wpe13.gif (1391 bytes)  Contents




If someone wishes to go head to head with Mormons (which I seriously don't recommend) I suggest going straight for the jugular— the priesthood order of Melchizedek; because it's the Achilles' heel of Mormonism's entire hierarchical structure.

According to the letter to Hebrews, the Melchizedekian order is a high-priest's post; and very exclusive.

1• Melchizedekian priests do not obtain their positions by succession.

2• Melchizedekian priests are personally hand-picked by God; not by man.

3• Melchizedekian priests must be immortal.

4• Melchizedekian priests must be childless.

5• Melchizedekian priests have no genealogy.

6• There can be only one Melchizedekian priest at a time.

7• Jesus is the man currently occupying the post; and since he rose from the dead immortal, he will never be replaced.

8• The Melchizedekian priesthood began with its post on earth. But when the covenant that Yhvh's people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Number, and Deuteronomy established Aaron as the high priest, Mel's post was moved to heaven; viz: no man on earth can officiate in the priesthood of Melchizedek; not even Jesus; were he here.

9• No human being under God outranks a Melchizedekian priest; not even an actual Old Testament prophet.

If Mormons challenge you to produce textual evidence to substantiate those nine points: don't do it. Instead tell them that if they want textual evidence then they will just have to read the letter to Hebrews themselves because you're not telling.

The reason I recommend that stance is because Mormon men are supposed to be well-versed so that you shouldn't have to produce textual evidence. Don't let them talk you out of this by citing rules of academic discussion and so forth. You don't have to win the discussion; all you have to do is know what you're talking about; and he that's biblically ignorant; let him be ignorant still.

If the Mormons with whom you are conversing attempt to divert you, or refute you with "revelation" or in any way bee-ess their way out of those nine points with clever LDS sophistry; it's time to come to a full stop— politely thank them for their time, and bid them have a nice day.

Q: Does Mormonism's order of Melchizedek have to be biblical? Why can't a church employ the name for their proprietary order of priests; sort of like the Mason-sponsored community of Job's Daughters International?

A: Because it's fraud. Maybe Mormonism's brand of morality doesn't see it that way; but my brand sure does. Christ's high-priest priesthood is not a trifling matter; it is crucial to humanity's association with God and when Mormon men take that title to themselves, they are nothing less than identity thieves and usurping someone else's authority as their own. I can't stop them of course, but neither can I condone their conduct.

FYI: The order of Aaron is also a high-priest priesthood; so even that order is limited to one man at a time; viz: both of Mormonism's priesthoods, even were they valid, are way, way over-staffed.

Mormonism's God(s)                                        

In its beginnings, Mormonism's champions believed and practiced a kind of theology called monolatrism (a.k.a. monolatry) which can be defined as belief in the existence of many Gods, but with the consistent worship of only one deity. Unlike henotheism, monolatrism asserts that there is only one God worthy of worship, though other Gods are believed to exist.

According to Brigham Young, monolatrism's "one God worthy of worship" is Adam; a.k.a. Michael the Archangel.

"In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 349)

"When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. His is Michael the Archangel, the Ancient of Days about whom holy men have written and spoken-- He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do." (Brigham Young, in the Journal of Discourses, 1:50)

Whether the LDS still follows those teachings I don't know. But it's notable that Isaiah's God believed in neither a head of the Gods, nor a council of Gods, nor an Adam-God Creator. In point of fact, Isaiah's God is quite unique as the only God in existence.

Isa 43:10 . . Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isa 44:6 . . I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

Isa 44:8 . . Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Isa 45:5 . . I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me

Isa 45:18 . . For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

Isa 45:21-22 . .There is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

Isa 46:9 . . I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me

The New Testament's Jesus also believed in a solo God.

John 17:3 . . that they might know thee the only true God

Seeing as how there is only one true God, then by default all other so-called Gods are false Gods since there is no category of intermediate Gods in the Bible sandwiched between the true and the false.


Related References

The Kingdom Of The Cults
by Walter Martin
ISBN 1-55661-264-8