Pope Francis' Inclusivism, Mormonism's Prophets and Priests

And welcome to The Dividing Line on a Thursday, I think. Yeah. It's hard to... Hard. Huh? All day. Thank you very much. Appreciate that insight. Good to have you with us. As I mentioned on the last program, we do need to get to a few things that I've been putting off for a little while.

Well, but every day is something new that has developed since the day before. I was looking through, I was trying to find something in my Dropbox file, and, you know, I just had the thought cross my mind.

It's been happening a lot recently, maybe some of the rest of you. I'm actually hesitant to even mention things like that, lest I get bounced for being on the wrong side of history. That type of thing's happening.

I mean, when literally you have banks who will not process donations for political candidates because the banks have been taken over by Marxists, and so they just do whatever they want to do. And people just getting bounced out of social media, right, left, and center for just not having the right opinions.

It has the effect of chilling free speech because you just don't want to say something. If you're going to get bounced out, you might as well get bounced out for saying something meaningful rather than just simply they don't like you and you're gone.

So I'm hesitant to even mention platforms that I use or online services or anything because I wouldn't be the first person to all of a sudden find my password no longer works. And yeah, there you go. That is the world in which we live.

Pope Francis and the Loss of Christian Exclusivity

So let's start off, I think, here, and then we'll go to some questions. Last week, I believe it was last week, I made mention of a video put out by Pope Francis. And, well, you just sort of have to watch it.

And there's subtitles so you can, it's the Pope, I think, himself. It's at the service of human fraternity, the Pope video one, January of 2021. That sort of would indicate to me that there's going to be a series of Pope videos.

We'll see. But here is what I think it came out right as everything went insane last week. And so it sort of got buried. But here is the Pope's video.

We must return to our sources and focus on what is essential, what is essential in our faith. The worship of God and the love of our neighbor. We pray that the Lord will give us the grace to live in full fraternity with brothers and sisters of other religions, and not to be fighting and praying for each other, opening ourselves to everyone.

So there is the Pope video, interesting way of describing it. And so let's let's look at it a little bit more closely. It starts off by saying, when we pray to God following Jesus, we come together as brothers and sisters.

OK, when we pray to God following Jesus, what does that mean? What does it mean to be following Jesus? Doesn't that mean to be praying in his name, even to him? Isn't prayer directed to Jesus? In First Corinthians chapter one, we're described as those who epikaleo, call upon the name of the Lord.

And epikaleo is in prayer, and it's kurios, Lord Jesus. So when we pray to God following Jesus, and of course, I would say that means following his example, which would mean that we're not praying to saints, we're not praying to intermediaries, we're not praying to angels, anything like that at all.

You can try to take the audio down a little bit. OK, with those who pray according to other cultures, other traditions, and other beliefs. Now, how do you... So that parallels praying according to Jesus with cultures, traditions, and beliefs.

And I think it's why even a lot of Roman Catholics were really put off by this kind of rhetoric, this kind of ecumenical mishmash, which is just par for the course for not just Francis. Francis represents the natural South American outworking of Vatican II.

So there have been Francis's for a long time now, 60 years, within Roman Catholicism, and will be for as far as we can see in the future, that's for sure. And this results in this idea of praying according to cultures, traditions, and beliefs.

And obviously, what you have, whatever this culture, tradition, belief is, here you have a Muslim woman doing one of the daily prayers. And so whatever this is, culture, tradition, belief, it has to do with Islam at this particular point.

And then, of course, we then have, we... Oops, back it up just a little bit here. We are brothers and sisters who pray. And here you have a Jewish man. And so these are your monotheistic, the great monotheistic religions, right?

Judaism, Christianity, Islam. Not in that order, but that's what's being said. And we are brothers and sisters who pray. Now, this is consistent with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. We have read it many, many times before, Section 841 of the Universal Catholic Catechism.

The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims. These profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us, they adore the one merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day.

So that's a quotation from Vatican II that is from Lumen Gentium 16, if you want to look that up, repeated in the Universal Catholic Catechism, which I would argue in some ways elevates its authority in the current teaching magisterium of the Church.

If it's found in a magisterial document, and then it's placed in the Catechism, and you have multiple popes who have then reaffirmed that. Okay, and so you have the claim, evidently, this is true prayer, acceptable prayer.

So evidently, you can have true, acceptable prayer outside of Christ, outside of the one mediator. Well, it makes sense. Roman Catholicism has already violated in a horrific way, the biblical message of the mechanism whereby we approach God, which is through the merits of the risen Savior.

If you try to approach God outside of Christ, you are fundamentally questioning the validity of the Father's testimony to the Son. That's what people really, really, really, really, really don't like, is there is a natural, necessary exclusivity if Christ is who he claimed he was.

If Christ truly is not merely a representative of God, an angelic being, any of the Unitarian perspectives, a highly exalted creature, whatever, but if he is Yahweh in human flesh, the Son become flesh, then any other way of approaching God is rendered useless.

In light of his own claim to be the way the truth in life, no man comes to the Father but by me. If God has gone through the stupendous reality of the Incarnation, this is an absolute deal breaker for pluralism, for inclusivism, whatever else it might be.

And so, this has been, and that, of course, was accepted as a given within Roman Catholicism for a great period of time. But you've got your Roman Catholic liberals, and you've got your Protestant liberals, and you've got almost all Jews are liberals, so they've all given up on any kind of exclusivity because they don't really believe in objective truth.

So, if you don't believe in objective truth, all this stuff doesn't make any sense anyways. So, we are brothers and sisters who pray. How are we brothers and sisters? Well, within Roman Catholicism, we're all children of God.

The biblical distinction between children of God by faith and merely creatures of God is pretty much wiped out since Vatican II. Really, over and over and over again, you'll find popes speaking about God redeeming his children, and they do it within the context of all of humanity.

And, of course, this pope, speaking to a little boy, atheist daddy, you see it over and over and over again. This is liberation theology. This is leftist theology. It's the lifeblood of Roman Catholicism in the Southern Hemisphere.

Well, okay, in South America. Not necessarily Africa. I'll take that back. In South America, most definitely. So, here you have this commonality being brought together in what Francis is saying. So, fraternity leads us to open ourselves to the Father of all to see in the other, a brother or sister, to share our lives or to support, to love, and to know each other.

And so, there is somehow in the human action of prayer and opening up and the creation of a fraternal family, not because of redemption, not because of forgiveness of sins, not because of union in Christ, not because of the cross, not because of the resurrection, but because of what we do.

So, we're praying people. And so, praying people, even if you're not praying to the same God, but Roman Catholicism says they are. Roman Catholicism in regards to Judaism, Islam, adoring the same God.

That's that. Just read it. Section 841. And of course, we've responded to this over and over and over again, pointing out that the Trinitarian nature of God is fundamental to the Christian understanding of what prayer is, who it's directed to, and how then prayer does create a body, but it is a body of faith that is defined by fidelity to Jesus Christ.

And so, this is a brotherhood and sisterhood based upon an attitude of vague, undefined prayer. And I say vague and undefined because there is a fundamental difference between how a Muslim views prayer and how a biblical Christian views prayer.

Now, there may not be as much with a Roman Catholic who is using beads in a rosary as Muslims use beads in some of their prayers as well, though there would also be a fundamental divide in that Roman Catholics will be praying to Mary, to saints, to angels, all of which a Muslim's going, I mean, that's polytheism pretty much.

One point for the Muslims on that one. Very clearly, a real fundamental issue there, which we've addressed. You can go back to the debates we've done on these subjects. You can address these and the Roman Catholic perspective and their argumentation over and over again.

We know what the arguments are. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt decades ago. But the point is that this idea of prayer in this nebulous fashion, it can't be defined in a biblical way by the Pope because the Pope leads a religion that doesn't pray biblically.

And that leads to all sorts of other issues. And to know each other, I'm not sure how we would know each other just simply because we pray. There's all sorts of religions pray. But here, the church values God's action in other religions without forgetting that for us Christians, he has to throw us in here.

Well, you know, he's going to say that without forgetting that for us Christians, we'll get to it eventually here. Come on. Good grief. How long did it take him to say that? The wellspring of human dignity and fraternity is the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Now, the gospel is the issue with Rome. That's what we've been saying for years and years and years. But the wellspring of human dignity and fraternity is in the gospel of Jesus Christ. A gospel that an Orthodox Jewish person doesn't believe because it doesn't believe Jesus is the Messiah.

A gospel that is identified as falsehood and polytheism within the pages of the Quran. That to believe that to say three is to engage in shirk, kufr, to have no one to help you and to endure hellfire.

So evidently, the idea is you can reject the gospel, but still have this unity. And the church values God's action in other religions. How do you avoid the rather obvious conclusion that Rome today has abandoned the exclusivity of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ?

When you have words like this, the church values God's action in other religions. What do you mean by God's actions? I mean, for any of this to make any sense, what you're saying is that the prayers of all religions, or at least, I don't know why you do this, but I can see someone arguing, at least the prayers of those in monotheistic religions are acceptable before God, are heard and accepted by God, even with the rejection of the crucifixion, resurrection, even the identity of Jesus as the son of God, even as Messiah, right?

So despite these rejections, despite the fact that scripture specifically says, if you will not confess the son, you do not have the father either. It seems that since Vatican II, Rome's position is, yeah, hey, you know, as long as there's a good faith tipping of the hat toward the father, then you've got at least the benefits of the son, something along those lines.

But the church values God's action in other religions. Whatever that means, I don't know. What does that mean? I don't know. And then you just have the, you know, the wellspring of human dignity and fraternity.

How about the centrality of everything the triune God has done in all of creation is in the gospel of Jesus Christ? How's that? That's a little bit more forceful, I think, and correct. But again, the Pope doesn't have the gospel.

We believers must return to our sources and concentrate on what is essential. We believers, it's hard for me not to see that as an identification of all monotheistic members of all monotheistic religions as fellow believers, which is why Francis has been so stridently denouncing the proselytization of these other religions.

I mean, if you're a Roman Catholic who seeks to bring your message to Jews, your Pope says you're not supposed to be doing that. Same thing with Muslims. You're not supposed to be doing that. Bad person.

Francis doesn't think that's what you should be doing at all because they're already believers, which we know is not what Roman Catholics believed 200 years ago. We know this. This is obvious. This isn't even debatable.

This is not what they believed 200 years ago. But it's what Francis believes today, and this is called the Pope video. So why not accept what the Pope video says? What is essential to our faith is the adoration of God and love of neighbor.

I think there are probably a number of Roman Catholics who would agree with me that the only proper way of adoring God is in and through the revelation he has made in his son, Jesus Christ, and that to seek to adore God while rejecting the testimony he's given by raising Jesus from the dead is to call him a liar.

So this faith is not a Christian faith. What is essential to our faith is the adoration of God and love of neighbor. Adoration of God as he has revealed himself in Jesus Christ. That's not in the Pope's video.

And then, of course, they're giving food to folks, and they're being really, really nice. Let us pray that the Lord may give us the grace to live in full fellowship with our brothers and sisters of other religions and not fight each other.

Full fellowship. So in the Pope's mind, full fellowship can exist outside of the redemption that's in Christ Jesus, outside of regeneration. You're going to have full fellowship. No spirit, no common object of prayer, no common means of prayer, but full fellowship with our brothers and sisters of other religions and not fight each other.

Now, if you just mean by that physical fighting, but that's not all he means. He means proselytization. He said that many, many times. And praying for one another, open ourselves to all. This is the message of the Pope video.

So there you go. As I've said many times, these are tough years for Roman Catholic apologists, because I'm going to tell you, just think how many times we have done debates in the past with Roman Catholics who said things far more exclusivistically than their Pope just did.

Do they think back on stuff like that? I really wonder. They think back and go, oh no, or just ask their questions as to why the Pope would take the positions he has now. I don't know. Okay, let's shift gears a little bit.

Mormon Prophets, Apostles, and the Priesthood

And let's talk a little Mormonism, shall we? It's been a while since we have addressed anything within Mormonism. Mormonism is undergoing a tremendous, I wouldn't call it a transformation. I mean, I don't know what's going on in Utah.

I don't know anyone has ever really understood what was going on in Utah at all. But we have our sources in Utah. Basically, Jason Wallace, who sends me videos and says, can you believe this? It's always, oh, I wonder what kind of new thing.

Good old Jason, he keeps cranking out the videos up there. You got to check out their stuff. Look up Jason Wallace and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church up there. They keep cranking out the good stuff.

And yet he'll always be sending me stuff. Can you believe that this is now going on? And look at what they're saying now. And the collapse of Mormonism on issues relating to human sexuality, especially.

I've commented on this in a number of different venues. It just stuns me. Because before 15 years ago, 15 years ago, you know, a decade before Obergefell, if you had said, where do you think the strongest resistance will be to a continuing movement toward homosexual marriage, transgenderism, things like that?

Where do you think that would be? I would have said, well, I'd assume Utah and the Mormons will always be there. Why? Because of the fact that they have an embodied, gendered God. Their God didn't create gender.

Ever thought about that? Gender pre-exists the Mormon God. Had to, because there has to be all these generations of gods before this God. And so male and female is a almost eternal thing within Mormonism.

And so I would have said, they'll defend that hill. That's a hill they'll die on in Utah. Well, it ain't. It isn't. It's amazing. It is interesting to see what's been going on at BYU and how BYU, as in many other religions that could be mentioned, that academic intravenous feeding into the bloodstream of the religion is fundamentally changing that faith.

It really is. And so we haven't done a lot with Mormonism of late. Last thing we were talking about, sadly, we were really hoping to have some stuff going on in Utah and some dialogues and things like that.

We've got a real nice leather-bound item here that we just need to package up and send it. I mean, seriously, and just hope that down the road. I keep forgetting to mention that. We need to get it out and just get it done and write a letter.

We're going to have dialogues and debates and so on and so forth. And Utah just, for some reason, the Mormons in particular are extremely sensitive to any sense of, they're very fearful of public opinion.

Very fearful of public opinion. So we were really ramped up and ready to go for the April General Conference last year, because it was 2020, 200 years since the alleged First Vision. We really should do something in 2023, or 2024, because that's when it would have been.

We just got to remember to do that. I forget things like that. But we were ready to do stuff on the First Vision and everything. In-person classes at BYU, everything just gone. Just shut down like anything.

It really reminds me of the United Kingdom, honestly. I mean, did you all see? I'm not going to forget. I'm going to have a hard time the rest of my life. I really am. Because when I see abject stupidity, it is really hard for me not to go, look, it's abject stupidity.

And so did you see the video of the guy? He's running in London. I know where he's running. I've run there myself. I know where he is. I was running there in 2019. I can pull up on Strava and show you my routes in London where I was running.

Along the Thames, it can get very windy there. And here's this guy. He has been stopped by a COVID marshal. Now, if you ever were looking forward to a great career, what a career to wear a bright yellow vest and walk around in London lecturing people about masks and not being six feet away from somebody else.

Or they probably use six feet there and then they use meters someplace else. And what a life. So this video starts up because you can tell this guy has been stopped from running. And there were a lot of us who ran.

Funny thing was, we were in London. I'm not forgetting Mormonism. I'm going to get back. But I don't want to forget this. Funny thing in London was there weren't a lot of early morning runners. I would be out there before sunrise and I had downtown London to myself.

To myself. Where the eye is and stuff. I mean, I ran under the eye going both directions and I was the only one there. Nobody across the bridges and nobody there. I mean, it's a sleepy town in the morning and then that changes.

But that's when you got to get your running in. And so here's this guy. I know where he is. You can see in the background what bridge is nearby. That's how you can tell where you are on the Thames is which bridge is nearby.

And he has been stopped by a COVID marshal and told he cannot run because he's breathing too hard. Now, I have thought of this scenario many times while running. I ran seven and a half miles yesterday.

That's 12 .07 kilometers. Something like that. Listening to Carl Truman's new book, which by the way, I know Carl's never going to see this, but Carl Truman's new book was not designed to help you run faster.

Not at all. In fact, I'm sure I ran a good bit slower than I normally would have. I needed John Cooper. I did not need Carl Truman. But I learned more from Carl Truman, so that's why I was doing it. Anyway, every time I run, there's a bus stop at one of the corners I go by.

On one of the major streets. And I've seen cops there in the past. And the thought has crossed my mind more than once. How long until some nutcase is going to say you need to be wearing a mask? Because I see people biking.

I see people running. They're wearing masks. And I'm just like, okay. So here's this video. And the funny thing is, have you ever used your cell phone to do video? The little microphone thingy there is extremely sensitive to air movement.

And so you can hear and you can see it. The guy, the Marshall dude has a thing. You can put up a hoodie type thing and you can see it fluttering in the wind. The wind is blowing along the Thames. And this is where I'm losing it, folks.

This is where I'm going to be suffering for the rest of my life. Anyone who knows anything about something called viral load knows that in those conditions, you can't communicate nothing. You can't spread nothing.

As soon as you breathe that wind, your outdoors disperses everything. And it's poof. That's it. People have the idea that if there's one virus hanging around someplace that goes up your nose, you know, that's not how it works.

That's not how it works. Any decent virologist will tell you. Outdoor transmission is almost, almost never happens. Requires lengthy, close contact. And if the wind is whipping, you are perfectly safe.

But here they are stopping runners along the way to say you're breathing too hard. This was the once mighty Britannia. I don't mean to mock anybody, but the level of stupidity is just... Okay. Anyway, back to Mormonism.

I apologize for that brief departure. Two issues. I received some questions and I should remind everybody that both of these questions are addressed rather fully in this book. This is the later version of it.

I don't even think I have the... No, I don't have the original in here. But a book called Letters to a Mormon Elder. And then, of course, you also have Is the Mormon My Brother? Two books that address these issues.

But two issues that I've been asked questions about and I've asked permission of the individual who kindly asked me, could I address these in the program? Because others may have the same questions, may be involved in similar conversations, discussions, whatever.

And that allows us to kill two birds with one stone. Oh, I'm sorry. I need to apologize to the avian community. If you saw the Scottish guy doing that, it was hilarious because it's just so true. It doesn't matter what you say.

You've got to apologize to somebody today. That's just how it works. Anyway. So, the first question has to do with the issue of prophets. As you may or may not know, depending, you know, there's people who don't know a whole lot about Mormonism and its specific means and how it's set up and things like that.

There are many prophets within Mormonism. And there is the prophet, the president of the church. But then in another way, all of the First Presidency and the apostles are prophets in a sense. And in Mormonism, this is directly connected to the concept of the priesthood, the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods as well.

And the whole concept of church authority, which, and I just wonder how long it's going to be. In fact, I'm sure it's happening right now. Back when I first started studying Mormonism, 11-year-old kids knew these stories and knew their theology.

Last time I was in Salt Lake City, which I think was 2019, yeah, October of 2019, when I visited the Deseret Bookstore in Salt Lake, which used to be just this amazing place. I mean, just theology books abounding.

I was stunned at what had happened to this bookstore and how few books specifically on Mormon theology were left in it. The section which used to just, you'd have all the time, you could be in there all day long is now one little alcove.

Total change, just astonishing. Anyway, now I am sure there are many at BYU who are introducing historical criticism of the LDS sources themselves, and I'm sorry, the Book of Mormon cannot survive that.

The Doctrine and Covenants cannot survive that. The Pearl of Great Price, oh goodness, cannot survive that. Once you bring any type of critical historical analysis to bear upon the LDS scriptures, done.

So the problem is that the entire hierarchy of the church is based upon this concept of a restored priesthood, which allows for prophets and apostles, and once you delve into what the scriptures actually teach about these things, it's nothing, nothing at all like Mormonism has construed it to be.

Joseph Smith was a very, very ignorant man. He borrowed from sources that were available to him, but he had an extremely shallow understanding of the relationship of the sources that he would make reference to.

And he really, you know, he was a very uneducated individual, and it is the element of education that's clearly missing from him is learning to think in proper categories and see how things are related to one another.

He just, he could not relate things properly. And so Mormonism claims to have apostles and prophets, but this is clearly not what is being referred to, for example, in Ephesians 4 .11. He gave some as apostles and some as prophets and some as evangelists and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints, the work of the service, the building of the body of Christ, till we attain to the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature that belongs to the fullness of Christ.

And in fact, of course, this is in the same section of Ephesians, where just earlier Paul said, now to him who is able to do far more abundantly beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that works within us, to him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever.

Mormonism teaches that there are many generations of past where there was no true church, but Paul had no such idea. And to him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus, ais pas astas geneas, to ionos ton ionon.

So, to him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus, ais unto all generations forever and ever. So, whatever else is being referred to by the Apostle Paul, it's not the idea of a restored ministry, a restored priesthood.

Paul knew nothing of the LDS concepts of Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods. And in fact, I think it would be good to point out, because this is even more foundational, because every Mormon prophet pretends to hold the priesthood.

Of course, every Mormon elder riding by on his bike pretends to hold some kind of this priesthood. We have a tract, I remember, well, we have a couple of tracts that address the issue of the Mormon priesthood that we have distributed up in Salt Lake City.

And I've always been surprised that there weren't more Christians who focused upon this, because in my opinion, it is clearly one of the weakest areas in Mormon theology, is this concept of the priesthood.

Not only historically, because, yeah, I don't, no, I don't have it in here. I mean, I do have a triple, but I don't have it. I mean, I have a quad, actually. I have the new quad. Excuse me, I didn't get my arm work in today.

So, in the Doctrine and Covenants, in section 24, if I recall correctly, if I had my little one back that I got back in 1984, somewhere around there. No, no, if I put my reading glasses on, I have marked in orange everything that was added about the subject of the priesthood in the Doctrine and Covenants, and that it's not noted in the modern version of the LDS Scriptures, the changes that have taken place.

Because the concept of the priesthood came about after the establishment of the church in 1830. That, in fact, was one of the things that I think it was David Whitmer brought up, was that this was stuff that developed later on, and then he changed the Book of Commandments when it came to Doctrine and Covenants.

He added all this stuff to it and edited the quote-unquote revelations and so on and so forth. So, digging into the history of the development of the idea of the priesthood in Mormonism reveals the editing of the LDS Scriptures themselves.

But more to the point, the New Testament teaching on the nature of the priesthood is absolutely irreconcilable with what Mormonism teaches. Mormonism teaches that you have a lesser and a greater priesthood in the sense that the young men receive the alleged Aaronic priesthood, and then at 18, you can receive the Melchizedek priesthood.

I'm sure there are people pushing for these priesthood rights and authorities to be given to women in Mormonism. Currently, they're only for men. Man, would that be an earthquake. Just wow. And, of course, Brigham Young taught that the day that the priesthood was given to the black was the day that the church went into apostasy.

Um, that was 1978 when that happened, by the way. But when you compare the ideas of Joseph Smith about what a priesthood was with biblical revelation, once again, you're just struck with how little Joseph Smith knew of the Bible and its history.

How little he understood it. And how he made just incredibly erroneous—it's like he did not understand, for example, when you have the Mormon three levels of heaven, the celestial, telestial, and terrestrial.

He made up the word telestial because he did not understand not only the parallelism that Paul was using in 1 Corinthians chapter 15, but he didn't realize in the King James translation of the Bible. In the Pauline epistles, that particular translation committee used terrestrial and celestial, the very same Greek words that were used in the Gospel of John, and that translation committee used heavenly and earthly.

It's an inconsistency in the King James, which he didn't know because he doesn't know the original languages, and he wasn't a prophet. And so we have this celestial glory and terrestrial glory, and then he comes up with telestial glory, which doesn't mean anything.

To try to parallel it with sun, moon, and stars. This is the kind of weirdness that you come up with when you actually start looking at what Joseph Smith attempted to teach and derive things from the Bible.

It's a mishmash of ignorance, it really is. Well, especially so when it comes to priesthood. Because the Aaronic priesthood is for the family of Aaron, and no one today knows if they're the family of Aaron any longer.

The Mormons do pretend to have something called a patriarchal blessing, where you are told what tribe you're of, but they're not told that they're the tribe of Aaron, but they're still given the Aaronic priesthood.

And what did we call that tract that had Korah, Dathom, and Abiram on the front? A test for the Aaronic priest, right? Wasn't that it? That was always a bad color paper. Oh, I know, I know. A test for the Aaronic priest.

And it has a... Didn't Don do that drawing in the front? It's got these guys who are about to fall into a... The earth is opened up underneath them, and it's sort of like the Wile E. Coyote defying gravity moment, every time he goes off the cliff.

That's what Korah, Dathom, and Abiram are doing, and you can find the story in the Old Testament where they wanted the Aaronic priesthood, and God had the earth open up and swallow them because they were not of the proper family to have the Aaronic priesthood, and so God showed them that.

And then, of course, you can go into the Book of Hebrews, and it talks about the passing away of that priesthood and its services and things like that in light of the sacrifice of Christ. And then the Melchizedek priesthood is something that's discussed for us in the Book of Hebrews, and it is astonishingly clear that Joseph Smith did not understand the Book of Hebrews at all.

Now, you can't blame him. There are a lot of Christians today who don't have a clue what's going on in the Book of Hebrews, too, but he claims to be a prophet, and so there's no excuses at that point.

But he comes up with this concept of the Melchizedek priesthood, and the problem is, I remember the first time I opened up my new LDS Bible, and I was talking to a Mormon, and I said, do you claim to hold the Melchizedek priesthood?

Well, I do. I said, well, do you know what the requirements for the Melchizedek priesthood are in the Bible? Well, here in Hebrews 7 .3, without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually.

Is that you? Or is that your mom and dad over there? You know, and they're like, huh? I have never met a missionary on his mission, and I've spoken to, no, I've not spoken, I've spoken, we figured it out one year out at the temple toward one of the last years that we were doing it, or 5 ,000 more missionaries in Salt Lake and in Mesa.

And in all that time, obviously, I did not talk about the priesthood with all of them, but in all that time, I had never met a Mormon missionary who could look me in the eye and say that he had specifically studied what the New Testament taught about priesthoods.

Didn't really care. Didn't, I mean, that's not their source. They don't believe in Sola Scriptura. But without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually.

That's the Melchizedek priest. And then I would take them down, for it is attested to him, 715, and this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, he has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life.

So if there's going to be another Melchizedek priest after Melchizedek himself, he has to have an indestructible life. For it is attested of him, you are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.