Joseph Smith's priesthood system is a serious and complex subject. I have devoted six chapters (11-16) to it in my book Part Way to Utah: the Forgotten Mormons. It is complex because Joseph Smith combined several Biblical concepts into a tangled hierarchy, and presented it as a restoration of primitive first-century Christian priesthood. Nothing could be further from the truth. For a discussion of actual ministry in the first century see chapter 12 in my book, Ministry in the Early Christian Church. Presented below is a very brief summary of some of the problems with Joseph Smith's priesthood.
- Aaonic Priesthood. The Aaronic priesthood is the Old Testament priesthood of Israel. God created Israel's priesthood to function as an integral part of the law He gave to Moses at Mt. Sinai. This priesthood was held first by Moses' brother Aaron and his sons, and was to be passed on only to Aaron's descendants (Exodus 28:1) within the larger tribe of Levi (hence the common designation “Levitical priesthood”). Aaron was the first of these priests to be designated the great, or high, priest. The New Testament tells us that the Mosaic law, including its sacrificial system and officiating Levitical priesthood, was only a shadow of the superior work which Christ would ultimately do for us (Heb. 10:1-2a, 11-14; Col. 2:16-17). It also tells us that the Law was completely abolished by this perfect and completed work of Christ on the cross (Heb. 7:18; 8:13; 10:9b-10; Col. 2:13-14). Furthermore, it tells us that any effort to revive the old order of things represented by the Mosaic law—in any way—displays open contempt for Christ and results in alienation from Him (Gal. 5:2-4). God, therefore, could never have authored a revival or “restoration” of the Aaronic, or Levitical priesthood within the Christian church. To do so would be to cast aspersions on the perfect work He had already accomplished through Jesus. Indeed, evidence from both the New Testament and church history confirm that no such priesthood order ever existed in the early Christian church.
For a more in-depth discussion, see my chapter 14, The Aaronic Priesthood - A Biblical Analysis, or our tract The Aaronic Priesthood.
-
The Melchizedek Priesthood.
According to the Bible: Melchizedek is mentioned only ten times in the Bible—eight of which are in the Epistle to the Hebrews. In Israel, priesthood was confined to the lineage of Levi (through Aaron), whereas kingship was in the lineage of Judah. Consequently, religious priesthood and political kingship could never be held by the same person. This is what makes Melchizedek unique. The only glimpse we have of Melchizedek is in the three brief verses of Genesis 14:18-20. There we are told he that he was both king of Salem (later Jerusalem), as well as priest of God Most High. Psalm 110:4 is the only other Old Testament scripture referring to Melchizedek. This entire Psalm is Messianic: Jesus applied it to Himself (Matt.22:43-45; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42), and Peter reaffirms the early church's understanding of it in Acts 2:34-35, as applying to Jesus. Indeed, the author of Hebrews explains in detail that Jesus alone is this promised priest after the order of Melchizedek, and explains just how far superior His priesthood is above Abraham, the Levitical priesthood and the Mosaic law. Plus, in Jesus, the roles of both king and priest became united in one person, which had never before been true in Israel.
The most important point to note throughout all of this is: with the sole exception of Genesis 14:18–20, where Melchizedek is first introduced, virtually every mention of a Melchizedek priesthood in the Bible is in reference to the specific and unique ministry which Jesus Christ alone fulfills as God's chosen means of salvation for His people. Nowhere is there any suggestion that there ever was—or should be—an order of Melchizedek priests in the Christian church.
Since the Biblical concept of a Melchizedek priesthood always refers to the unique and exclusive role of Jesus Christ alone, any attempt by mere humans to appropriate this title or ministry to themselves actually constitutes a form of blasphemy, by usurping an unique title and function which belong to Jesus alone.
According to Joseph Smith: Joseph Smith completely distorted the Biblical view described above by creating fictitious accounts of Melchizedek within his own "scriptures." His distortions are found primarily in his Inspired Version of the Bible in Genesis 14 and Hebrews 7, his Book of Mormon in Alma 10:7-16 and in his Doctrine & Covenants section 83:2. For example, he makes Melchizedek out to be a high priest. The high priesthood, however, was reserved only for Aaron and his lineage. And Melchizedek actually preceded Aaron by hundreds of years. The book of Hebrews also makes a big point that Melchizedek was "without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever" (Heb. 7:3). His point is that the priesthood of Melchizedek 1) is perpetual, just like Jesus', and 2) is superior to Aaron's priesthood which depended on meticulous genealogical records to transmit its authority. Joseph Smith furthers contradicts the Biblical record by creating a genealogy for Melchizedek in Doctrine & Covenants section 83:2. He also tries to make it appear that there was a long line of Melchizedek priests, which authority was passed from one generation to another.
For a more in-depth discussion, see my chapter 13, The Melchizedek Priesthood - A Biblical Analysis, or our tract The Melchizedek Priesthood.
Paul Trask