Array

Mormonism and priesthood/Non-transferable: Difference between revisions
Line 178: Line 178:
#{{note|bauer1}} Reference "aparabatos," in Walter Bauer and Frederick William Danker (editors), ''A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature '', 3rd edition, (Urbana and Chicago, University Of Chicago Press, 2001), 97. ISBN 0226039331.
#{{note|bauer1}} Reference "aparabatos," in Walter Bauer and Frederick William Danker (editors), ''A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature '', 3rd edition, (Urbana and Chicago, University Of Chicago Press, 2001), 97. ISBN 0226039331.
#{{note|tdnt1}} Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (editors), Geoffrey W. Bromiley (translator), ''Theological Dictionary of the New Testament'' (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993), 5: 742-743.  
#{{note|tdnt1}} Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (editors), Geoffrey W. Bromiley (translator), ''Theological Dictionary of the New Testament'' (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993), 5: 742-743.  
#{{note|benson1}} {{TETB1|start=223}}
#{{note|richards1}} LeGrand Richards, ''A Marvelous Work and a Wonder'', Ch.9, p.84
#{{note|byus1}} {{BYUS1|author=Richard Lloyd Anderson|start=60|num=1|vol=6|date=NEEDED|article=NEEDED}}{{nc}}{{nl}}
#{{note|byus1}} {{BYUS1|author=Richard Lloyd Anderson|start=60|num=1|vol=6|date=NEEDED|article=NEEDED}}{{nc}}{{nl}}
#{{note|brown1}} {{BYUS1|author=S. Kent Brown|start=56|start=56|vol=23|num=1|article=NEED|date=NEED}}{{nc}}{{nl}}
#{{note|brown1}} {{BYUS1|author=S. Kent Brown|start=56|start=56|vol=23|num=1|article=NEED|date=NEED}}{{nc}}{{nl}}

Revision as of 01:39, 18 December 2007

Answers portal
Early Christianity &
Apostasy
    RESOURCES

Apostasy

Authority: and Priesthood

Doctrinal shift:

    PERSPECTIVES
    MEDIA
    OTHER PORTALS

Criticism

Critics claim that only Jesus held the priesthood, and that such priesthood was not 'transferable' to members of the Church.

Source(s) of the Criticism

Search for the Truth DVD (2007) Resources

  • Walter Martin, The Maze of Mormonism

Response

One of the things that people who are opposed to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints criticize us for is our belief in the Priesthood. Latter-day Saints believe the Priesthood is the authority God has given man to perform the ordinances (e.g. baptism, sacrament, sealing, etc.) that Jesus has declared to be necessary, in order that the atonement may have full effect in our lives.

Our critics oppose the Priesthood, claiming it does not exist among mortals, as Jesus Christ is the only one with the Priesthood. Unfortunately for them, the Bible contradicts them.

Using old scholarship

Anti-Mormon critics tend to use older references, since these references agree with their idea that the Melchizedek priesthood is "untransferable."

However, this view is dated and incorrect. In Bauer's Greek-English lexicon, we read:

Aparabatos, on (see parabaino; belonging to later Greek [Phryn. 313 Lob];not LXX) Hebrews 7:24 usually interpreted 'without a successor'. But this meaning is found nowhere else. Aparabatos rather has the sense of permanent, unchangeable" [followed by citations].[1]

Thus, it is the priesthood which is unchangeable, rather than being untransferrable. The critics' stance is not supported by the Biblical text. Rather, the priesthood is a permanent and necessary part of the Church—any Church claiming it is unnecessary does not meet the Biblical model.

The ten-volume Theological Dictionary of the New Testament agrees, in which the word aparabatos is discussed:

This is a rare word found only in later Greek.... Its usual sense is 'unchangeable,' 'immutable.'"
[after giving examples from secular literature: Plutarch, Josephus, Epictetus, etc]
Hebrews 7.24 says of Christ that because He remains to eternity He has an unchangeable and imperishable priesthood. Instead of the passive 'unchangeable' [743] many expositors suggest the active sense 'which cannot be transferred to another;" 'Christ has a priesthood which cannot be transferred to anyone else' [citing Bengel]. This is a natural interpretation and yields a good sense, but it does not really fit the context. We should keep to the rendering 'unchangeable,' the more so as the active sense is not attested elsewhere." (742-3).[2]

The statement 'yields a good sense' suggests that those who choose that translation are probably doing so for theological reasons, not grammatical or linguistic reasons; and the TDNT author is voting against such a choice.

In a review of Walter Martin's book, The Maze of Mormonism, in which Martin bases his argument against the Melchizedek Priesthood on the interpretation of "unchangeable" being "non-transferable, Richard Lloyd Anderson informs us that:

Instead of treating descriptions in the Acts or Pastoral Letters concerning the bestowal of apostolic authority on others, Martin prefers to base his case on a dubious translation of Hebrews 7:24, maintaining that Christ's priesthood is "untransferable." But his vintage 1889 citation from Thayer's lexicon for this use is squarely contradicted by the best authorities in the field. The lexicon of Arndt-Gingrich (in agreement with Moulton-Milligan) gives more than a dozen secular uses of the period to show that the term in question (aparabatos) "rather has the sense permanent, unchangeable." The point of the passage is not that Christ's priesthood cannot be transferred, but that it permanently remains superior, as does he, to all other authority.[3]

So we see that it is incorrect to interpret "unchangeable" as "nontransferable."

Additional evidence

The rather late Christian understanding that Jesus would be the last High Priest of the Melchizedek order (see Hebrew 7:24, marginal reading no. 5 in most King James Version translations) is based on an erroneous interpretation of the Greek word aparabaton which does not mean "intransmissible" but means "unchangeable" when referring to Jesus' priesthood.[4]

And:

God's promises to Abraham are extended to all who come unto Christ: Jesus was a priest after the order of Melchizedek, who was the priest who blessed Abraham, in whose loins was Levi. The superiority of Christ's Melchizedek Priesthood over the Levitical priesthood and the Law of Moses is developed in chapter 7. Melchizedek was a type of Christ. His priesthood was more enduring than the Levitical priesthood, which was limited to blood lines and was not given with an oath and whose priests did not continue because of death and needed daily renewal (Heb. 7:3, 21, 23, 27). The Melchizedek order of priesthood, however, was directed by Jesus Christ, who, unlike the high priest under the Law of Moses on the annual Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:4), did not need to "offer sacrifice for his own sins, for he knew no sins" (JST Heb. 7:26). His priesthood was aparabatosmeaning "permanent, unchangeable, and incomparable" (Heb. 7:24). No other priesthood will succeed it. It will be the permanent power of salvation and eternal lives within Christ's church forever more (see TPJS, 166, 322)[5]

Modern Bible translations

More modern versions of the Bible agree with this interpretation.

Hebrews 7
24 (NIV)
but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. (emphasis added)
Hebrews 7
24 (NASB)
but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. (emphasis added)
Hebrews 7
24 (RSV)
but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues for ever. (emphasis added)

The critics' interpretation of "unchangeable" to mean "non-transferable" does not stand up to scripture, correct doctrine, Biblical scholarship, or Greek terminology.

For an examination of Bible teachings about priesthood authority, see: What does the Bible teach about priesthood?.

Why the opposition to priesthood?

It is understandable that creedal Protestant Christians (who make up the vast majority of sectarian anti-Mormons) desperately need the priesthood, as understood by Latter-day Saints, to be non-existent today. The whole idea of authority, direct from God, being necessary for the saving ordinances of mankind, completely undermines and destroys the traditionally accepted doctrine that one is "saved by faith alone." It also completely destroys their own claims to authority, since they are the result of a break-off from the Roman Catholic faith.

If the Catholics did not have the priesthood authority, then the Protestants cannot have taken it with them. Hence, they are anxious to claim a "priesthood of all believers," or claim priesthood isn't needed at all.

If the Catholics did have the authority, then Protestants were wrong to leave in the first place. And, the Church rejected the view that the priesthood was "non-transferrable." Biblical scholarship has now "caught up" to this view, but Joseph Smith had it right in the first place.

Reading Hebrews 7:24

As seen above, most critics of the LDS Church rest most of their argument against the LDS doctrine of priesthood on Hebrews 7꞉24:

But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.(emphasis added)

The critics of the LDS Church interpret the word "unchangeable" as meaning non-transferable. Therefore, they say, the Priesthood that Christ held (the Melchizedek Priesthood) could not be transferred to anyone. But, as we have seen, this relies on an out-dated reading of the Greek. Such a view was defensible in the 19th century; it can no longer be sustained.

But, even if we grant the critics' obsolete reading, could this be the correct interpretation? If so, there is a glaring contradiction within this very chapter, for verse twelve says the priesthood has changed:

For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.(Hebrews 7꞉12) (emphasis added)

Either the priesthood is transferable (changeable), from Christ to others, or it is not. Which verse are we to believe? Let's take a closer look at this "unchangeable" priesthood in Hebrews 7꞉11-24:

  • 11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical (Aaronic) priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,)

(under the Aaronic priesthood, the people received the law of Moses -- an eye for an eye)

  • what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

(Those that hold the authority of the higher, or Melchizedek Priesthood, also hold the authority of the lessor, or the Aaronic Priesthood)

  • 12 For the priesthood being changed,

(Here is a glaring contradiction to what the critics claim, for it clearly says the priesthood "changed." Let's continue to examine just what changed, and what the term means in context.)

  • there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

(The Law of Moses changed, not the priesthood. In other words, when Christ came, he gave a higher law. For example, the law was no longer an "eye for an eye," it was "turn the other cheek." Along with this higher law, came a higher priesthood, which is what is meant by "changed.")

  • 13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe

Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

(Moses did not speak about the Melchizedek Priesthood and the higher law, which the Lord had, but he did speak of the Aaronic Priesthood, or the lower law.)

  • 15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,

(This priest is Jesus Christ)

  • 16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment,

(The Law of Moses—An Eye for an Eye)

  • but after the power of an endless life.

(The higher law, which Christ brought, which will lead us to eternal life.)

  • 17 For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

(Christ, and the priesthood authority He holds -- the Melchizedek Priesthood -- is eternal -- without end.)

  • 18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

(The Law of Moses was abolished with the institution of the higher Law brought by Christ.)

  • 19 For the law [Mosaic Law] made nothing perfect

(We could not become perfect as our Father in Heaven commanded us to be by obedience to the Mosaic Law, for it does not contain the authority for the saving ordinances of salvation—the "keys" to bind in heaven and on earth, or in today's terminology, temple ordinances)

  • but the bringing in of a better hope did;

(A better hope, or a higher law, which brought the authority for the saving ordinances)

  • by the which we draw nigh unto God.

(It is through this higher law, by partaking of the temple ordinances, that we can "draw nigh" unto God, or become like Him, which is to "be perfect" {as God is perfect} as He commanded us—Matthew 5:48.)

  • 20 And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:

(This is in reference to the oath and covenant of the priesthood.)

  • 21 (For those priests

(The priests of the Aaronic, or Levitical, priesthood)

  • were made without an oath;

(The Aaronic, or lessor, priesthood, does not require an oath or covenant.)

  • but this [This = Higher, or Melchizedek Priesthood] with an oath
"When a priesthood holder takes upon himself the Melchizedek Priesthood, he does so by oath

and covenant. This is not so with the Aaronic Priesthood. The covenant of the Melchizedek Priesthood is that a priesthood holder will magnify his calling in the priesthood, will give diligent heed to the commandments of God, and will live by every word which proceeds "from the mouth of God" (see D&C 84:33-44). The oath of the Melchizedek Priesthood is an irrevocable promise by God to faithful priesthood holders. "All that my Father hath shall be given unto them" (seeDC 84꞉38). This oath by Deity, coupled with the covenant by faithful priesthood holders, is referred to as the oath and covenant of the priesthood."[6]

  • by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:)

(The Melchizedek Priesthood is eternal)

  • 22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: 24 But this man (Jesus Christ), because he continueth ever, [Eternal] hath an unchangeable [Eternal] priesthood.

(In context, this verse (24) that critics use to try to argue against the priesthood, is saying that since Jesus Christ is eternal, so is the authority He has. It is this same authority that Christ passed on to his Apostles, and they, passed on to others in the Church.)

This explanation should make it plain that the law, or schoolmaster (see Galatians 3:24), to lead the people unto Christ was administered by the Aaronic, or Levitical, Priesthood. However, perfection cannot be obtained through this priesthood alone, as Paul explained. Therefore, it was necessary for the Lord to send another priest after the order of Melchizedek. The priesthood thus being changed, there was "of necessity a change also of the law."[7]

The fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, therefore, was introduced by him to take the place of the law of Moses.

Conclusion

The claim that priesthood is non-transferrable fails on linguistic, scriptural, scholarly, and logical grounds.

Endnotes

  1. [note]  Reference "aparabatos," in Walter Bauer and Frederick William Danker (editors), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature , 3rd edition, (Urbana and Chicago, University Of Chicago Press, 2001), 97. ISBN 0226039331.
  2. [note]  Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (editors), Geoffrey W. Bromiley (translator), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993), 5: 742-743.
  3. [note]  Richard Lloyd Anderson, "NEEDED," Brigham Young University Studies 6 no. 1 (NEEDED), 60.[citation needed] (needs URL / links)
  4. [note]  S. Kent Brown, "NEED," Brigham Young University Studies 23 no. 1 (NEED), 56.[citation needed] (needs URL / links)
  5. [note]  ???, "Epistle to the Hebrews," in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 4 vols., edited by Daniel H. Ludlow, (New York, Macmillan Publishing, 1992). (needs URL / links)[citation needed]

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

The early Christian Church and the Great Apostasy


Jump to Subtopic:

Evidence of a total apostasy


Jump to Subtopic:

Biblical evidence of an apostasy after Christ


Jump to details:


Evidence of an apostasy after Christ from early Christian history other than the Bible

Summary: Do the Early Church Fathers and other post-Biblical documents shed any light on the apostasy?


Jump to details:


Visible evidence of the apostasy


Jump to details:


Extent of the apostasy


Jump to Subtopic:

Complete apostasy after Christ

Summary: Do other Christian denominations believe that no other church on earth is complete, or is this an arrogant belief assumed only by the "Mormons"?


Jump to details:


Apostasy and the "gates of hell"

Summary: Is Jesus' teaching about "the gates of hell" prevailing against "the rock" inconsistent with a belief in a universal apostasy?


Jump to details:


Priesthood on the earth during the apostasy


Jump to details:


Reasons why the apostasy occurred


Jump to Subtopic:

God permitted the apostasy to occur

Summary: If there were some people who would have accepted the Gospel as taught in Mormonism, why did God allow the earthly Church to pass from the earth?


Jump to details:


Relationship of Mormonism to other branches of Christianity

Summary: What does the apostasy doctrine mean with respect to the relationship of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to other branches of Christianity?


Jump to details:


The office of Apostle within the ancient Church of Jesus Christ


Jump to details:


Mormonism and priesthood


Jump to Subtopic:

Restoration of the priesthood


Jump to Subtopic:


Administration of priesthood authority


Jump to Subtopic:


Criticisms of the Mormon priesthood


Jump to Subtopic:


FAIR web site

Apostasy FairMormon articles on-line
  • Roger Keller, "The Apostasy," FAIR 2004 conference. FAIR link
    Dr. Keller is a former Presbyterian minister.
FairMormon Priesthood FairMormon articles on-line
  • John A. Tvedtnes, "Is There a Priesthood of All Believers?" FAIR link

External links

Learn more about the Great Apostasy
Key sources
  • Noel B. Reynolds (editor), Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2005), 1. ISBN 0934893020. off-site
FAIR links
  • Barry Bickmore, "Joseph Smith Among the Early Christians," Proceedings of the 2014 FAIR Conference (August 2014). link
  • John Gee, "The Corruption of Scripture in the Second Century," Proceedings of the 1999 FAIR Conference (August 1999). link
  • John Hall, "As Far as it is Translated Correctly: The Problem of Tampering with the Word of God in the Transmission and Translation of the New Testament," Proceedings of the 2007 FAIR Conference (August 2007). link
  • Roger Keller, "The Apostasy," Proceedings of the 2004 FAIR Conference (August 2004). link
  • Daniel C. Peterson, "What Has Athens to do with Jerusalem?: Apostasy and Restoration in the Big Picture," Proceedings of the 1999 FAIR Conference (August 1999). link
Online
  • David Stewart, Jr., "The Christian Apostasy," cumorah.com off-site
  • Roger D. Cook, "'How Deep the Platonism? A Review of Owen and Mosser's Appendix: Hellenism, Greek Philosophy, and the Creedal Straightjacket of Christian Orthodoxy'," FARMS Review 11/2 (2000). [265–299] link
  • Dallin H. Oaks, "Apostasy and Restoration," Ensign (May 1995): 84.off-site
  • Hoyt W. Brewster Jr., "I Have A Question: What Was There in the Creeds of Men that the Lord Found Abominable, as He Stated in the First Vision?”," Ensign (July 1987): 65–67. off-site
  • Hyde M. Merrill, "The Great Apostasy as Seen by Eusebius," Ensign (November 1972): 34.off-site
  • Kent P. Jackson, "Early Signs of the Apostasy," Ensign (December 1984): 8.off-site
  • Richard L. Anderson, "Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp: Three Bishops between the Apostles and Apostasy," Ensign (August 1976): 51.off-site
  • Matthew L. Bowen, "'Unto the Taking Away of Their Stumbling Blocks': The Taking Away and Keeping Back of Plain and Precious Things and Their Restoration in 1 Nephi 13–15," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 53/9 (7 October 2022). [145–170] link
  • William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson, "The Evangelical Is Our Brother (Review of How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation)," FARMS Review 11/2 (2000). [178–209] link
Video
The Apostasy, Roger Keller (Former Presbyterian minister), 2004 FAIR Conference
Print
  • Hugh W. Nibley, "Evangelium Quadraginta Dierum," Vigiliae Christianae 20 (1966):1-24; reprinted in "Evangelium Quadraginta Dierum: The Forty-day Mission of Christ-The Forgotten Heritage," in Mormonism and Early Christianity (Vol. 4 of Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by Todd Compton and Stephen D. Ricks, (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Company ; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1987),10–44. direct off-site
  • Matthew B. Brown, "Evidences of Apostasy," in All Things Restored, 2d ed. (American Fork, UT: Covenant, 2006),1–32. AISN B000R4LXSM. ISBN 1577347129.
Navigators
Priesthood links to articles
  • Brian Q. Cannon, "Priesthood Restoration Documents," Brigham Young University Studies 35 no. 4 (1995–96), 162. PDF link (Key source)
  • Donald Q. Cannon, Larry E. Dahl, and John W. Welch, "The Restoration of Major Doctrines through Joseph Smith: Priesthood, the Word of God, and the Temple," Ensign 19 (February 1989): 7. off-site
  • William G. Hartley, "Review of Gregory L. Prince's Power from On High: The Development of Mormon Priesthood," Brigham Young University Studies 37 no. 1 (1997), 225–230.off-site
  • John A. Tvedtnes, "Jesus' Apostles and Early Church Organization," Meridian Magazine (2 February 2007)off-site.

Printed material

Apostasy printed materials
  • Matthew B. Brown, "Evidences of Apostasy," in All Things Restored, 2d ed. (American Fork, UT: Covenant, 2006),1–32. AISN B000R4LXSM. ISBN 1577347129.
  • Noel B. Reynolds (editor), Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2005), 1. ISBN 0934893020. off-site  (Key source)
Priesthood printed materials
  • Richard Lloyd Anderson, "The Second Witness of Priesthood Restoration," Improvement Era (71/9 (September 1968)), 15–24.
  • Richard Lloyd Anderson, "The Second Witness on Priesthood Succession," Improvement Era (September 1968), 14–20.
  • Brain Q. Cannon and BYU Studies staff, "Seventy Contemporaneous Priesthood Restoration Documents," in Opening the Heavens: Accounts of Divine Manifestations 1820–1844 (Documents in Latter-day Saint History), edited by John W. Welch with Erick B. Carlson, (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press / Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Company, 2005), 215–263. ISBN 0842526072. This book has recently been reprinted, in paperback. BYU Studies and Deseret Book (July 13, 2011) (Key source)
Retrieved from "http://104.237.154.152/answers/index.php?title=Mormonism_and_priesthood/Non-transferable&oldid=20932"