Get your own Free Home PageTo go to the beginning, click here.
“And it came to pass that after there had been false Christs, and their mouths had been shut, and they punished according to their crimes;” (Words of Mormon 1:5)
The problem Br. Clif finds is: False Christs appeared during the days of King Benjamin, when the people knew the Messiah was supposed to come 600 years after Lehi left Jerusalem. [My note: Or for another 470 years yet.] And these false Christs, quote: “...had enough of a leg to stand on that they were even worth mentioning as something more than crackpots”. (Quote correct as of mid May 1998.)
* * * * *
The reason false Christs were popping up in King Benjamin’s day --the reason false Christs pop up in any era-- is because some people misread, misinterpreted, glossed over or even plain ignored some scriptures.
To illustrate how obvious scripture can be overlooked-- Verses like Matthew 24:36-44 and 2 Peter 3:10 plainly tell us that no one, only the Father, knows when Y’shua will come to the earth again. Even with scriptures as obvious as those, every few years we have some “Bible thumper” declare that “Christ” is coming on such-and-such a day, even at such-and-such a time down to the minute. And --regardless of obvious scripture-- Some people flock to them, leaving their homes, buying new ones, and changing their whole lifestyles. Plus, those “ministers” manage to make the TV news, the newspapers, radio and the tabloids. If some people today can “miss” such obvious scripture about the Messiah, some people in King Benjamin’s day could have “missed” obvious scripture about the Messiah also.
Most believers expect the Messiah to descend from heaven for his Second Coming. Yet, earth-born “Christs” still attain some measure of popularity, even among non-Jews and some “Christian” communities. Consider Maitreya, claims by God’s Salvation Church, David Koresh, “Do” (Heaven’s Gate), Father Divine, Charles Manson, and Jim Jones (People's Temple), just to list several. They usually gain some following, regardless of what the Bible says about the Messiah’s Second Coming. How and why? Because of misreading, misinterpreting, or glossing over of scripture by charismatic persons. If some people today can “miss” obvious scripture that the Messiah’s Second Coming will be from heaven (like Dan.7:13; Matt. 16:27; 26:64; Acts 1:11), some people in King Benjamin’s day could have “missed” obvious scripture about the Messiah.
Backing up to 2 Nephi 25:23-27: “(23) ...we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children...to believe in Christ.....(24) And, notwithstanding we believe in Christ, we keep the law of Moses, and look forward with steadfastness unto Christ, until the law shall be fulfilled. (25).... we are made alive in Christ because of our faith; yet we keep the law because of the commandments. (26) ...we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. (27) Wherefore, we speak concerning the law that our children may know the deadness of the law; and they, by knowing the deadness of the law, may look forward unto that life which is in Christ...” (Bold added by me.)
2 Nephi 25:23-27 shows a people who are immersed in Christ, and they are doing everything they can to make sure their children are too. A few generations later, a few power-hungry people start twisting some scriptures here and playing on a few fears there...(And there’s always a few people who have never really studied the scriptures, who are just “along for the ride” and will believe whatever sounds good.)....Presto! They have false Messiahs during the time of King Benjamin, and some of the people are following them. Nevertheless, the majority are true to the prophecies, they know the Messiah isn’t due for another 470 years, and they are able to stop the nonsense.
Fraud and blasphemy were serious crimes, not just crackpottery. The seriousness of the crimes merited brief mention in the Nephite record, which it did receive with one short verse--Words of Mormon 1:5 above. The Nephites who did hold to the prophecies, as a remnant from Jerusalem, treated the false Messiahs like the frauds and blasphemers they were. Among King Benjamin’s people: The false Messiahs were considered blasphemous liars, and shut up and punished. Among the Jews: Many of the Jews considered Yeshua to be a false Messiah, a blasphemous liar...and were determined to shut him up and punish him for it. That’s how both the Jews and the Nephites treated people they considered false Messiahs.
“For behold, and also his blood atoneth for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgressions of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them, or who have ignorantly sinned.” (Mosiah 3:11)
The problem Br. Clif finds is, quote: “Why then is baptism for the dead needed?” (Quote correct as of mid May 1998.)
* * * * *
This requires basic knowledge of the LDS doctrine that people will be resurrected with celestial, telestial, or terrestrial bodies...and how baptism effects that.
The LDS Church teaches the Atonement covers even those who --through no fault of their own-- died not knowing Jesus is the Messiah. There are MILLIONS of people who have been born, lived, and --through no fault of their own-- died without hearing about Yeshua. Father loves all His children, even those who did not get to hear about Yeshua. Would Father, being perfectly just and merciful, just leave those beloved children to burn in “Hell”? The LDS answer is: No. All of Father’s children will be given equitable opportunity to hear the gospel and accept Yeshua as their Messiah (such is the LDS interpretation of 1 Peter 3:19 & 4:6).
The LDS Church also teaches that believers in the Messiah who have lived honorably will be resurrected to either celestial or terrestrial bodies, as Paul touched upon in 1 Cor 15: “(35) But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? ....[In verses 36-40 Paul goes on to explain that our bodies will be quickened, and that God has given living things different bodies...]... (41) There are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. (42) There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. (43) So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption: it is raised in incorruption:” (Emphasis added by me.) (The “glory of the stars” here corresponds to the telestial glory mentioned in this next paragraph.)
The LDS Church teaches that we must do as Jesus did --including being baptized-- to be resurrected to the celestial glory of heaven where God Himself dwells: “Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:5).” Delving deeper into this LDS doctrine is Doctrine and Covenants 76. Putting Section 76 in a very abbreviated summary-- (FIRST we have the upright believers in Jesus the Christ:) -- (1) Those who received a fullness of the gospel, who followed Christ completely --including being baptized-- will be resurrected with celestial glory, to dwell in the presence of God and Christ forever; (2) Those who were honorable but did not follow Jesus completely --including not being baptized-- will be resurrected with terrestrial glory to dwell in heaven; (THEN we have those who were wicked:) -- (3) Those who were wicked will be raised in the last resurrection (after they have been punished in “hell” for 1000 years) with telestial glory. However, they will not dwell in the presence of God nor with Christ. [...Then there are the “sons of peridition” (those who denied and defied the power of Christ after receiving a testimony of Christ). They don’t get any glory. They will suffer with the devil and his angels for all eternity (i.e. suffer in eternal “Hell”--See also Solution 17]. That is a simplistic summary, but it will do for my purposes here.
Baptism for the dead opens the way for the deceased to follow Yeshua completely --thereby obtaining a celestial body in the resurrection-- if they accept the baptism. This is why the LDS Church practices baptism for the dead (i.e. baptism by proxy on behalf of the dead). (I should note that not everyone who is baptized will be resurrected with celestial glory, either. Even after baptism, they must still endure to the end.)
In 1 Cor. 15:12-29, Paul gives an “argument” for the resurrection of the dead. In verses 12-28, he basically says that if there is no resurrection, then Christ is not risen, and our faith is in vain and we are yet in our sins. But Christ is risen and became the firstfruits. Then, continuing his argument, Paul mentions baptism for the dead as evidence for the resurrection: “Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? (1 Cor. 15:29) Various versions of the Bible state it a little differently than the KJV. Those who own a few versions of the Bible can contrast and compare. (I have a KJV, a DRV and a NIV -- The DRV even has a foot note that states: “That are baptized for the dead, Some think the apostle here alludes to a ceremony then in use...”) Whichever way, it appears Paul essentially wrote, “What will the people do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead don’t rise? Why then are people baptized for the dead?” Whichever way, it appears that baptism for the dead was something practiced during the early “Christian” Church.
“And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world.” (Mosiah 18:13)
The problem Br. Clif finds is: The Book of Mormon does not state exactly where Alma got his priesthood authority. [My note: The LDS Church teaches proper priesthood authority is necessary to perform ordinances.] Alma could not have been ordained by Abinadi. He could not have been ordained by the apostate priests of Noah--If so, then Catholicism can grant authority. Therefore, Bro. Cliff states, we don’t need a priesthood to receive authority from God. Thus, quote, “As Christians we are priests.” (Quote correct as of mid May 1998.)
* * * * *
I will: (1) Explore how Alma could have received priesthood authority; (2) Examine the “Priesthood of all Believers” (as his quote sounds very similar to that belief).
(1) Here’s how Alma could have been given authority--Alma’s righteous father or grandfather (or other qualified person) ordained him before he became a priest of Noah.
I pieced together some clues about Alma. This was done by finding that Alma was born in approximately 173 B.C. (doing some math from Mosiah 29:45 and the bottom corner of page 207 of my footnoted Book of Mormon). Then I looked at the events that happened during Alma’s youth, looked at the dates and years involved, and formed a possible sketch and timeline of Alma’s background.
Alma was born among the people of Zeniff, who left Zarahemla to return to the land of Nephi (discussed in my Solution 9). He was born during Zeniff’s reign, a time when the people were righteous and put “their trust in the Lord” (Mosiah 10, esp. 10:10,19, 22). Therefore, Alma’s parents, grandparents, friends and neighbors were righteous, commandment-keeping people. Alma was raised to keep the Commandments and follow the Law.
When Alma was around 13 years old, Zeniff passed his kingdom to Noah. Noah was a wicked king who led the people to break the Commandments. But, not everyone followed Noah’s evil example. Abinadi began to sharply preach repentance to them. The people (the majority was probably wicked by that time) didn’t like what they heard and wanted to kill Abinadi, but he escaped (Mosiah 11:26). Alma was around 23 years old when that happened. Two years later, Abinadi came back and began preaching repentance again. By then, Alma was around 25 and a priest of Noah. When Abinadi was brought before the priests for questioning, he delivered a harsh message accusing the priests of breaking the commandments and leading the people astray. Alma knew Abinadi was right and pleaded on his behalf. That made King Noah angrier....He cast Alma out and sent people to kill him...Alma went into hiding, repented of his sins, began preaching among the people, baptized them and started the first formally organized, structured church among the Nephites. (Mosiah 12-18:30)
Since Alma was born and raised in a righteous family, among a righteous people for at least the first 13 years of his life, he was ordained to the priesthood by his father, grandfather, or maybe someone else, before Abinadi began preaching. [Note that the Bible doesn’t tell us how Melchisedek was made a priest, either...]
[AFTER I had studied this out in my mind and prayed about it, forming the solution above, I was browsing through some LDS writings. I saw this statement by Joseph F. Smith Jr.: “Alma...held the priesthood before the coming of Abinadi...(Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 2, pg 366)”]
(2) The “Priesthood of All Believers”, or the idea that a person has the priesthood automatically because they are Christians --in my opinion-- is like someone taking the priesthood upon themselves. Yet, the New Testament tells us that a person can’t take priesthood authority upon themselves...neither the Aaronic nor the Melchizedek: Hebrews 5:4-6: “(4) And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but that is called of God, as was Aaron. (5) So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. (7) As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.”
Aaron didn’t just say “I believe in YHWH”, and automatically have priesthood authority. He did not choose himself. He was called of Elohim, through Moses who ordained him. Even Yeshua the Only Begotten Son of the Father, a high priest after the order of Melchisedec, did not glorify himself by taking the priesthood upon himself. He waited until he heard from his Father. If even Yeshua didn’t glorify himself, how dare we claim the priesthood just “falls” on us simply because we believe! [Even the devils believe that Yeshua is the Messiah (Matt. 8:29; Mark 1:34; Acts 19:15). Did the holy priesthood fall on them too? I don’t think so.]
The early Christians believed in the necessity of valid priesthood authority. They taught that one could not simply take it upon himself to administer to the Church. Instead, one had to be called and ordained to have valid priesthood authority. Verses that support ordaining, or the giving of power and authority, include: Matthew 16:19 (Yeshua gave the keys of the kingdom. Peter didn’t just decide they were his simply because he was a disciple.); John 15:16 (Yeshua said to his apostles: “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you...”); Mark 3:14-15; Luke 9:1-2; Acts 1:22; 6:2-7; 14:23; 16:4-5; Titus 1:5. [Note: When Yeshua was baptized, he didn’t go to just anyone. John the Baptist was of priestly descent through both his parents (Luke 1:5-13). John the Baptist held the Aaronic (Levitical) Priesthood --Yeshua, who set the example for us to follow, was baptized by one who had the priesthood authority to do so! (Baptism wasn’t something “new”. The Jews practiced baptism, called t’villa, water immersion performed by priests.) ...In order for us to fully follow Yeshua, the priesthood authority to perform baptisms had to be restored to the earth...]
An example of proper priesthood authority being necessary is Acts 8:5-17. Philip went to Samaria, preached about Yeshua and baptized people. Then, for some reason, the apostles sent Peter and John to lay their hands upon the people so they could receive the Holy Ghost. Why didn’t Philip just do it himself? Because Philip had the priesthood authority to baptize, but he did not have the priesthood authority to lay his hands upon them to give the Holy Ghost. [The Levitical Priesthood has the authority to baptize, but not to give the gift of the Holy Ghost. The Melchizedek Priesthood, as the greater priesthood (Heb. 7), has the authority to give the gift of the Holy Ghost.] The twelve apostles had the Melchizedek Priesthood (from Yeshua), and therefore had the authority to give the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. Proper priesthood authority was necessary for that to be done, thus Peter and John were sent. [An example of pretenders without authority can be found in Acts 19:13-16; See also my Solution 47.]
Priesthood does not make someone “more righteous” than someone else. All Christians are entitled to a one-on-one relationship with the Messiah (Rom. 10:12). Plus, those who use the priesthood to gain power over others, to make themselves better than others, automatically loose their priesthood authority (D&C 121:37).
From what I’ve read, the “Priesthood of All Believers” comes from Martin Luther. During previous centuries, most of the people could not read. The Bible became an object to be revered instead of studied. Priests developed the attitude that the “mysteries” of the Bible were too deep for the common folk, which eventually made them look pompous. Luther began reading the Bible for himself. As a result, he viewed the Catholic priesthood as a tyranny which, through the sacraments, controlled the salvation of others. Fed up with what he perceived to be false teachings by an arrogant priesthood, he turned completely away from any formal priesthood whatsoever. He picked out verses which seemed to make “blanket statements” about Christians automatically being priests (somehow overlooking the verses I quoted above). He decided the sacraments were not necessary for salvation. Therefore, a formal priesthood to administer them was also not necessary.
In one sense Luther was right. We do not need to be baptized and take the sacrament to go to heaven. We are saved through the grace of Yeshua. (Acts 15:11; 16:31; Rom. 10:13; Eph. 2:8-9) However, there is also John 3:5, where Yeshua himself says: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Then we have the fact that Yeshua was baptized, not because he had to be, but to fulfill all righteousness (Matt. 3:15). He set the example for us to follow (John 13:15; 1 Peter 2:21). Plus, as stated earlier, Yeshua was not baptized by just anyone. He was baptized by one holding the Levitical Priesthood (Luke 1:5-13). To reach our fullest potentials, we must follow Yeshua completely. To follow the Messiah completely, we must be baptized by one who has the valid priesthood authority to do so. [See Solution 11 for more about the importance of following Yeshua completely.] There are also many references in the Bible confirming the importance of valid priesthood authority, some of which I gave above.
The New Testament plainly states that no man takes the priesthood upon himself --neither the Levitical nor the Melchizedek. Rather, it is held only by those who have been called and ordained. The Bible supports the necessity of valid priesthood authority to perform ordinances.
“(14) And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit. (15) And again, Alma took another, and went forth a second time into the water, and baptized him according to the first, only he did not bury himself again in the water.” (Mosiah 18:14-15)
The problem Br. Clif finds is: Alma and Helam both immersed in the water. Yet Helam was the only one being named for baptism--not Alma. According to Mormon doctrine, a person can not baptize themselves. (5/98)
* * * * *
Most of the answer for this one came at the same time I found Solution 12. As shown in Solution 12, Alma was raised among a righteous people, in a righteous family. Just as Alma was ordained before the coming of Abinadi, Alma was also baptized before the coming of Abinadi.
There is no way Alma could have been baptizing himself in Mosiah 18:14. That is clear from: (1) The prayer he gave right before doing the baptism, where he names only Helam, not himself; (2) The fact that a priesthood holder can’t baptize themselves; one person must baptize another person; (3) The clues from Solution 12 that point to Alma having been baptized previous to Abinadi.
That leaves the question, “Then why did Alma immerse himself that first time?” I repeatedly asked myself that question, as I continued to prayerfully study the scriptures, having faith there was an answer...somewhere. As I did so, one thought continually pressed upon my mind: Repentance. Yet, I still wasn’t sure just how it all fit together. A couple days later, I was looking for information about Lehi. I stumbled upon this quote: “WHY ALMA IMMERSED HIMSELF. Alma was baptized and held the priesthood before the coming of Abinadi, but he became involved with other priests under the reign of the wicked King Noah, and when he baptized Helam, he felt he needed a cleansing himself so he buried himself in the water as a token of full repentance.” (Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, Pg.336 - Pg.337) That made sense to me. I’ve committed trespasses in my time. I can understand how and why Alma would make a token of full repentance. It was something he wanted to do, something he decided he could do, and he did it.
Br. Clif also commented about this baptism being “too Christian”... Generations before Alma, Nephi wrote: “And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. Wherefore, we speak concerning the law [of Moses] that our children may know the deadness of the law; and they, by knowing the deadness of the law, may look forward unto that life which is in Christ...” (1 Nephi 25:26-27) Just before Alma baptized Helam, his prayer included these words: “...and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ...” (Mosiah 18:13) Then after the people were baptized, they called themselves “the church of Christ” (Mosiah 18:17; All emphasis added by me). Those people looked forward to the Messiah’s birth, they knew who to look to for salvation, they believed in Christ. The baptism resembled a Christian baptism because it was, essentially, a Christian baptism. [Furthermore, “Christianity” wasn’t something suddenly new. The gospel has been around since the beginning--See Solution 40.]
“And it came to pass that king Mosiah granted unto Alma that he might establish churches throughout all the land of Zarahemla; and gave him power to ordain priests and teachers over every church.” (Mosiah 25:19)
* *
“And now it came to pass that the persecutions which were inflicted on the church by the unbelievers became so great that the church began to murmur, and complain to their leaders concerning the matter; and they did complain to Alma. And Alma laid the case before their king, Mosiah. And Mosiah consulted with his priests.” (Mosiah 27:1)
The problem Br. Clif finds is: Where did King Mosiah II get the priesthood authority to grant Alma the authority to establish churches and ordain priests in those churches? Also: Where/how did Mosiah II get his own priests? Why would a theocratic tribe of Yisrael need either a civil government or two branches of priesthood? (5/98)
* * * * *
There are a cluster of questions here. To answer them, I will: (1) Examine the “merging” of the peoples that takes place in Mosiah 25; (2) Examine the relationship between the “church and state” afterwards to show it was not a theocracy.
(1) Alma didn’t need any priesthood authority from Mosiah II. As shown in Solution 12 and Solution 13, Alma already had it. What Alma did need was government permission to establish the “church of Christ” in Mosiah II’s kingdom.
Alma and his people were new to Zarahemla. As mentioned in Solution 12, Alma had started a church, the first formally organized religious body among the Nephites. Later, Alma and his people fled from the wicked King Noah and lived in the land of Helam for around 25 years. Then they went to Zarahemla. (The full account is in Mosiah 18, 23-24). When Alma and his people arrived in Zarahemla they brought their church with them. King Mosiah II and his people, as righteous believers in the Messiah, had the same basic beliefs as Alma and the “church of Christ”. Therefore, when King Mosiah II saw that new church, with its structure, he probably thought it was a good idea. So, as the monarch of Zarahemla, he gave Alma authority to establish and organize the “church of Christ” throughout Zarahemla. (Mosiah 25) Modern governments and religious leaders still do this today. When a religious leader wants to bring his already established church into a different country --and wants to do it on friendly terms-- he gets permission from that country’s government. If the government thinks it’s acceptable, they will grant that religious leader authority to establish the church in that country. What went on between King Mosiah II and Alma was basically the same thing. Reading Mosiah 25:19-23, in context with the events surrounding it, shows Alma was given permission to establish the church so it could meet the needs of the people throughout the land of Zarahemla.
Get your own Free Home Page