No proof for Melchizedek Priesthood for LDS

[_SteelHead]

Sub,
Your references are all subject to interpretation. I didn't see any verbiage talking about priesthood, nor anything talking about some differentiation between priesthoods.

[_Tobin]

Forgive me, Tobin, but as Steelhead points, out claims do not equal proof. No egg on my face because your chicken is barren on this topic. I have heard Mormon elders many times say: "In the name of Jesus Christ and by the power of the Holy Mechizedec Priesthood which I hold...." Presumably this is all part of the "restoration" Mormonism claims. I wonder why there is no mention of this phrase, no mention of anyone, not Moses, not Elijah (not Elias for those who think he should be included) anywhere in the Bible using these word or even described as having the MP. Why not? Is it some vast conspiracy?

There are three mentions of Melchizedec in scripture...the first which identifies him as a great priest and king to whom even Abraham gave tithes (a type of Christ figure) , the second is a passing reference in the Psalms, and the third is in Hebrews in relation to Jesus ascending to the position of High Priest. Why is that significant...it is because there was only one high priest at a time and once per year, year after year after year, his primary function was to enter the temple Holy of Holies and after making atonement for himself he would make sacrifice and atonement on behalf of all the people. His priesthood was the Levitical priesthood, a priesthood to which Jesus, being of the tribe of Judah, could not lay claim. So, how could Jesus make atonement "once and for all"? By ascending to the holiest priesthood of all, the priesthood of Melchizedec, because he was the only man worthy and holy enough to claim it. In so doing, instead of entering a symbolic earthly Holy of Holies he entered the real Holy of Holies, the place where God dwells and sat down at the right hand of God. His sacrifice was himself and it never has to be done again...not ever...thus ending for all time the need for the Levitical priesthood and becoming the only high priest of Melchizedec of whom we have need. He broke down fully and completely the separation between God and man and the rending of the temple veil from top to bottom is declares.

Albion, we are talking about the LDS concept of the Melchizedek Priesthood. We are pefectly fine to cite examples from Mormon sources about its use, authority and power. Those citations are as valid of proof as any citation from the Bible in this instance. So don't tell me what is or it not valid.

[_Albion]

The thread was started by a critic of Mormonism and she asserted a premise that there is no proof from the LDS for them having the MP. That premise gives a broader umbrella than the one you claim. The charge is for LDS people to demonstrate their proof which so far they have not. I notice, too, that you ignored completely my explanation of why no one but Jesus holds the MP.

[_Albion]

P>S> Tobin, if you have no Biblical proof and your claim rests entirely on Joseph Smith says so and we can all move on.

[_Tobin]

P>S> Tobin, if you have no Biblical proof and your claim rests entirely on Joseph Smith says so and we can all move on.

You really are being completely ridiculous. We are talking about LDS. Mormonism isn't exclusively tied to the Bible to prove one darn thing period. If your position is that the Bible is the only source of proof we are going to use, then we have absolutely nothing to discuss - EVER!

[_Albion]

I am glad to have your admission that much of Mormonism, and in this case claims to the MP, has no basis in the Bible, the foundation of Christian theology and belief against which Christian truth is measured. Indeed, there is nothing else to say on this topic.

[_Tobin]

I am glad to have your admission that much of Mormonism, and in this case claims to the MP, has no basis in the Bible, the foundation of Christian theology and belief against which Christian truth is measured. Indeed, there is nothing else to say on this topic.

Again, that is a total mischaracterization of what I said and completely false. I said that Mormonism isn't exclusively tied to the Bible. That does not mean there are not occasionally hints and snippets of doctrine in the Bible. However, in this case, the vaste majority of detail is beyond the scope of the Bible and it is perfectly fine to reference those sources here.

[_just me]

It is obvious that the priesthood has been restored!

Just look at all the deaf being healed to hearing.
The blind having their sight restored.
The mute being able to speak.
The amputees having their limbs restored!

Oh, wait. That's medical science.

[_Albion]

If you have Biblical proofs to LDS having the MP then state them. If you can't and still claim the MP then it is not a Biblical based claim. That is what you appear to be saying to me.

[_Tobin]

If you have Biblical proofs to LDS having the MP then state them. If you can't and still claim the MP then it is not a Biblical based claim. That is what you appear to be saying to me.

I'll stand by what I said, the citation from Hebrews and other places gives us snippets. For the full details, we have to go beyond the Bible. It is like when you are trying to learn about math. The Bible is like a book on algebra, but if we want to learn calculus - we need additional texts.