When Did Jesus Receive The Aaronic And Melchizedek Priesthood?

[Flyonthewall]

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

 

Mormonism teaches that there are many mediators between God and man--but the Bible teaches that since Jesus is our High Priest we can go directly to God through Jesus Christ.

No man comes to the Father except it by through Jesus Christ - that is true. But until His Second Coming He is not here, and in order for His church to function, there must be authorized representatives... which is where priesthood holders are required.

And as the Scriptures plainly teach: And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.

[Flyonthewall]

You're asking a traditional Christian to see evidence of Priesthood which he doesn't see as existing.

You might as well ask an Atheist to see evidence of God in his life.

He'll never see the evidence because he doesn't believe it exists.  It requires faith to see the evidence of the unseen.  Traditional Christian faith cannot see beyond the interpretations they were indoctrinated with any  more than we can.

I know... but at least in the afterlife, he cannot ask: Why didn't anybody tell me this before?

[Bobbieaware]

That is what the LDS church teaches but that is not taught in the Bible. You can't show me a single NT church member who held the Melchizedek priesthood.

In a previous post you were informed that in the Bible the Melchizedek Priesthood is also known as the "Royal Priesthood" and the Priesthood of Heavenly King & Priests -- both of which are mentioned in the Bible. We also believe that the saints of God who overcome will, as joint heirs with Christ, inherit ALL he possesses, including his Melchizedek Priesthood. If you don't actually believe the saints of God were made to inherit ALL Christ possesses as an inheritance from the Father (his priesthood included) that's your prerogative. But we LDS do believe it. So I hope you'll show a little respect around here and stop going around and around driving yourself and everybody else crazy. Please do stop beating this poor dead horse of yours that died many posts ago.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[Avatar4321]

That is what the LDS church teaches but that is not taught in the Bible.  You can't show me a single NT church member who held the Melchizedek priesthood.

the fact that you refuse to acknowledge it doesn't mean they didn't have it. How does Peter claim we are a royal priesthood if he has no priesthood? Why did people try to buy priesthood authority from Peter if there was no priesthood authority?

and the beauty of the gospel is you don't have to take our word for it. Study of out and asked the Lord.

[ERayR]

the fact that you refuse to acknowledge it doesn't mean they didn't have it. How does Peter claim we are a royal priesthood if he has no priesthood? Why did people try to buy priesthood authority from Peter if there was no priesthood authority?

and the beauty of the gospel is you don't have to take our word for it. Study of out and asked the Lord.

 

And where did Peter derive his authority to bind(seal) and loose?

 

Matt 16:19  And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

[Canadaigua]

the fact that you refuse to acknowledge it doesn't mean they didn't have it. How does Peter claim we are a royal priesthood if he has no priesthood? Why did people try to buy priesthood authority from Peter if there was no priesthood authority?

and the beauty of the gospel is you don't have to take our word for it. Study of out and asked the Lord.

There is nothing to acknowledge since you have yet to show me a single person in the entire NT who holds the Melchizedek priesthood.  

Here is another test for you.  Show me a single NT member of the church besides Christ who was a high priest.  

[Canadaigua]

And where did Peter derive his authority to bind(seal) and loose?

 

Matt 16:19  And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Again other verse to try and show that the apostles held the Melchizedek priesthood-but of course no mention of he Melchizedek priesthood.  LDS have simply made this up as even one of the Book of Mormon witnesses has stated in his later writings.

[JLHPROF]

Again other verse to try and show that the apostles held the Melchizedek priesthood-but of course no mention of he Melchizedek priesthood.  LDS have simply made this up as even one of the Book of Mormon witnesses has stated in his later writings.

 

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...whether it's call a duck or not.  Your hangup on the use of a specific term just shows that you are unable to recognize priesthood authority being exercised in the Bible.  It's everywhere.

[ERayR]

Again other verse to try and show that the apostles held the Melchizedek priesthood-but of course no mention of he Melchizedek priesthood.  LDS have simply made this up as even one of the Book of Mormon witnesses has stated in his later writings.

 

Talk about making things up!!! 

 

Your constant juvenile Prove it neener neener it wearing thin.  Ones religious beliefs are what one chooses to believe.  It is okay if you choose not to believe Mormonism.  I and others have tried to correct your misconceptions about our church.  You still choose to not believe or ignore us.   Your only intent seems to be to ignore and accuse.  We are not trying to convert you against your will but one would hope you would be mature enough to learn something bu then maybe not.

[Flyonthewall]

Again other verse to try and show that the apostles held the Melchizedek priesthood-but of course no mention of he Melchizedek priesthood.  LDS have simply made this up as even one of the Book of Mormon witnesses has stated in his later writings.

The Apostles were given the keys of the kingdom - power to bind on earth and in heaven. By definition, that is the priesthood.

You putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "na na na na, na na na na" doesn't change that.

[Avatar4321]

Do you think that when we are at the judgment seat of the Lord that He will justify you playing such games? Will you acknowledge His Priesthood and authority then? Or will you demand He shows you in the Bible where His Priesthood existed when you've already been shown multiple times?

If you want to know and understand the priesthood study it out and ask the Lord about it. Study how it was reestored, Oliver and Joseph's testimonies concerning it. Read how it functions. Study the duties and how to fulfill them in righteousness. Then ask the Lord whether this is His Holy Order and He will testify to you that it is. If you have faith in Christ you can obtain a knowledge of all things.

[Canadaigua]

The Apostles were given the keys of the kingdom - power to bind on earth and in heaven. By definition, that is the priesthood.

 

Can you tell me where it says that the "keys of the kingdom" = Melchizedek priesthood?

 

You said "By definition, that is the priesthood".  Where did you come up with that definition?

[Canadaigua]

Do you think that when we are at the judgment seat of the Lord that He will justify you playing such games? Will you acknowledge His Priesthood and authority then? Or will you demand He shows you in the Bible where His Priesthood existed when you've already been shown multiple times?

If you want to know and understand the priesthood study it out and ask the Lord about it. Study how it was reestored, Oliver and Joseph's testimonies concerning it. Read how it functions. Study the duties and how to fulfill them in righteousness. Then ask the Lord whether this is His Holy Order and He will testify to you that it is. If you have faith in Christ you can obtain a knowledge of all things.

"Do you think that when we are at the judgment seat of the Lord that He will justify you playing such games?"

 

You didn't quote a post so I will assume that you are speaking to me.  I am certainly not playing games at all.  I have simply asked you to tell me where on earth you claim the Bible teaches that the NT members held both the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthood and thus far I have not been given a single reference for either.  It anyone is playing games it is you.  Mormonism claims to be a RESTORATION of the NT church but all you have done is show me that it is certainly not a restoration but rather a REVISION of the NT church.  Why call it a restoration when clearly it is not?

[Flyonthewall]

Can you tell me where it says that the "keys of the kingdom" = Melchizedek priesthood?

 

You said "By definition, that is the priesthood".  Where did you come up with that definition?

Do you disagree that the priesthood is the power and authority to act in the name of God on earth?

[Avatar4321]

There is nothing to acknowledge since you have yet to show me a single person in the entire NT who holds the Melchizedek priesthood.  

Here is another test for you.  Show me a single NT member of the church besides Christ who was a high priest.

you're acting like the black knight, refusing to acknowledge that you've been bested despite having lost your arms and legs.

what priesthood did Peter belong to if not the priesthood of melchizedek? He was not a levite or a child of Aaron, so what total priesthood did he hold?

[JLHPROF]

 Mormonism claims to be a RESTORATION of the NT church but all you have done is show me that it is certainly not a restoration but rather a REVISION of the NT church.  Why call it a restoration when clearly it is not?

 

Oh it clearly is a restoration of the NT Church.  It is not a restoration of the Church that it had become by 300-400AD.

The problem is we try to view the NT Church looking backwards THROUGH 1500 years of history.  We can only see the Church in 200AD when looked at through 300AD then 400AD and so on as if they were contemporaries.

 

We need to be able to ignore everything except that information available contemporary to the life of Christ and the apostles.  When that is done there are many things that appear in the record that point to Mormon similarities.  When taken from the records of 450AD writing about 100AD it's not all that accurate a description of the early Church.

[mfbukowski]

Can you tell me where it says that the "keys of the kingdom" = Melchizedek priesthood?

 

You said "By definition, that is the priesthood".  Where did you come up with that definition?

OK now you tell me why you think the bible is true anyway?  Where do you come up with that idea?

 

No more questions until you answer that one.

Edited January 15, 2015 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

"Do you think that when we are at the judgment seat of the Lord that He will justify you playing such games?"

 

You didn't quote a post so I will assume that you are speaking to me.  I am certainly not playing games at all.  I have simply asked you to tell me where on earth you claim the Bible teaches that the NT members held both the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthood and thus far I have not been given a single reference for either.  It anyone is playing games it is you.  Mormonism claims to be a RESTORATION of the NT church but all you have done is show me that it is certainly not a restoration but rather a REVISION of the NT church.  Why call it a restoration when clearly it is not?

Who cares what the bible teaches? 

[mfbukowski]

Again other verse to try and show that the apostles held the Melchizedek priesthood-but of course no mention of he Melchizedek priesthood.  LDS have simply made this up as even one of the Book of Mormon witnesses has stated in his later writings.

Have you done any study of the bible at all?

No one knows who wrote most of it.

 

Why would you even believe that stuff?

 

Every time you post, I will ask you that until you answer satisfactorily.

[Michael Sanders]

There is nothing to acknowledge since you have yet to show me a single person in the entire NT who holds the Melchizedek priesthood.  

Here is another test for you.  Show me a single NT member of the church besides Christ who was a high priest.  

Canadaigua,

 

If we look at the priesthood evidence from the bible and consider that the “pattern” established in Israel is a “type” for the church (see John Tvedtnes, The Church of the Old Testament [salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967]) then the following church structure becomes clear:

 

Old Testament:

 

Moses – Melchizedek High Priest – God’s “mouthpiece” and ultimate authority to judge the “hard matters” of the people.

Judges – Chosen to govern and administer the laws among the various tribes in Israel.

12 Princes – One at the head of each tribe.

70 “Elders” – Leaders among the people.

Priests – Aaronite High Priest and many other priests (sons of Aaron)

Levites – Many courses of levites who teach the people and tend to the temple

 

New Testament:

 

James, the Lord’s Brother – Melchizedek High Priest – God’s “mouthpiece” and ultimate authority to judge the “hard matters” of the church (his “sentence” in Acts 15 applies to the whole church

Bishops (Overseer) – Chosen to govern and administer the laws over various stakes of the church (James in Jerusalem, Clement in Rome, etc…Ignatius describes this)

12 Apostles – “traveling councilors” charged with the work of promulgating the gospel abroad, but quorum equal in authority to the presidency

70 “Elders” – the seventy, who also did the work of evangelization, but as a quorum are equal in authority to the twelve

Elders (Presbytery) – appointed to watch over the local churches

Priests – many of which were “obedient to the faith” and went before the apostles as mentioned in Acts 8 (could baptize but not confer the holy ghost)

Teachers and Deacons – in the branches as local priesthood authorities

 

Book of Mormon:

 

Alma – Melchizedek High Priest – God’s “mouthpiece” and ultimately authority to judge the “hard matters” of the church by revelation

High Priests – over the various lands to govern and administer the laws over various lands (Ammon & Giddonah are examples) with hardest matters sent to Alma

12 Disciples - "traveling councilors" charged with promulgating the gospel and watching over the churcers

High Priests – as a council of collection (number not known, but plural) given the charge to watch over the church and to do missionary work (Sons of Mosiah for example)

Elders – appointed to watch over and regulate the church in the various local assemblies

Priests – appointed over congregations of 50 to teach and instruct as standing ministers

Teachers – in the branches as local priesthood authorities

 

Church of Christ:

 

Joseph Smith – Melchizedek High Priest – God’s “mouthpiece” and ultimate authority to judge the “hard matters” of the church (see Sec 107)

Bishops (Overseer) – also high priests chosen to govern and administer the laws of the church and to render judgments

12 Apostles – “traveling councilors” charged with the work of promulgating the gospel abroad, but quorum equal in authority to the presidency

70 “Elders” – the seventy, who also did the work of evangelization, but as a quorum are equal in authority to the twelve

Elders (Presbytery) – appointed to watch over the local churches

Priests – office called out in the revelations with specific duties, can baptize but not confer the holy ghost

Teachers and Deacons – in the branches as local priesthood authorities

 

If we look at these “patterns” and acknowledge the incompleteness of our records in every instance – that alone should give us pause and cause us to consider how much we really “know” if we just take our “pattern” from one book in isolation from the others.  In all of these instances, the Lord begins with a “mouthpiece” and additional offices are added to that church structure as the church grows and expands to a place of full organization.  We need to be careful about taking a snapshot at one stage of development, but rather look at the whole and make comparisons between the various church structures when their development is comparable.  Any fair assessment of these “patterns” would be hard pressed to say that they are contradictory if we can make certain allowances for various naming conventions in different periods and cultures.

 

In my next post, I’ll try to marshal some evidence from the first century (when seen through the restoration lens) supports that James the Just (or James the Lord’s Brother) held this prominent position in Jerusalem and was a Melchizedek High Priest so you can have another person (other than Christ or Melchizedek) who held this office.

 

Michael Sanders

Book of Mormon Believer

Independence, MO

Edited January 15, 2015 by Michael Sanders

[Michael Sanders]

Again other verse to try and show that the apostles held the Melchizedek priesthood-but of course no mention of he Melchizedek priesthood.  LDS have simply made this up as even one of the Book of Mormon witnesses has stated in his later writings.

No - they didn't "make this up" and I addressed David's rather late reminiscence that really only shows his lack of understanding of the scriptures and desire to build up his own church.

 

What do you make of the two degrees of authority I mentioned in the case of Philip and clearly reflected in Acts 8?

 

Mike Sanders

Book of Mormon Believer

Independence, MO 

[DBMormon]

Nice try.   But as the teacher in my marriage/family class last year taught, "women are inherently more spiritual and righteous than men." "Even more than Christ?" I wanted to ask ....  but I miraculous lost my ability to breathe/speak when my wife anticipated my comment and stiffly elbowed me in the ribs. It's not the first time, and probably not the last, that the spirit has prompted her to save my bacon. She's well worth the rib I paid for her.

your funny .....

[Michael Sanders]

"Mormonism claims to be a RESTORATION of the NT church but all you have done is show me that it is certainly not a restoration but rather a REVISION of the NT church.  Why call it a restoration when clearly it is not?

 

Canadaigua,

 

In the New Testament James the Just (also called James the Righteous and James the brother of the Lord) held an important position as bishop (overseer) over the Church in Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 1 Cor 15:7; Gal 2:9-12).  Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340 CE) tells us in his “Ecclesiastical History” that James was selected by the apostles as “Bishop of Jerusalem”:

 

“But Clement in the sixth book of his Hypotyposes writes thus: ‘For they say that Peter and James and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem.’  But the same writer, in the seventh book of the same work, relates also the following things concerning him: ‘The Lord after his resurrection imparted knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter, and they imparted it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom Barnabas was one.” – Church History II.1.3-5

 

Eusebius also quotes Hegesippus (100-180 CE) which is no longer extant and whose quotations only survive in Eusebius concerning James and the Twelve that:

 

“But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth book of his Memoirs. He writes as follows: ‘James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called the Just by all from the time of our Saviour to the present day....He was holy from his mother's womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel...” – Church History II.23.5-6

 

Clement of Rome (30-97 CE) or someone purporting to be him, addresses his letter in the non-canonical Psuedo-Clementine Homilies of Clement to “James…Bishop of Bishops, who rules Jerusalem, the Holy Assembly of the Hebrews and the Assemblies everywhere…”

 

Now for the restoration lens (sorry we just have more information that informs our belief as opposed to your belief that we are just reading our beliefs back into earlier texts):

 

James seems to fit the description of the presiding high priest as found in LDS Section 107:

 

“then cometh the high priesthood, ... it must needs be that one be appointed, of the high priesthood, to preside over the priesthood; ... From the same cometh the administering of ordinances and blessings upon the church, by the laying on of the hands. Wherefore the office of a bishop is not equal unto it, for the office of a bishop is in administering all temporal things: nevertheless, a bishop must be chosen from the high priesthood ... [and] set apart unto the ministering of temporal things, having a knowledge of them by the Spirit of truth, and also to be a judge in Israel, to do the business of the church, to sit in judgment upon transgressors, upon testimony, as it shall be laid before him, according to the laws ... Thus shall he be a judge, even a common judge among the inhabitants of Zion until ... it becomes necessary to have other bishops, or judges. And inasmuch as there are other bishops appointed they shall act in the same office…Again, verily I say unto you: The most important business of the church, and the most difficult cases of the church, inasmuch as there is not satisfaction upon the decision of the judges, it shall be handed over and carried up unto the court of the church, before the president of the high priesthood...[who] shall have power to call other high priests, even twelve, to assist as counselors; and thus the president of the high priesthood, and his counselors shall have power to decide upon testimony according to the laws of the church. And after this decision, it shall be had in remembrance no more before the Lord; for this is the highest council of the church of God, and a final decision upon controversies…" – Section 107:64-80

 

There is “one” appointed from the “high priesthood” to preside over and administer ordinances and blessings upon the church by the laying on of hands.  A “bishop” (overseer) is also a “high priest” who is appointed to be a judge in Israel over an established area or stake.  If his decision is not accepted then the “most difficult cases of the church” are given to the president of the high priesthood who duty is to convene a council of 12 high priests (high council) and render a final decision on controversies.

 

The Book of Mormon has this “pattern” except that the priesthood designation is not Bishop (which simply means overseer) but refers to them as “high priests” coupled with the phrase “over the land of” or a specified area.  For example, the apostate Korihor’s preaching caused division in the church as he preached to the Anti-Nephi Lehis  in Jershon.  He was brought before the “high priest” over that land to be judged.

 

“But behold, they were more wise than many of the Nephites; for they took him, and bound him, and carried him before Ammon, who was a high priest over that people.”  Alma 16:21

 

He was condemned by Ammon and cast out of the land – only to go over to the land of Gideon – same result.

 

“And he came over into the land of Gideon, and began to preach unto them also; and here he did not have much success, for he was taken and bound, and carried before the high priest, and also the chief judge over the land... Now the high priest's name was Giddonah." – Alma 16:23-27

 

Korihor refused to repent and was subsequently brought before Alma – who was the president of the high priesthood to judge the matter (this position is referred to in Alma 2:25 as “being high priest over the church”).

 

"But they caused that he should be bound; and they delivered him up into the hands of the officers, and sent him to the land of Zarahemla, that he might be brought before Alma..." – Alma 16:37 

 

Alma’s judgment?

 

"Now Alma said unto him, This will I give unto thee for a sign, that thou shalt be struck dumb, according to my words; and I say, that in the name of God, ye shall be struck dumb, that ye shall no more have utterance. 62 Now when Alma had said these words, Korihor was struck dumb, that he could not have utterance according to the words of Alma..." – Alma 16:61

 

The “pattern” found here is that the work of “Bishop” is equated to “High Priest” thus if James the Just has the Bishopric conferred upon him (Bishop of Bishops per Clement or High Priest of the High Priests per Mike) and he acts as the presiding high priest in rendering judgment over hard matter to end all controversies and his decisions are final then – well as another poster said, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck!

 

Now specifically let’s look at the place of James, the Lord’s brother.  A conference of the church was convened in Acts 15 to deal with the jewish/gentile conversion issue, i.e. did gentile converts need to be circumcised, observe the dietary code, etc…

 

James presides over the conference and after they hear all sides and confer on the topic – James renders his decision for the whole church:

 

"Wherefore, my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood..." – Acts 15:19-20

 

Also remember that according to Eusebius that the Lord imparted knowledge to “James the Just and to John and Peter” and they in turn imparted it to others.  Does this possibly equate with the Latter-Day reference concerning the presiding high priest that “from the same cometh the administering of ordinances and blessings upon the church, by the laying on of the hands.”?

 

I submit that James, the Lord’s brother (in addition to the apostles previously mentioned) is a very good candidate to be the presiding high priest selected by our Lord to govern the church with the apostles and to sit in judgment of “hard matters” or “controversies” which is a “pattern” reflected in both the NT, BOM, and the Latter-Day Church.

 

Revision or Restoration?

 

Mike Sanders

Book of Mormon Believer

Independence, MO

[Avatar4321]

We have two priesthood orders mentioned in Hebrews. The aaronic order and the melchizedek order. That does not necessarily mean those are the only orders of priesthood, just those are the only ones the bible mentions.

we also have Peter claiming to be a royal priesthood along with the brethren. So was he a priest of the aaronic order or one of the melchizedek order? We don't exactly have many choices.

[Michael Sanders]

Canadaigua and intra,

Now that you’ve interrogated us on the priesthood issue – how about a little cross-examination?

You’ve both suggested that our views on priesthood authority do not align with what is revealed in the New Testament. Would either of you care to briefly state what church structure or model represents your belief and practice? What constitutes authority in your assemblies? Do you belong to a denomination? Do you home church? Do you adhere to an elder rule model? Do you believe in paid ministry? What exactly does a “priesthood of believers” model look like? When you assemble is anyone in charge, what is he or she called? How is authority conferred upon this individual or does everyone possess this authority? How are callings determined, or is everyone called? Do you have a professional clergy or lay ministers? Do you ordain through the laying on of hands? Do you baptize? If so, how? Are there any ordinances performed by any ecclesiastical authority in your faith tradition?

Can you cite NT passages that are proof texts for your beliefs? I think it might be a good exercise to see how closely your beliefs align with the NT or if they are in fact revisionist. Then perhaps we can compare and discuss NT passages and see if they are better supports for your beliefs or restoration tenets.

Mike Sanders
Book of Mormon Believer
Independence, MO

Edited January 15, 2015 by Michael Sanders