 | Home |
| Page 1 | |
| Page 3 | |
| Home |
| Page 1 | |
| Page 3 | |
The Lord said further: "for I rule in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, in all wisdom and prudence, over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen" (Abraham 3:21). Among the spirits who were assembled, "there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell" (Abraham 3:24). This passage must refer to the Son, but although he had already declared his plan to create the earth, God asked: "Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first" (Abraham 3:27).
The book of Moses had already given a quite different account of these events, stating that it was Satan who first came before God and presented a plan.
And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying -- Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor. But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me -- Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever. Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down; and he became Satan . . . . (Moses 4:1-4)
The wording of both the Book of Moses and the Book of Abraham is derived from Isaiah's vision of the Lord sitting upon a throne: "Also, I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me" (Isa. 6:8).
In the Book of Moses, the Son is at-one with the Father, but in the Book of Abraham, the status of the Son is less clear. God had declared himself to be superior in intelligence to all other spirits, and the Son was standing with the other spirits when God came into their midst. This seems to imply that the Son was inferior to God and was merely one among many spirits. The Son proposed to create the earth, but God wanted to hear if any other spirit had a plan. There seems to be the possibility that the Son could have failed and that some other spirit might have been sent in his place.
In the Book of Moses, it is God and his Only Begotten who create the earth and the first man and woman, although the text uses the singular term "I, God." However, in the Book of Abraham, the Son wanted to enlist the aid of other spirits, when he proposed his plan to form the earth. And after the Son was chosen, the text states: "And then the Lord said: Let us go down. And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth" (Abraham 4:1). The text continues to use the term "the Gods" in its account of the seven days of creation.
The doctrine that other gods participated in the creation of the world has parallels in the writings of Plato and Philo. Plato states that God created the stars and planets as living creatures. He then says that the origin of the other divinities is beyond our knowledge. However, after the gods had been created, the Artificer addressed them, stating that he would fashion the immortal, divine part of the soul, while they were to form mortal bodies and weave the immortal with the mortal, making living creatures. Philo believed that the Genesis of Moses should be interpreted in a similar manner: "One may not unfitly raise the question what reason there could be for his ascribing the creation in the case of man only not to one Creator as in the case of the rest but, as the words would suggest, to several. For he represents the Father of the universe as speaking thus, 'Let us make man after our image and likeness.'" (Saunders 1966, 213). Philo argued that since man was of a mixed nature, liable to both virtue and vice, it was improper for God, in whom all virtue dwells, to be the sole creator of man: "So we see why it is only in the instance of man's creation that we are told by Moses that God said 'Let us make,' an expression which plainly shows the taking with Him of others as fellow-workers" (Saunders 1966, 214).
Joseph Smith's doctrines continued to evolve. In an editorial in the Times and Seasons on 1 April 1842, he finally eliminated the distinction between matter and spirit: "the body is supposed to be organized matter, and the spirit, by many, is thought to be immaterial, without substance. With this latter statement we should beg leave to differ, and state the spirit is a substance; that it is material, but that it is more pure, elastic and refined matter than the body; that it existed before the body, can exist in the body; and will exist separate from the body, when the body will be mouldering in the dust; and will in the resurrection, be again united with it" (Joseph Smith 1976, 207). On 17 May 1843, Joseph also stated: "There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter but is more fine or pure and can only be discerned by purer eyes. We cant see it but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter" (Joseph Smith 1980, 203; D&C 131:7-8).
We have already seen the influence of Plato and Philo, and Joseph's new cosmological teachings also seem to be derived from ancient philosophy. Greek Atomists, like Democritus, believed that atoms are eternal and indestructible, that there are an infinite number of worlds, and that the soul, which they identified with mind or reason, is composed of fine, smooth atoms. The doctrines of the Atomists, taken over by the Epicureans, were popularized by Lucretius in his poem On the Nature of Things, and the Epicurean philosophy gained favor during the Renaissance. Joseph Smith taught similar ideas: the elements are eternal, God has created innumerable worlds, and spirit is a material substance, finer and purer than the body.
We can find other parallels in the Book of Abraham. For example, it incorporates restructured versions of a number of Jewish myths. According to legend, Abraham was brought as a young child before king Nimrod. When he ordered Nimrod to worship the only true God, all of the idols toppled over, and Nimrod himself fell down in a swoon. Abraham's father, Terah, was not only an idol worshipper, but also manufactured and sold idols. When Abraham was fifty years old and had concluded his studies in the school of Shem and Eber, he returned home and one day smashed the idols in his father's shop. When Abraham gained many followers, Nimrod ordered that he be thrown into a fiery furnace, but Abraham was unharmed by the fire.
Similarly, the Book of Abraham states that Abraham's fathers worshipped the heathen gods of Elkenah, Libnah, Mahmackrah, Korash, and the god of Pharaoh. Abraham's kin would not turn away from their idol worship, and the heathen priests placed Abraham on an altar to be sacrificed. However, as the priest lifted up his hand, an angel appeared and untied Abraham's bands. The Lord then "broke down the altar of Elkenah, and of the gods of the land, and utterly destroyed them, and smote the priest that he died" (Abraham 1:20). Thus the Book of Abraham parallels Hebrew myth by making Abraham's kin idol worshippers and by making the lord strike down the heathen altars and the priest, just as the idols of Nimrod and Nimrod himself fell to the ground, and just as Abraham smashed his father's idols. Instead of throwing Abraham into a fiery furnace, the Book of Abraham places him on a sacrificial altar, a scene which recalls Abraham's attempted sacrifice of Isaac and the intervention of an angel (Gen. 22).
The Book of Abraham describes the heathen altar as being shaped like a bed: "it was made after the form of a bedstead, such as was had among the Chaldeans" (Abraham 1:13). This seems to be derived from another Jewish legend. It is said that Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, journeyed to Sodom to deliver a message to Lot. The men of Sodom invited Eliezer to pass the night on a bed placed out in the open, for it was their custom to torture strangers by cutting off their legs, if they were too long for the bed, or by pulling and stretching them, if they were shorter than the bed. A similar story appears in Plutarch's account of the bed of Procrustes. The Book of Abraham may also draw upon Deuteronomy 3:11, which describes the iron bedstead of Og, king of Bashan.
The names of the gods in the Book of Abraham -- Elkenah, Libnah, and Korash -- are probably derived from the names of Elkanah, Libni, and Korah in Exodus 6. These men were all descendants of Levi and kin of Moses. Libnah was also the name of one of the places where the Israelites rested in the Sinai, as well as the name of a city in Palestine, which was captured by Joshua (Num. 33:20; Josh. 10:29).
The Book of Abraham also gives a history of the discovery of Egypt: "The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden; when this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land. Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal" (Abraham 1:23-25). Egyptian priests told Herodotus that in the reign of Min, the first ruler of Egypt, a large area of Egypt was under water. In addition, Arrian says that the Nile river was originally called Aegyptus: "the river gave its name to the country, for that Aegyptus was originally the name of the river now known both in Egypt and elsewhere in the world as the Nile there is sufficient evidence in Homer, where we find the statement that Menelaus brought up 'at the mouth of the Aegyptus'" (Arrian 1971, 264). Josephus, citing Manetho, says that Sethosis was called Egyptus: "The country also was called from his name Egypt; for Manetho says that Sethosis himself was called Egyptus, as was his brother Armais, called Danaus" (Josephus 1974, 4:166). The Book of Abraham has simply rewritten Egyptian history, naming the country after Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, who discovered it lying under water.
In the Book of Abraham, Abraham is shown a vision of the stars: "And I saw the stars, that they were very great, and that one of them was nearest unto the throne of God; and there were many great ones which were near unto it; and the Lord said unto me: These are the governing ones; and the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me, for I am the Lord thy God: I have set this one to govern all those which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest" (Abraham 3:2-3). Abraham was also shown the sun (Shinehah), the moon (Olea), and the stars (Kokob, Kokaubeam). In Joseph Smith's explanations of the figures in Facsimile No. 2, which accompanies the Book of Abraham, he said that Oliblish "is the next grand governing creation near to the celestial or the place where God resides," and that the revolution of Oliblish is equal to that of Kolob. Another governing planet is Enish-go-on-dosh, the sun, which borrows "its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power, which governs fifteen other fixed planets or stars, as also Floeese or the Moon, the earth and the Sun in their annual revolutions. This planet receives its power through the medium of Kli-flos-is-es, or Hah-ko-kau-beam, the stars . . . receiving light from the revolutions of Kolob."
Abraham's visions seem to be an imitation of Cicero's The Dream of Scipio. According to Cicero's account, Publius Cornelius Scipio had a dream in which his relative, Africanus Scipio appeared to him, standing "amid the bright illumination of radiant stars." The younger Scipio looked about him and saw stars which he had never seen from earth. Africanus then showed Scipio the nine spheres of the universe: "The outermost sphere is heaven itself, and it includes and embraces all the rest. For it is the Supreme God in person, enclosing and comprehending everything that exists . . . ." Below this sphere, Scipio saw the spheres which contained Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars: "Next, almost midway between heaven and earth, blazes the Sun. He is the prince, lord and ruler of all the other worlds, the mind and guiding principle of the entire universe" (Cicero 1971, 342, 347).
Thus Kolob, the star which governs planets of the same order as the earth, is similar to the sun, which Africanus calls "the prince, Lord and ruler of all the other worlds, the mind and guiding principle of the entire universe." The throne of God corresponds to the outermost sphere of stars, which is called heaven and the Supreme God.
In addition to the Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith worked on an Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar, in which he arranged characters in a column on the left-hand side of the page and gave an interpretation next to each character. Joseph's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar refers to "Flos isis," which is defined as the "highest degree of light, because its component parts are light. The governing principle of light Because God has said Let this be the centre for light, and let there be bounds that it may not pass. he hath set a cloud round about in the heavens, and the light of the grand governing of 15 fixed stars centre there -- and from there it is drawn by the heavenly bodies according to their portions . . . so God has set the bounds of light lest it pass over and consume the planets" (Joseph Smith n.d., 25). Philo of Alexandria gave a strikingly similar description in his commentary on Genesis.
Special distinction is accorded by Moses to life-breath and to light. . . . Now that invisible light perceptible only by mind has come into being as an image of the Divine World Who brought it within our ken: it is a supercelestial constellation, fount of the constellations obvious to sense. It would not be amiss to term it "all-brightness," to signify that from which the sun and moon, as well as fixed stars and planets draw, in proportion to their several capacity, the light befitting each of them . . . .. . . After the kindling of the intelligible light, which preceded the sun's creation, darkness its adversary withdrew: for God, in His perfect knowledge of their mutual contrariety and natural conflict, parted them one from another by a wall of separation. . . . He not only separated light and darkness, but also placed in the intervening spaces boundary-marks, by which He held back each of their extremities . . . . (Saunders 1966, 205-06)
Abraham also had a vision of the intelligences in their preexistent state: "Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was made; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones; and God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born" (Abraham 3:22-23). Similarly, as Scipio and Africanus were talking, Paullus, Scipio's father joined them and explained: "For men were brought into existence in order that they should inhabit the globe known as the earth, which you see here at the centre of this holy space. They have been endowed with souls made out of the everlasting fires called stars and constellations. . . ." He stated further that those who had completed their lives in the world dwelled in "a circle of light, blazing brilliantly among all the other fires." Africanus told Scipio that "it is from here in heaven that the rulers and preservers of those states once came; and it is to here that they eventually return" (Cicero 1971, 345-46, 344). Furthermore, he said that Scipio was destined to assume an important role in the Roman state, just as the Lord told Abraham that he was one of the chosen ones.
Since the Book of Abraham evidently draws upon such sources as Herodotus, Arrian, Josephus, Cicero, Philo, and Jewish myth, it appears to be linked with the Book of Mormon. There are also names in the Book of Abraham which are similar to names in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Abraham refers to an Egyptian named Onitah (Abraham 1:11), while the Book of Mormon mentions a hill and a place which were both called Onidah, as well as a city which was named Onihah (Alma 32:4; 47:5; 3 Nephi 9:7). Both books also contain the name Jershon.
On 7 April 1844 Joseph delivered a sermon at the funeral of a man named King Follett, which contains one of his clearest statements on the nature of God and man.
God who sits in yonder heavens is a man like yourselves That God if you were to see him to day that holds the worlds you would see him like a man in form, like yourselves. Adam was made in his image and talked with him & walkd with him. . . . We suppose that God was God from eternity. I will refute that Idea . . . . he once was a man like us, and the Father was once on an earth like us . . . Jesus Christ said As the Father hath power in himself so hath the son power in himself to do what the father did even to lay down my body & take it up again . . . . And you have got to learn how to make yourselves God, king and priest, by going from a small capacity to a great capacity . . . . to be an heir of God & joint heir of with Jesus Christ enjoying the same rise exhaltation & glory untill you arive at the station of a God. What did Jesus Christ do, the same thing as I se the Father do, see the father do what, work out a kingdom, when I do so to I will give to the father which will add to his glory, he will take a Higher exhaltation & I will take his place and am also exhalted. (Joseph Smith 1980, 344-45)
Joseph said that the opening words of Genesis should be correctly translated as: "the head one of the Gods, broat forth the Gods . . . . The grand Council set at the head and contemplated the creation of the world" (Joseph Smith 1980, 345). After stating that the world was organized out of already-existing, chaotic matter, Joseph turned again to the relation between God and man: "God was a self exhisting being, man exhists upon the same principle. God made a tabernacle & put a spirit in it and it became a Human soul, man exhisted in spirit & mind coequal with God himself . . . . God never had power to create the spirit of man, God himself could not create himself. Intelligence is Eternal & it is self exhisting, All mind is susseptible of improvement, the relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge" (Joseph Smith 1980, 346).
On 16 June 1844 Joseph elaborated his teachings further. Again referring to Genesis, he said, "The Head one of the Gods said let us make man in our image . . . . The word Eloiheam ought to be in the plural all the way thro -- Gods -- the heads of the Gods appointed one God for us" (Joseph Smith 1980, 379). He then stated that he wanted to relate something which he had learned from the papyrus containing the Book of Abraham. He said that the argument concerning one spirit being more intelligent than another proved that "intelligences exist one above anotr. that there is no end to it" (Joseph Smith 1980, 380). It must follow, he reasoned, that if Christ has a Father, his Father must also have a Father.
On 18 June 1844, Joseph also asserted that the Holy Ghost is spirit, but is "waiting to take to himself a body. as the Savior did or as god did or the gods before them took bodies" (Joseph Smith 1980, 382).
Joseph's new teachings were directly opposed to the Book of Mormon and the early revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants. Furthermore, the whole force of the Lectures on Faith was to argue that faith, and therefore our own salvation, depends upon having a correct idea of the nature and attributes of God. The correct idea of God entails that there is no being greater than God: "An acquaintance with these attributes in the divine character, is essentially necessary, in order that the faith of any rational being can center in him for life and salvation. For if he did not, in the first instance, believe him to be God, that is, the Creator and upholder of all things, he could not center his faith in him for life and salvation, for fear there should be greater than he who would thwart all his plans, and he like the gods of the heathen, would be unable to fulfill his promises; but seeing he is God over all, from everlasting to everlasting, the Creator and upholder of all things, no such fear can exist in the minds of those who put their trust in him . . . ." (Lundwall n.d., 35). Joseph had completely destroyed the argument of the Lectures by revealing an entirely new idea of God. It was now not only possible for a being greater than God to exist, but it was also an absolute necessity. God himself must have a Father, and there might be an infinite number of gods, each wiser than the ones below it on the scale of intelligence. In this case, it might be possible for our God's plans to be overruled by a greater God; therefore, we could never put our trust in God, and the basis for faith and salvation would be destroyed.
Nonetheless, Mormons continue to portray God with the same attributes as those listed in the Lectures on Faith. For example, Lecture Two states: "We here observe that God is the only supreme governor and independent being in whom all fullness and perfection dwell; who is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient; without beginning of days or end of life; and that in him every good gift and every good principle dwell . . . and he is the object in whom the faith of all other rational and accountable beings center for life and salvation" (Lundwall n.d., 13). Joseph F. Smith paraphrased this same passage: "Faith in God is to believe that he is, and 'that he is the only supreme Governor and independent Being, in whom all fulness and perfection and every good gift and principle dwell independently,' and in whom the faith of all other rational beings must centre for life and salvation; and further, that he is the great Creator of all things, that he is omnipotent, omniscient, and by his works and the power of his Spirit omnipresent" (Joseph F. Smith 1939, 100). Smith changed the wording to make God omnipresent only in Spirit, since a being with a finite body can not be present everywhere at the same time. However, he still affirmed that God is "the only supreme Governor and independent Being." To say that God is the only independent Being is to say that all other beings are dependent upon God for their existence. But this contradicts both the doctrine that all intelligence is uncreated and independent and the belief that God must himself have a Father.
Did Joseph Smith's new teachings originate in his own mind, or did he appropriate them from material which was removed from the Book of Mormon? The doctrine that the Son is the Father is so well attested in the Book of Mormon that this must have been the true teaching. But the Book of Mormon also describes a number of dissenting groups, which held various concepts of God. The only suggestion in the Book of Mormon that anyone believed in a plurality of gods comes in the Book of Alma. In Ammonihah, Zeezrom asked Amulek if there was more than one God, and Amulek answered, no, saying that an angel had made it known to him. Zeezrom then addressed the people who were listening: "See that ye remember these things; for he said there is but one God; yet he saith that the Son of God shall come" (Alma 11:35). Zeezrom then asked Amulek if the Son of God was the Eternal Father, and Amulek answered, yes. After Amulek and Alma finished speaking, the people went to the chief judge and complained that they had "testified that there was but one God, and that he should send his Son" (Alma 14:5). This seems to imply that Zeezrom and the people of Ammonihah were offended by the assertion that there was only one God and thought that Amulek contradicted himself by saying that God would send his Son, which must mean that there is more than one God. Apparently, they also could not grasp the fact that the Son is the Father. It is probable, therefore, that Zeezrom and the others believed in a plurality of gods. Since the text does not present their beliefs clearly, it may be that Joseph removed material from the Book of Mormon and later found Zeezrom's doctrines to be more appealing than Amulek's.
Joseph Smith's version of Genesis gives us information about some other peculiar religious beliefs that existed in the time of Abraham: "And God talked with him, saying, My people have gone astray from my precepts, and have not kept mine ordinances, which I gave unto their fathers; and they have not observed mine anointing, and the burial, or baptism wherewith I commanded them; but have turned from the commandment, and taken unto themselves the washing of children, and the blood of sprinkling; and have said that the blood of the righteous Abel was shed for sins; and have not known wherein they are accountable before me" (JST Gen. 17:4-7). Thus, people in Abraham's day did not look forward to the atonement through the blood of Christ, but believed that Abel's death had saved them from their sins, and they had instituted religious rites involving the sprinkling of blood, apparently in remembrance of Abel. This suggests that they worshipped Abel as the Son of God.
This passage from the JST Genesis seems to be the only link between Joseph Smith's writings and another strange doctrine which Brigham Young started to preach in 1852. He asserted that Adam had lived as a man on another planet, where he had received his exaltation, and that Adam had created our earth. However, according to Brigham, Adam was not merely the first man, the father of the human race; Adam was also the begetter of our spirits, and therefore, our God. If the people of Abraham's day believed that Abel was divine and that his death atoned for our sins, they surely must have thought that Adam, the father of Abel, was himself a god. Brigham Young's Adam-God doctrine seems to be a presupposition of the belief in Abel as Savior.
The Romans believed that humans could become gods. According to legend, Romulus was reviewing his troops one day, when he was enveloped in a thick cloud and vanished. He was then hailed "as a god and son of a god" (Livy 1960, 51). Plutarch relates this same story and adds: "we must really believe that, according to their divine nature and law, their virtue and their souls are translated out of men into heroes, out of heroes into demi-gods, out of demi-gods, after passing, as in the rite of initiation, through a final cleansing and sanctification, and so freeing themselves from all that pertains to mortality and sense, are thus, not by human decree, but really and according to right reason, elevated into gods admitted thus to the greatest and most blessed perfection" (Plutarch n.d., 45). Julius Caesar and other Roman emperors were deified; altars were constructed and priests appointed to attend to their worship.
When the Book of Mormon finally comes around to giving an explanation of the holy order of God, it occurs at a wholly unexpected point. Alma chose to relate a brief history of the priesthood to Antionah, a chief ruler in the city of Ammonihah. Since Adam and Eve had transgressed God's first commandments, God made known to them the plan of redemption and gave them a second set of commandments, which apparently consisted primarily of the doctrines of faith, repentance, and holy works. Those who did not keep the commandments could not enter into the rest of the Lord and faced a second and everlasting death. After making these prefatory remarks, Alma launched into a discussion of the priesthood.
And again, my brethren, I would cite your minds forward to the time when the Lord God gave these commandments unto his children; and I would that ye should remember that the Lord God ordained priests, after his holy order, which was after the order of his Son, to teach these things unto the people. And those priests were ordained after the order of his Son, in a manner that thereby the people might know in what manner to look forward to his Son for redemption. And this is the manner after which they were ordained -- being called and prepared from the foundation of the world according to the foreknowledge of God, on account of their exceeding faith and good works; in the first place being left to choose good or evil; therefore they having chosen good, and exercising exceedingly great faith, are called with a holy calling, yea, with that holy calling which was prepared with, and according to, a preparatory redemption for such. . . . and thus being called by this holy calling, and ordained unto the high priesthood of the holy order of God, to teach his commandments unto the children of men, that they also might enter into his rest -- this high priesthood being after the order of his Son, which order was from the foundation of the world; or in other words, being without beginning of days or end of years, being prepared from eternity to all eternity, according to his foreknowledge of all things . . . thus they become high priests forever, after the order of the Son, the Only Begotten of the Father, who is without beginning of days or end of years, who is full of grace, equity, and truth. (Alma 13:1-9)
Alma also states that Melchizedek belonged to the high priesthood of the holy order of God. Nephi, the son of Helaman, affirms that the order of God existed before the days of Abraham (Helaman 8:17-18).
It is evident that Alma's account of the high priesthood follows certain passages in the Bible. In Genesis, Melchizedek is called "the priest of the most high God" (Gen 14:18). In addition, Psalm 110:4 declares: "The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." Paul's epistle to the Hebrews applies this statement to Christ (Heb. 5:5-12; 7:3, 11-17).
When the resurrected Jesus appeared at Bountiful, he chose twelve Nephite disciples, who are never called apostles. The account of Jesus' mission in the New World does not list any priesthood offices, despite the fact that we would expect Jesus to instruct the Nephites in the offices and duties of the orders of the priesthood. It is not until we reach the appendix, which Moroni added to the plates as an afterthought, that we find information regarding priesthood offices. Moroni continues to use the term disciples and states that the disciples "were called the elders of the church" (Moroni 3:1). He then gives the precise manner in which the elders ordained priests and teachers. He states that priests and teachers were ordained "according to the gifts and callings of God unto men; and they ordained them by the power of the Holy Ghost, which was in them" (Moroni 3:4). Apparently then the ecclesiastical system which was established after the appearance of Jesus consisted only of elders, priests, and teachers and did not include the office of high priest. And since the church before Jesus included both high priests and elders, we cannot assume that the elders of the later church were also high priests.
When the church was officially organized on 6 April 1830, it included only the offices of elder, priest, teacher, and deacon. As originally published in the Book of Commandments, Section 20 of the Doctrine and Covenants (June 1830), which sets out the responsibilities of the priesthood, mentions only these four offices, while also referring to Joseph and Oliver as apostles and elders. It did not include verses 66 and 67, which refer to bishops, high councilors, and high priests. Section 20 also makes no reference to either the Melchizedek or Aaronic priesthoods. Thus the initial organization of the church was very similar to the Nephite church, with the addition of the office of deacon. In fact, Section 20 reproduces almost word for word a number of passages from the Book of Moroni. For example, Section 20 follows Moroni in stating: "Every elder, priest, teacher, or deacon is to be ordained according to the gifts and callings of God unto him; and he is to be ordained by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is in the one who ordains him" (D&C 20:60; Moroni 3:4). Section 20 also reproduces the two prayers for the blessing of the sacrament found in Moroni 4 and 5 (D&C 20:76-79). Verse 37 of Section 20, describing the conditions for receiving baptism, is also taken from Moroni 6:2-3.
Taken together, the Book of Moroni and Section 20 seem to set out the ideal ecclesiastical structure, with a minimum of offices, no distinction between greater and lesser orders of the priesthood, and a few simple ordinances and doctrines. Ordination into the priesthood was by way of calling and by the Holy Ghost. However, this could not have been the actual teaching of the Book of Mormon. It appears rather that it was imposed on the Book of Mormon by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. As we have seen, Alma elaborated a much more complex view of the priesthood. On the matter of being called to the priesthood, Alma seems to steer a course between a Calvinistic predestination of the elect and the view that one is called on the basis of personal merit. Alma's doctrine is derived from Paul: "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified" (Rom. 8:29-30). It is certain that the true organization of the church would include the holy order of God and the office of high priest, but neither the Book of Moroni nor Section 20, as originally published, refers to either the high priesthood or the office of high priest. Furthermore, although both of these documents provide for ordination into the priesthood, they present the concept of "being called" in terms which are too simplistic, ignoring Alma's complex teachings. They seem to reflect the common view of being called as feeling the Spirit working within you, whereas for Alma being called is based upon our exercise of free agency in the preexistent world and a confirming life of faithfulness. In addition, the power of the priesthood is not merely the power of the Holy Ghost, but includes a special power and authority from God, which is passed from one person to another.
Thus although the Book of Moroni and Section 20 present a unified viewpoint, it is not confirmed by other parts of the Book of Mormon. It appears to be Joseph and Oliver's initial views on the proper organization of the priesthood and offices of the true church. But it was not long before Joseph started to revise this structure. In 1831, the first high priests and the first bishop of the church were ordained.
In September 1832, Joseph received Section 84, which explains that there are two priesthoods.
And the Lord confirmed a priesthood also upon Aaron and his seed, throughout all their generations, which priesthood also continueth and abideth forever with the priesthood which is after the holiest order of God. And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God. Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest. And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh; for without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live. Now this Moses plainly taught to the children of Israel in the wilderness . . . but they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence . . . . Therefore, he [the Lord] took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also; and the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel; which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins, and the law of carnal commandments, which the Lord in his wrath caused to continue with the house of Aaron among the children of Israel until John, whom God raised up, being filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb. (D&C 84:18-27)
Section 84 also traces the transmission of the greater priesthood:
And the sons of Moses, according to the Holy Priesthood which he received under the hand of his father-in-law, Jethro; and Jethro received it under the hand of Caleb; and Caleb received it under the hand of Elihu; and Elihu under the hand of Jeremy; and Jeremy under the hand of Gad; and Gad under the hand of Esaias; and Esaias received it under the hand of God. Esaias also lived in the days of Abraham, and was blessed of him -- which Abraham received the priesthood from Melchizedek, who received it through the lineage of his fathers, even till Noah; and from Noah till Enoch, through the lineage of his fathers; and from Enoch to Abel, who was slain by the conspiracy of his brother, who received the priesthood by the commandments of God, by the hand of his father Adam, who was the first man -- which priesthood continueth in the church of God in all generations, and is without beginning of days or end of years. (D&C 84:6-17)
Section 84 presents us with information which is missing from the Book of Mormon. We can now understand how the distinction arose between two orders of priesthood. We know that Moses received the greater priesthood from his father-in-law Jethro and was ready to reveal it to the Israelites, but because of their transgressions, they were not privileged to receive it and were instead given the lesser priesthood.
This certainly accords better with the teachings of Alma. Section 84 affirms the existence of the holy order of God back to Adam and stresses the importance of the ordinances and authority of the priesthood. The greater priesthood holds the keys of the mysteries of the kingdom, and through it, one can converse with God. Section 20 does not reserve such wonderful powers even to an apostle; it states merely that his duties are to ordain others to priesthood offices, to administer the sacrament, and to baptize and confirm members of the church. The Book of Mormon fails to give us a connected, fully understandable account of the orders and offices of the Nephite church. It is apparent that vital information is missing and that details which Joseph Smith supplied in later revelations could only have come from the Book of Mormon.
Although Section 84 traces the transmission of the priesthood, we do not know who any of the men were from Esaias to Caleb. Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, was a Midianite priest, and the Midianites were the descendants of Midian, the son of Abraham and Keturah. Why would the priesthood pass through Midian rather than through Isaac and Jacob? This strange pedigree seems to be derived from a Jewish legend. According to this story, Melol was Pharaoh of Egypt about 130 years after Jacob and his sons went to live with Joseph in Egypt. At this time Jethro was serving as one of three counselors to the Pharaoh, along with Balaam and Job. When Melol had a dream, Balaam correctly interpreted it as a prediction of the birth of Moses and recommended killing the children of Israel. However, Jethro advised the Pharaoh to leave the Israelites in peace. Melol was angered by this advice, and Jethro left Egypt for the land of Midian, where he became a high priest. When Moses later fled Egypt and arrived in Midian, Jethro put him in prison. Jethro's daughter, Zipporah, had many suitors, and Jethro announced that he would give her in marriage to the man who was able to draw from the ground a staff, which Jethro had planted in his garden. Zipporah succeeded in getting Moses released from prison, and when he saw the staff in the garden, he easily pulled it out of the ground. Angelo Rappoport gives this account of the staff:
The story of this staff runs as follows: It was a staff made of sapphire which the Almighty had created in the twilight of the first Sabbath eve. When Adam was driven out of the Garden of Eden, he carried this staff with him, as one of the gifts he had received from the Creator. He handed it to Enoch, who transmitted it to Noah, who again handed it to Shem. The staff reached Abraham, who transmitted it to his son Isaac. The latter gave it to Jacob, who brought it with him to Egypt and handed it to his son Joseph. When the Viceroy died, the Egyptians pillaged his house and took away this sapphire rod which they brought to Pharaoh. Reuel [Jethro], who was one of the counselors of Pharaoh, saw this rod and made up his mind to possess it. His desire was so great that he did not hesitate to steal it and carry it away when he left Egypt. He planted the rod in his garden, and no one could uproot it or even approach it. (Rappoport 1987, 2:254-55)
The Book of the Bee gives a somewhat different version of this story:
In the Book of the Bee it is related that Jethro invited Moses to go into the house and to select a shepherd's staff, and that at the command of the Lord one of the staffs left its place and moved towards Moses. The story of the rod of Moses is related as follows:When Adam was driven out of Paradise, he cut a branch from the fig tree which was the tree of knowledge, and this branch served him as staff all his life. This staff he left to his son, and it was transmitted from generation to generation till it came into the possession of Abraham. It was with this staff that the Patriarch smashed the idols of his father Terah. Jacob used the staff when he tended the flocks of Laban, and his son Judah gave it as a pledge to his daughter-in-law Tamar. The staff was subsequently concealed by an angel in the cave of treasures, in the mountains of Moab. When the pious Jethro was pasturing his flocks, he found the staff and used it henceforth. When Jethro had grown old, he asked Moses to go into the house and fetch this staff. . . . The staff then came into the possession of Phinehas, who buried it in the desert. It belonged to Joseph, the husband of Mary, at the moment of the birth of the Saviour, and it served afterwards as one of the planks in the Cross of Christ. (Rappoport 1987, 2:366-67)
Both of these accounts agree that the staff was in the possession of Adam and that it was passed from one person to another until it reached Abraham. From this point, the accounts differ; one states that Jacob gave the staff to Joseph, while the other says that Judah obtained the staff. The staff is then either stolen or hidden, but both accounts agree that it came into the possession of Jethro and finally became the rod of Moses. Similarly, Section 84 traces the transmission of the priesthood from Adam to Abel, Enoch, Noah, Melchizedek, and Abraham. It then invents an entirely new line of transmission through Esaias and four other unknown men to Jethro and Moses. The legend concerning the staff seems to be the reason for this odd divergence of the priesthood from the direct line of ordination which we would have expected. Since the different versions of the story did not agree about what happened to the staff after it left the hands of Abraham, the author of Section 84 apparently felt free to give his own account. For him, the staff was merely a symbol of the priesthood, which had passed down through many generations from Adam.
Section 84 of the Doctrine and Covenants states that Abraham received the priesthood from Melchizedek, but in the Book of Abraham, when Abraham says that he became a high priest, he never mentions Melchizedek. Joseph Smith's later teaching was that Abraham received a higher priesthood from Melchizedek. In 1843 he delivered a sermon on the text of Hebrews 7, stating that the epistle outlines three different orders of priesthood, the Melchizedek, the patriarchal, and the Levitical. He claimed that Abraham held the patriarchal priesthood, but received the fullness of the greater priesthood from Melchizedek. On 18 December 1833 Joseph ordained his father as the first patriarch of the church, and during his blessing he made the following remarks:
Three years previous to the death of Adam, he called Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch and Methuselah, who were High Priests, with the residue of his posterity, who were righteous, into the valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and there bestowed upon them his last blessing. And the Lord appeared unto them, and they rose up and blessed Adam, and called him Michael, the Prince, the Archangel. . . .So shall it be with my father: he shall be called a prince over his posterity, holding the keys of the patriarchal Priesthood over the kingdom of God on earth, even the Church of the Latter-day Saints, and he shall sit in the general assembly of Patriarchs, even in council with the Ancient of Days when he shall sit and all the Patriarchs with him and shall enjoy his right and authority under the direction of the Ancient of Days. (Joseph Smith 1976, 38-39)
Joseph's blessing certainly ascribes great power to the patriarchal priesthood, and it is difficult to see in what way it is inferior to the order of Melchizedek.
On 28 March 1835, before he began work on the Book of Abraham, Joseph received Section 107, which refers to the order of evangelists: "the order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made. This order was instituted in the days of Adam, and came down by lineage" (D&C 107:39-41). After tracing the transmission of the priesthood down to Noah, the revelation quotes the very same words concerning the gathering of Adam's posterity at Adam-ondi-Ahman, which Joseph had used when he blessed his father as patriarch of the church. Thus this portion of Section 107 appears to be giving an account of the patriarchal priesthood. However, it also appears that patriarchs must first be high priests, as was the case with Joseph Smith's father, and Section 107 says that the office of high priest belongs to the Melchizedek priesthood. Therefore, it would be impossible for a patriarch to hold a lesser priesthood than the Melchizedek priesthood.
In his sermon on Hebrews 7, outlining the three orders of the priesthood, Joseph had stated that the Melchizedek priesthood was distinguished from the other orders by the holding of kingly powers and sealing powers. However, the kingly powers of the higher priesthood would surely be supplemented by the right to hold the keys of a dispensation. But the patriarch seems to be the logical custodian of the keys; since he stands at the head of his posterity, he should also be the father of his dispensation. Furthermore, it seems that a patriarch would hold the sealing powers, since he must bind together all of his posterity, to ensure their mutual salvation.