zerinus Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 (edited) Edit to add, please continue the discussion in this thread, as requested by David T.We don't really have any insight into how the Melchizedek priesthood was administered in pre-exilic times and whether or not any worthy Israelite male could qualify.We do have some ideas about it. According to D&C 132:39, it was held by a very select handful of high profile prophets. It was not something that was widely available to all Israelites in general. When I said that “any worthy Israelite male could qualify,” I did not mean to imply that it was widely available to everyone. What I meant to convey was that, unlike the Levitical priesthood, it was not ethnically based. There was no restriction on what tribe you came from in order to have it. But those who had it appear to have been a very select handful of high ranking prophets.But in any case, I'm not referring to lineage in the levitical sense anyway. I'm referring to lineage (or "line" if you will) in the same sense that I have a Melchizedek priesthood lineage that can be traced back to Joseph Smith.But I was! Allow me to remind you how the conversation went. You had said:I have long argued that Lehi, Nephi and Jacob have a priestly background. And one of the main motifs from the era of the return (Malachi, Ezra, Nehemiah, etc.) is the priestly issue of intermmariage. It's a striking theme in second temple literature, including the texts from Qumran. There is this sense of division between us and them. So while there are certainly a number of metaphorical uses of color in the BOM, as pointed out by Jeremy and others, there are a few that appear to read better in a more literal sense. And these passage I've always read in a context of priestly separation--it is a natural consequence of intermarriage that Nephi interprets in a spiritual sense. This is a very priestly point of view. It fits the time and background.You are here implying that the Lamanite curses (so that they would not intermarry with the Nephites) had the same justification or motivation behind it as the “priestly issue of intermarriage” with the Gentiles that the Jews had after the exile into Babylon. My reply to that was that that couldn’t be the case because the Jewish “priestly issue of intermarriage” with the Gentiles had to do with preserving the purity of the race (since the Levitical priesthood was ethnically based), whereas the priesthood of Lehi (not being Levitical) was not ethnically based, therefore the issue of preserving the purity of the race could not have been an issue with the descendents of Lehi in the promised land. To that you replied:Note that I didn't say anything about a Levitical priesthood. Most LDS scholars consider that Lehi held the Melchizedek priesthood. (The question is what the lineage for this priesthood is.) The word I used was priestly. All the biblical and pseudo-biblical texts for the time period from the exile onward document various Israelite priestly classes fixated on the uncleanliness of intermarriage. It is a very strong motif in priestly literature and thus indicative that this question actually does have something to do with the priesthood, or at the very least the culture of the individuals in the priesthood at the time.The only way that I can understand that paragraph is that you are still trying to tie up the Jewish priestly prohibition of intermarriage with the Gentiles with that of the intermarriages between the Nephites and Lamanites, by suggesting that the Melchizedek Priesthood was equally lineal as the Levitical priesthood is lineal. If it is not, the my original objection still stands, and there cannot be a connection between the two.It looks like this conversation is becoming too confused for both of us to follow. Perhaps it would be a good idea to start from the beginning. Can you be kind enough restate for me once again as clearly and concisely as you can exactly what connection do you see between the Jewish priestly prohibition of intermarriage with the Gentiles and the Nephite prohibition of intermarriage with the Lamanites? Once you have done that then maybe we can move forward with this discussion in a more constructive fashion. Edited April 7, 2012 by zerinus
David T Posted April 7, 2012 Author Posted April 7, 2012 Could I request we take the discussion of Lehite Priesthood to another thread? While I recognize the purpose for it initially being brought up, I think the further discussion is diverting significantly from the main topic. Thanks!
zerinus Posted April 7, 2012 Posted April 7, 2012 Could I request we take the discussion of Lehite Priesthood to another thread? While I recognize the purpose for it initially being brought up, I think the further discussion is diverting significantly from the main topic. Thanks!Done! The discussion is now split off into this thread. I invite J Green to continue the discussion with me in that thread.
Recommended Posts