The everlasting covenant and gospel dispensations -- Part 6 (Jesus Christ)

The previous parts of this series are found here:

• Part 1: Introduction and Adam
• Part 2: Enoch
• Part 3: Noah
• Part 4: Abraham
• Part 5: Moses

This post will focus on the gospel dispensation of Jesus Christ himself. There is plenty of material to take from since the scriptures testify of him. Some of that describes Christ as a restorer of the everlasting covenant. It is interesting to note that from Enoch and on, there is an increasing amount of available information on the gospel dispensations. We know next to nothing about Enoch from the Bible but the Pearl of Great Price gives us a chapter and a half. We have several chapters in Genesis about Noah. We have even more chapters about Abraham in Genesis plus the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. We have entire books about Moses (Exodus-Deuteronomy). The same can be said about Jesus. In addition to the four gospels, we have the account of his visit among the Nephites in 3 Nephi, but numerous prophecies and sermons in addition. From Joseph Smith we have almost the entire Doctrine and Covenants plus much more detailed accounts of his life than any of the other heads of previous dispensations.

But back to Jesus Christ. The peculiar thing about this dispensation is that he, as the God of the Old Testament, established the everlasting covenant in the first place. He covenanted with Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and Moses. He is "the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning" (Mosiah 3:8). The author of the everlasting covenant came to earth himself to restore it. He who created all things longs to re-unite all creation and paid the price of it with his own blood.

In the previous post we discussed the dispensation of Moses. How the Lord wanted to give them the fullness and they could only handle a part. But Moses prophesied:

The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers (Deuteronomy 18:15)

Christ identified himself as that prophet when he visited the Nephites.

Behold, I am he of whom Moses spake, saying: A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me (3 Nephi 20:23)

More on this in a previous post about Moses and Christ, explained beautifully by Abinadi. There is a Jewish tradition of the Messiah as the second Moses and there are numerous parallels in addition to the simple fact that Jesus identified as the prophet that Moses told about and said he had come to fulfill the Law of Moses. For instance:

• Jesus was born without shelter and laid in a manger. Moses was also born without shelter and laid in a basket, interestingly called an ark.
• Pharaoh and Herod both order all male infants killed and thereby threaten the lives of Moses and Jesus
• Jesus and Moses both spent their childhood in Egypt
• Both Jesus and Moses fasted 40 days in the wilderness

These historical events establish a parallel such that we can find meaning in the following:

• Moses led Israel out of physical bondage. Jesus leads out out of spiritual bondage
• The people that Moses led were fed manna from heaven. Jesus referred to this event as he identified as the bread of life
• Moses smote the rock so the water gushed out. Jesus is the rock who offers the water of life
• The 10 commandments were given through Moses. Jesus discussed and re-interpreted these in the Sermon of the Mount
• Moses erected a tabernacle to house God. Jesus came down in an earthly tabernacle to house his spirit
• Moses initiated the passover lamb. Jesus is the Lamb of God offering himself as a sacrifice.
• Moses led the people to the promised land. Jesus leads us to the promised land of the celestial kingdom

Jesus came as the second Moses to fulfill the law. The law came with a covenant. The old covenant/testament was replaced by a new. The animal sacrifice pointing forward to Christ's sacrifice was replaced by the sacrament held in remembrance of Christ's sacrifice.

27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. (Matthew 26)

Both the sermon of Abinadi and the Letter to the Hebrews explain that salvation could not come by the Law of Moses alone but only through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Law of Moses was administered with the Aaronic Priesthood, also called the lesser or preparatory priesthood. The gospel of Christ and the everlasting covenant are administered with the Melchizedek Priesthood.

11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

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

6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: (Hebrews 8)

Since Christ's mission was to fulfill the Law of Moses, there are numerous parallels to that dispensation in particular. But the life and ministry of Christ also refers to the other gospel dispensations

• Adam plucked the fruit from the tree. Jesus reversed the fall as the firstfruits of God hanged on the tree at the crucifixion. "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." (1 Corinthians 15:22)
• Enoch established Zion that was taken up to heaven. When Jesus comes again from heaven, he will establish the millennial Zion and the two will meet.
• Noah survived the baptism of the earth and sent forth a dove when the water receded. When Jesus was baptized and came out of the water, the Spirit descended on him in the form of a dove.
• Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son. This is a "similitude of God and his Only Begotten Son" (Jacob 4:5)

As in previous dispensations, the everlasting covenant was brought to earth when Christ came. But where previous dispensations only had looked forward to the sacrifice that was required to effectuate it, Jesus, the creator, came to sacrifice himself for the creation.

Let the mountains shout for joy, and all ye valleys cry aloud; and all ye seas and dry lands tell the wonders of your Eternal King! And ye rivers, and brooks, and rills, flow down with gladness. Let the woods and all the trees of the field praise the Lord; and ye solid rocks weep for joy! And let the sun, moon, and the morning stars sing together, and let all the sons of God shout for joy! And let the eternal creations declare his name forever and ever! And again I say, how glorious is the voice we hear from heaven, proclaiming in our ears, glory, and salvation, and honor, and immortality, and eternal life; kingdoms, principalities, and powers! (D&C 128:23)

I think this verse is a fitting way to end the year on a positive note. We also wish our readers a Happy New Year! 

Melchizedek -- Part 3 (the Prince of Peace)

Here are links to part 1 and part 2. I am quoting the same verses multiple times in this series because there are multiple aspects to discuss and we need to focus on one at a time. Here is another item from the JST of Genesis 14 that I have not highlighted yet but want to discuss in this post

33 And now, Melchizedek was a priest of this order; therefore he obtained peace in Salem, and was called the Prince of peace...

36 And this Melchizedek, having thus established righteousness, was called the king of heaven by his people, or, in other words, the King of peace.

Why was Melchizedek called both king of peace and prince of peace? Alma 13 gives a possible clue

But Melchizedek having exercised mighty faith, and received the office of the high priesthood according to the holy order of God, did preach repentance unto his people. And behold, they did repent; and Melchizedek did establish peace in the land in his days; therefore he was called the prince of peace, for he was the king of Salem; and he did reign under his father. (Alma 13:18)

He literally was the king of peace since he was the king of a city named Salem (meaning peace in Hebrew and which most scholars agree was Jerusalem). But since he simultaneously was a king and reigned under his father, he was both king and prince. We know little about Melchizedek but absolutely nothing about his father. We can reasonably assume that he was righteous based on what we know about Melchizedek and the fact that he reigned under him.

But there might be deeper underlying truths to this idea of being a prince of peace. There are three persons in the scriptures that are referred to as prince of peace. In addition to Melchizedek, only Abraham and Jesus Christ get this title. Interestingly, the father/son or king/prince duality is a recurring theme. Notice for instance the extensive use of "father/fathers" in the beginning of the Book of Abraham where Abraham seeks to become a prince of peace

1 In the land of the Chaldeans, at the residence of my fathers, I, Abraham, saw that it was needful for me to obtain another place of residence;

2 And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers.

3 It was conferred upon me from the fathers; it came down from the fathers, from the beginning of time, yea, even from the beginning, or before the foundation of the earth, down to the present time, even the right of the firstborn, or the first man, who is Adam, or first father, through the fathers unto me.

4 I sought for mine appointment unto the Priesthood according to the appointment of God unto the fathers concerning the seed.

To become a follower of righteousness and prince of peace, Abraham needed to be appointed unto the Priesthood. This priesthood was a patriarchal order, transmitted from father to son, creating kings and princes, like Melchizedek who became the archetype of a holder of this priesthood. In the original language, Abraham, means "father of a multitude".  The wordplay is evident: "In the land of the Chaldeans, at the residence of my fathers, I, Father of a Multitude...sought for the blessings of the fathers".

The only other passage of scripture containing the title "prince of peace" is Isaiah 9:6

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Again we see the pattern of father and son (implied by prince). We know that Jesus Christ is both the father (in more than one sense) and the son. Some people trip over the oddity of that passage to our modern ears, but I find it beautiful

1 And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people.
2 And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son—
3 The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son—

4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth. (Mosiah 15)

What we have seen so far is that there are three persons with the title, Prince of Peace in the scriptures: Melchizedek, Abraham and Jesus Christ. In each case, there is a father-son theme. I think it has much to do with the priesthood. The Melchizedek Priesthood is not dependent on a tribe like the Levitical Priesthood. It's a pattern of Father-Son family priesthood. Paul spends much of his letter to the Hebrews that this is the priesthood that Jesus came to restore

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.

6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

There is no coincidence that Abraham, the father who sought for the blessings of the fathers, is mentioned so much in D&C 132. We get too hung up on plural marriage sometimes that we miss the beautiful truths about the priesthood and the everlasting covenant.

28 I am the Lord thy God, and will give unto thee the law of my Holy Priesthood, as was ordained by me and my Father before the world was.

29 Abraham received all things, whatsoever he received, by revelation and commandment, by my word, saith the Lord, and hath entered into his exaltation and sitteth upon his throne.

30 Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins—from whose loins ye are, namely, my servant Joseph—which were to continue so long as they were in the world; and as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them.

31 This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham, and the promise was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.

32 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.

As we enter into the law of the Melchizedek Priesthood, we like Joseph Smith, are the seed of Abraham and the same promises apply to us. That is, as Abraham's seed, our seed will also perpetuate into the eternities. This is how the priesthood and the covenant are preserved, from father to son becoming kings and princes. It is perhaps confusing then that Paul states:

Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. (Hebrews 7:3)

From the context, it seems like Paul describes Melchizedek here. But Joseph Smith clarifies and explains that this does not apply to the person, Melchizedek, but rather his priesthood.

For this Melchizedek was ordained a priest after the order of the Son of God, which order was without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life. And all those who are ordained unto this priesthood are made like unto the Son of God, abiding a priest continually. (JST Hebrews 7:3)

Early Christian extra-Biblical sources show that there was a great deal of confusion back then as well. Some considered Melchizedek as a divine figure and perhaps even the pre-mortal Christ himself. Others considered him just a mortal man, although a righteous high priest. I think the confusion comes from the fact that Melchizedek became the archetype of a priesthood holder after the order of the Son of God. Epitomizing this order, the man and the priesthood got confused as the tradition was passed down, scriptures were lost and perhaps deliberately changed. This is just my theory anyway.

The point is that the priesthood itself is eternal, without father and descent, while those who enter into this order become part of an eternal chain of father and descent. They are the seed of Father Abraham (who sought the blessings of his fathers) and receive the promise that their seed shall continue "out of the world". They become princes of peace and kings of righteousness, like Abraham and Melchizedek, receiving all these promises that are too great to fully comprehend.

Let me just add as a final note that I think princess, queen and priestess applies just as much. Despite the technicalities of the patriarchal order where men are ordained at least here on earth, the promises and blessings apply in equal measure and women obviously have a sacred role in the "continuation of the seeds for ever and ever" (D&C 132:19).

The Holy Order all the way back to Adam, part 2

In this multi-post series, I'm fleshing out the following ideas:

1. The High Priest tradition is far older than Judaism, dating all the way back to Adam.
2. The Judaism we know today is a revised version of an older form of Judaism, formed in reaction to Christianity and also in reaction to the loss of the second temple.
3. Hebrew culture was fragmented even by the time of Lehi, with various groups condemning other groups as apostate from the true, ancient, covenant-and-temple-based religion.
4. The Old Testament as we know it was most likely written and edited by Jews who espoused a tradition which had long since rejected the original purpose of the Law of Moses. They intentionally left out much of the High Priestly tradition.
5. In order to have written the Book of Mormon (which clearly outlines this older, High Priestly tradition), Joseph Smith would have needed to have organized this complex and historically plausible theology by 1829, inserted in subtly into the text, and then stayed pretty quiet about it for a few years until he received revelations outlining the modern day restoration of these ancient practices, including the priesthood, the temple, eternal families, etc.

In this post, I'll focus on #2 through #4 of the points above.

Sects of Hebrew religion

It's too easy for us to assume that there was only one version of the ancient Hebrew religion, when the truth is probably closer to the wide array we see in Christianity today.

We know there were several prominent sects of the Hebrew religion by the time of Jesus. The Essenes, for example, were a prominent sect from the 2nd century before Christ until the 2nd century after Christ.  Here is how an early Christian scholar described one particular sub-sect of Essenes:

The Nasaraean—they were Jews by nationality—originally from Gileaditis, Bashanitis and the Transjordan... They acknowledged Moses and believed that he had received laws—not this law, however, but some other. And so, they were Jews who kept all the Jewish observances, but they would not offer sacrifice or eat meat. They considered it unlawful to eat meat or make sacrifices with it. They claim that these Books are fictions, and that none of these customs were instituted by the fathers. This was the difference between the Nasaraean and the others... (source)

I'm not claiming that this particular group were adherents to the High Priestly tradition, but it is interesting to note that they believed Moses had received a different law and that they refused to offer sacrifice. (Perhaps because they believed they temple authority had become corrupted?)

The point is that many groups existed, some of which did not recognize the second temple authority as valid.

The 'Long Exile' Tradition

In the introduction of her book, Barker asserts that some sects of Hebrews believed the temple had lost its true purpose and High Priestly authority. By end of the first temple period, when the exile began, the central purpose of the temple had been corrupted. Barker notes that for some of the Israelites, the spiritual exile from the temple's true meaning did not end even when the Jews were allowed to return to their homeland and allowed to rebuild and rededicate their temple. For the Israelites who did not recognize the authority of the temple as valid, the "exile" continued all the way to the time of Jesus.

It was this tradition (which Barker refers to as the "long exile" tradition) that awaited their Messiah, a great High Priest/prophet/king to come and restore what had been lost. Barker claims that adherents to this tradition were the prime target of early Christian missionary efforts, and that the incredibly rapid adoption of Christianity in the early days after Jesus came about in part when large groups of "long exile" Israelites living in the surrounding areas recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

Not everyone shared this worldview, though.  In fact, the political 'winners' of the day held firm to a tradition that revered the Law of Moses.

The Old Testament as a record of a different tradition

Barker says:

...the Old Testament, both text and canon, has a complex history...others who shared the Hebrew heritage did not always share the same beliefs or the same scriptures. Among these 'others' were the first Christians. The Hebrew Scriptures as we know them were preserved, edited and transmitted by the priests and scribes of the second temple, the very people whom the 'long exile' tradition had condemned as impure apostates who had altered the Scriptures. (Temple Theology, pp. 5-6)

I find this very interesting and compelling, seeing as how Lehi and his family were not Jews, but were of a different tribe (Manasseh), living as 2nd or 3rd generation refugees in Jerusalem among Jews.  It isn't hard to see that Lehi and Nephi did not consider the Jews to be righteous and on the right path.

Nephi says the following of the Jews in Jerusalem:

2 For I, Nephi, have not taught [my people] many things concerning the manner of the Jews; for their works were works of darkness, and their doings were doings of abominations. (2 Nephi 25)

He also made very specific prophecies about what would happen to the scriptures which fit right in to this picture:

26 ...for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.
27 And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men.
28 Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God. (1 Nephi 13)

It seems very reasonable to conclude that the "Lehite" religion described in 1 and 2 Nephi is a close descendant of one of the versions of Hebrew religion of Lehi's day, possibly one that questioned the temple authority and looked to a future Messiah to make things right.  We shouldn't be surprised that this religion seems closer to Christianity than the version of Judaism we know.

The Judaism we know today (rabbinical Judaism) developed in part as a reaction to the development of Christianity.  Thus, as early Christians pointed to ancient Hebrew scripture to support their claim of Jesus as Messiah, Judaism adjusted its canon to create a clearer distinction from the Christian position.  This topic is discussed in detail in chapter 12 of The Great High Priest by Margaret Barker ("Text and Context). She gives examples of early Christian writers pointing out how the Jews of their day had altered their canon, changing some verses and removing entire books to exclude references to Christ.

To quote Barker:

Jesus was described and remembered as a great high priest (Hebrews 4:14), the Melchizedek raised up by the power of an indesctructible life (Hebrews 7:16) who had offered the final atonement sacrifice to fulfill and supercede the temple rites (Hebrews 9:1-14). ... Paul knew where the roots of Christianity lay; he argued that Christianity looked to the faith of Abraham (and by implication Melchizedek), and so was rooted earlier than the Law given to Moses. (Temple Theology, p. 4)

There is a fascinating document found among the Dead Sea Scrolls designated 11Q13, also known as the Melchizedek document, which references Melchizedek and speaks of an atonement for "the sons of light."  It is fragmentary, but includes passages like this:

Zion is ..., those who uphold the Covenant, who turn from walking [in] the way of the people. (link to wikipedia article)

Sounds very similar to Enoch from the Book of Moses. The Book of Enoch was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, suggesting it was a prominent part of that community's scriptural canon approaching the time of Christ. Both of these documents became lost to the Jews who practiced rabbinical Judaism.

Barker asserts that in order to understand the mindset of the early Christians, one must look to the ancient temple tradition:

Adam was remembered as the first high priest, and Jesus was described as the new Adam. The Christians remembered and hoped for the earlier Eden -- the true temple -- and saw themselves returning to the place and the priesthood from which they had been driven.  This was their worldview. (Temple Theology, p. 4)

This worldview was not shared by the Deuteronomists, who wrote and edited the Old Testament as we have it. It's not a stretch at all to conclude that the record we have today is not the same one had back then.

The final post in this series will look at what Joseph Smith would have needed to accomplish in order to include this complex theology into his new religion, as early as 1829.