marked in red in the post you wish to report.

Then, type your comments to the Moderators. They usually check them periodically and either warn posters, tell them to take a hike from a thread, delete posts and/or ban users depending upon the kind of offense reported.

[MormonMason]

No doubt that Christ came down the royal line of Judah as it states in Hebrews, and it also states that within the tribe of Judah nothing concerning priesthood is spoken.

Heb 7:14 "14For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood."

Moses spoke concerning the new priesthood which he set up and the current text of the Pentateuch speaks of the lineal order of priests not that of other tribes. Originally the Israelites were to become a kingdom of priests but they screwed up and this caused the priesthood of Aaron to be created and bestowed lineally instead of all Israelite men becoming priests.

Where do you get this idea of a "fixed succession of said priesthood" from? There is nowhere in the Bible that states that any other person held this priesthood. Psalms 110 mentions Melchezedek, but this is a Messianic Psalm.

It may be a messianic psalm but it is predicated on the reality of Melchizedek holding this priesthood. That makes more than one. As to where I got the idea of a succession of priesthood from, I got it from here:

Now, the key to understanding this is that each and every use of the word listed in the dictionary entry indicates an order as in being set in order one thing after another in its proper place. Look at the definitions very carefully. I disagree with some who have composed dictionaries who advocate the changing of the meanings of words mid-sentence and mid-paragraph. I thought I would say that now so as to remove all doubt as to where I stand. We must look at the usage of the words across the authors and we must compare that usage to how other authors used the words in the history of the word to determine its more less precise range of meaning. The most common etymological usage was a reference to a "priestly office." The second most common usage in all the ancient papyri where the word occurred, was that of "a list." The usage of "tax" or "assessment" came in third but this is never usd in the NT. The fourth and last usage was that of "character" or quality" but this lexicon only gives as an example 2 Maccabees 9:18. (See, for example, Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, 625).

The usage in the Bible in nearly every place where it occurs refers to a succession or order. It contains the inherent meaning of organization or orderliness wherever it is used in the NT. Think on that for a minute or two. May I also suggest that you also study up on the King Rites and Year Rites of Israel? This verse from the Psalms was believed to have been quoted during the coronation of the Kings of Israel.

Heb 7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest. . ."

Notice the word similitude in the above verse indicates similar but not the same.

Similitude

1 a: counterpart , double b: a visible likeness : image

2: an imaginative comparison : simile

3 a: correspondence in kind or quality b: a point of comparison

Yep, unfortunately for you, this is an example of a word falling into relative disuse and changing its meaning over time. It is also a translation of the Latin Vulgate rather than the Greek text itself. The Latin Vulgate has the latin word for similitude there. This is one of those unfortunate circumstances where the KJV relied on the Vulgate via Tyndale's translation rather than on any Greek text. There are many such passages in the New Testament! The actual range of meaning can be found here:

I have marked related words as well so that you can see the full range of meaning. The arrow points to the word that occurs in the Greek passage of Hebrews 7:15. It is closer in overall meaning to definitions 1 and 3 you have given above.

By the way, don't even try to pull the JST into this one. Joseph Smith didn't so much as touch this passage. I just checked my typescript of the JST manuscripts.

You are presupposing that it has to be one or the other.

"Priest - The Heb. kohen, Gr. hierus, Lat. sacerdos, always denote one who offers sacrifices.

At first every man was his own priest, and presented his own sacrifices before God. Afterwards that office devolved on the head of the family, as in the cases of Noah (Gen. 8:20), Abraham (12:7; 13:4), Isaac (26:25), Jacob (31:54), and Job (Job 1:5)." http://www.ccel.org/e/easton/ebd/ebd/T0003000.html#T0003001

And...??? This is an interpretation based upon silence. Where in the Bible does it say that every man was a priest for himself? Nowhere.

Gen 14:18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem [a] brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High,

Genesis 41:45 . . .priest of On, [a] to be his wife. And Joseph went throughout the land of Egypt.

Genesis 41:50 . . .priest of On

Genesis 46:20 . . .priest of On.

Genesis 47:22 . . .land of the priests, because they received a regular allotment from Pharaoh

Genesis 47:26 . . .Pharaoh. It was only the land of the priests that did not become Pharaoh's.

Exodus 2:16 . . .Now a priest of Midian had seven daughters (Jethro)

Exodus 3:1 . . .Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian

Exodus 18:1 . . . Now Jethro, the priest of Midian

Melchizedek = true priest.

Priest of On = false priest.

Priests of Pharaoh = false priests.

Jethro priest of Midian = possibly true priest. He knows the Lord and assists Moses in the adminstration of affairs in various places in the text. In his case, my reason for believing that Jethro held the Melchizedek priesthood comes from the following:

6 And the sons of Moses, according to the Holy Priesthood which he received under the hand of his father-in-law, Jethro;

7 And Jethro received it under the hand of Caleb;

8 And Caleb received it under the hand of Elihu;

9 And Elihu under the hand of Jeremy;

10 And Jeremy under the hand of Gad;

11 And Gad under the hand of Esaias;

12 And Esaias received it under the hand of God.

(Doctrine and Covenants 84:6-12)

So, as you can see, I believe that Jethro held the Melchizedek priesthood. I admit that the Bible is silent on the matter but the fact of the matter is, the Bible--apart from old, out-of-date Bible dictionaries--give allowance for three groups of priests, false, idolatrous priests, Aaronic priests, and Melchizedek priests. The priests spoken of in the passage I gave above in a previous post speak of coming near to the Lord, which indicates that they are true priests of God. They cannot be Aaronic priest because they do nt exist at that point in the history and they are not false priests, so what does the Bible leave us?

First 9 priests that show up in the Bible from Gen 1-Exodus 18. Other than Melchizekek do you recognize any of the main players in the History of the Bible. Don't you find it odd that you do not see Adam, Seth, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph in this list?

No, I do not see it as odd at all, considering that the Bible has been rewritten in several places and knowing as I do that the Bible itself refers to many inspired sources which no longer exist and which contained much more information than our current Bibles contain at this time. The Bible we have now is only an abridgement of many previous sources, most of which no longer exist. You should check out Josephus sometime. There are many points in his works that cannot any longer be found in the Bible but which were contained in the Bible manuscripts that Josephus knew and to which he had access.

Also you say that it has to be either the Aaronic or Melchizedek priesthood, what priesthood did the priest of On have? Or how about Moses' father in law Jethro, what priesthood did he have?

As I just said above, the priest of On was a false priest. I believe that Jethro was a priest after the order of Melchizedek. The Bible only mentions two valid priesthoods. This you cannot deny. The choice is between the Aaronic priesthood and the Melchizedek priesthood.