Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/1 It iss a pleasure to be here this morning to share some time with you to discussing

a topic that is important to all of us: our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. I was baptized into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints almost fourteen years ago. But my journey to the Church, which culminated with my baptism, began many years earlier. On a fall day almost twenty-five years ago, I was sitting in a hospital waiting area in San Diego. My fiance, Lynn, who soon thereafter became my wifemarried me, was scheduled to have surgery to remove a blockage in her trachea. The doctor was going to attempt a new procedure using a laser to burn away the excess tissue. Needless to say, I was worried, especially after the doctor who was scheduled to perform the surgery said he had never used a laser before. In any event, I happened to be sitting next to my future mother-in-law, whom I had just met. The only thing I recall from our brief time together is that she asked me what I believed about Jesus Christ and Heavenly Father. I dont recall my reply, but I doubt it was very satisfactory. You see, I had never really thought seriously about Jesus Christ or hHisHeavenly Father. A few years after Lynn and I married, I still had not made much progress in my understanding of the Savior. Although I devoted part of my professional life to studying social and cultural aspects of Christian religions, I had not pursued doctrinal studies, nor had I personalized any of the teachings of the Churchgospel. Then I had a dream that shook my soul. I was in the entryway of a white building waiting for Lynn. I looked a few feet to my left and saw her talking to a bearded man. Somehow I knew she was very close to this manI immediately thought that he was her best friendand it confused me for a moment. But then he looked at me in a rueful way and walked away. An intense feeling of sadness overcame me, for because I realized that he was my wifes friend but could not be mine. I decided to start learning about Jesus Christ and Latter-day Saint doctrine and a few years later I joined the Church. a few years later and began a new journeybut I still had a lot to learn. In 2005 my best friend passed away from cancer. Sun was not a member of our church, but he was a fine and honorable Christian man with a wonderful family. A couple of nights before the funeral I had a dream about him. If youll indulge me, Id like to read a description of this dream, which I delivered as part of his eulogy:
Comment [BB3]: Does this help with the transition? Comment [RM4]: The logical jump here is weird, but Im not sure how to bridge the gap without making assumptions Comment [BB2]: Or would it be better to specify The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Comment [BB1]: There is a bio at the end of the article. Is that the one we want to use (and do we want to keep it at the end or beginning of the article)?

Style Definition: MEG Block Quote: Indent: Left: 3 pi, Space Before: 12 pt, After: 12 pt, Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style Style Definition: Superscript: Superscript Formatted: Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 pi, Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/2 During a fitful nights sleep, having just found out that Sun had passed on to rejoin the Lord, I had a deep desire to see him once moreto make sure he was all right, or perhaps simply to test my faith. I dreamed I was walking along a corridor in a building where I work. I came across a turn-off into another corridor. It was dark, but I could just make out the shadow of a person facing away from me. I could see just enough to realize that it was Sun. He appeared to be waiting for someone. My first thought was one of fear: I did not want him to be in the dark, all alone. So I began to approach him. As I got nearer a light began to glow around him and get brighter. It was then that I realized it was not Sun who was in darkness; it was me. He was bathed in a vivid light that swept me into it. Without saying a word, he turned around and grabbed me in a hug as I began to weep. I then knew that he was there for methat he was in an eternal light that would never go out. We know the source of this light. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus said, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.1 In the Book of Mormon Alma taught his son Shiblon that the Lord Jesus Christ is the life and the light of the world.2 Although I have no idea if my dream had a literal quality, I like to believe that my friend has entered into this light. These This dream and other episodess from my life , as well as many others, have led me to want to know more about our Savior. Theis desire to know Christ involves both an intellectual and a spiritual pursuit that requires study and faith. We need to understand and follow his teachings so that we can achieve true happiness. I wish to come to get to know Him better and to know about Hishis mortal life, Hishis role in bringing forth the Atonement, and Hishis many teachings that. Wwe need to understand and follow his teachings so that we can achieve true happiness. Therefore, please let me share a small part of this pursuit, because I think it has improved my life in ways that I probably dont appreciate enough. We all know that there are many metaphorical and literal names for the Savior. In addition to His mortal moniker of Jesus and His self-ascription as the Light of the World, we also know Him as the Lord, the Son of God, the Bread of Life, the Good Shepherd, the Living Water, the Lamb of God, the Redeemer, Immanuel, Jehovah, and by many other titles.
Comment [BB9]: This could use a transition, maybe even a new heading. Comment [RM6]: The original sentence was too long. Comment [BB7]: This sentence was basically iterated earlier in the paragraph. Comment [RM8]: The original sentence was too long. Comment [RM5]: For GE 3.9 Avoid interrupting sentences

Formatted: Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/3 Although we regularly use several titles in the Church, I would like to highlight three that are often used together. Perhaps we know these words best from the hymn written by an eighteenth-century Baptist pastor, Samuel Medley,: I Know That My Redeemer Lives. The third verse includes these lines: He lives, and while he lives, Ill sing. He lives, my Prophet, Priest, and King.34 For some reason not entirely apparent to me, I have always been intrigued by this triumvirate. Considering the most common uses of these terms, it seems that prophets, priests, and kings are supposed to be subordinate to the Savior. I therefore wish to examine these titles more closely dig a little deeper and consider how the Lord takes onassumes these roles. But first, what is the source of this triple combination of three specific titles? The historical record suggests that the terms prophet, priest, and king were first combined and applied to Jesus in Palestine in the early fourth century. The man who combined them was Eusebius, the Bishop of Caesarea. Although the terms are common titles for the Savior, they are not used in this particular arrangement anywhere in the standard works. Thus we must search a little more broadly to find the origin of this phrase. The historical record suggests that the terms prophet, priest, and king , as applied to Jesus, originated with Eusebius, the Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine during the early fourth century. In his Church History, Eusebius wrote: That his anointing was divine is proved by the fact that he alone, of all who have ever lived, is known throughout the world as Christ and . . . is honored by his worshipers throughout the world as King, held in greater awe than a prophet, and glorified as the true and only High Priest of God.5 More than one thousand years later, John Calvin used the term threefold office to designate these roles taken on by the Lord.6 Calvin was particularly interested in linking the Jesus of the New Testament with these three offices from the Old Testament that represented Gods appointed servants. Yet he also saw that these three sacred offices were exemplified and perfected in Jesus Christ.7 Others, such as Moses and Melchizedek, may have fulfilled these roles during certain dispensations, but Jesus is the
Comment [RM12]: This sentence had a passive. The modifiers seemed crammed in the sentence in a way that could render translation difficult. The prepositional phrase "in the __century" was tacked on and could have been confusing to translate. Comment [RM11]: OR accepts (to eliminate the phrasal verb) Comment [BB10]: Will the footnote numbering change automatically once all the changes are accepted or rejected?

Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/4 only perfect prophet, high priest, and king anointed to rule on earth and in heaven. One scholar wrote that when we understand the Savior in these roles, they [come] into perfect bloom.8 Many others have emphasized another name for Jesus that encompasses the threefold officethat of Messiah. As you know, Messiah is a Hebrew word meaning the anointed. The Greek parallel is Christ, thus Jesus Christ means Jesus the Anointed. In the Old Testament it was through sacred anointing that prophets, priests, and kings were set apart to perform their duties. They were anointed as a symbol of purification and consecration, being made holy and thus fit to serve God.910 For instance, we learn that Moses poured . . . the anointing oil upon Aarons head, and anointed him, to sanctify him 1112 so that Aaron could perform his priestly duties. The Lord commanded Elijah to anoint Elisha as a prophet.13 Samuel anointed David to be king even before he took over the throne from Saul.14 And we learn in the Book of Mormon that kings were anointed among the Nephites and Jaredites.1516 The Savior was also anointed to conduct Hishis sacred duties, perhapsas with Hishis baptism at the hands of Johnto serve as an example to others. Some have pointed out that He was anointed three times: once during the premortal existence and twice during His ministry on the earth.17 Joseph Smith lends support for the premortal anointingspoke of the premortal anointing: He, the Lord being a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek, and the anointed Son of God, from before the foundation of the world.1819 The two mortal anointings occurred when the Savior was baptized and when Mary poured oil on ChristHim at Bethany prior to Hishis entry into Jerusalem.2021 Ill now examine the three offices that Jesus Christ fulfills: prophet, priest, and king. I have two reasons for taking theis step of mentioning his role as Messiah. First, I hope it will help us honor hHim better, perhaps by understanding a little more about what it means to say, He is the Messiah. Second, just as with other sacred roles, it is helpful to see how Jesus perfected them, thus providing an example for others people. Jesus Role as Prophet
Comment [RM16]: This is correct with our style guide. Comment [RM15]: Do you think this is what he meant? Comment [RM13]: This metaphor of "coming into perfect bloom" doesnt make much sense without an established context of the threefold name creating a flower or a plant (especially for people from cultures where flowers are not used in this kind of analogy). It also doesn't have a precise meaning but it does add aesthetics. Since the quote seemed to be valued for its phrasing, I dont think we need to cite it when we take the direct quote out. Comment [RM14]: Set apart as a word in a different language? Whats our style on this?

Formatted: Font: Italic Formatted: Font: Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Italic

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/5 In simple terms, a prophet is one who represents God to mankind. We learn about prophets from numerous passages in the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon. Pthat prophets serve as messengers who reveal Gods word, call people to repent, teach them to obey Gods laws, and prepare them for the coming of the Savior.22 Thus we recall that Lehi, following his first recorded vision, went forth among the people, and began to prophesy and to declare unto them concerning the things which he had both seen and heard. And it came to pass that the Jews did mock him because of the things which he testified of them; for he truly testified of their wickedness and their abominations. . . . And when the Jews heard these things they were angry with him; yea, even as with the prophets of old, whom they had cast out, and stoned, and slain; and they also sought his life, that they might take it away.23 The fate of many of Gods messengers included persecution, mockery, and even death.
2425

Samuel the Lamanite likewise preached repentance in the land of Zarahemla and was run

offchased away by disbelievers;2627 Abinadi was executed for teaching about Gods will for the people and for teaching about the coming of the Anointed One.2829 Thus we see that the fate of many of Gods messengers included persecution, mockery, and even death.30 Just as many prophets before hHim suffered such tribulations, the Savior experienced widespread rejection of hHis holy mantle. Two prophets of the Old Testament whose lives most directly anticipated the Saviors were Moses and Elijah. It is no coincidence that these two prophets of old appeared during Christs Transfiguration on the mount. Jesus and was likened unto Moses by had a number of parallel life experiences. Both were, including being tempted by Satan,3132 being transfigured on the a mount,3334 and being saved from certain death as an infants from certain death;,3536 and both confronteding powerful political and religious leaders.3738
Comment [RM17]: CE: Capitalization OK (RSC Style Guide 9)

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/6 Like Elijah, Jesus taught by using parables; he, healed the sick, raised the dead, and suffered rejection and persecution at the hands of Hishis own people.3940 He also preached to people outside of Israel.4142 Unlike most of the prophets before hHis time, the Savior expressed concern for all individuals , both Jew and Gentile, to conduct themselves according to the laws that hHe had prepared for them.4344 Yet the Savior transcended the sacred mantles of all previous prophets . While on the Mount of Transfiguration, Moses and Elijah spoke to Him about His departure or exodus. This referred to His impending death and resurrection,45 but it also represented the journey that would bring people to God through the Atonement.46 Bby offering an atoning sacrifice and overcoming death., the Lord surpassed the prophetic roles of both Moses and Elijah. The theologian Robert J. Sherman wrote of the Saviors transcendent role: The New Testament . . . clearly portrays Jesus as more than a prophet: . . . he speaks and acts with his own authority and power. He proclaims the kingdom of God; more than that, he is himself the revelation of Gods truth and purposes. Indeed, he not only enlightens, but empowers persons to recognize and claim Gods truth as their own true meaning and end, and as such in him prophecy itself is fulfilled.4748 Nephi taught that God would raise up a prophet from among the Jews six hundred years from then. Yet this man would be more than a prophet: hHe would be the Messiah, the Savior of the world.4950 Jesus Role as High Priest Whereas prophets represent God to the people, priests represent the people to God; priests function as mediators between God and mankind.5152 Understanding the Saviors role as a priest can be difficult in a biblical sense because priests in the Bible were of the Levitical line and the Savior was a descendent from the tribe of Judah. Yet we learn in Psalm 110 that the Lord would be a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.5354 In other words, the Lord was a priest of an order that predated the Levites. We understand through modern revelation that this involves thethere is a distinction between the
Comment [RM18]: CE: for ever is how it is in the scriptures. Comment [RM19]: What does this refer to? The meaning of this sentence isnt clear. It could be saying that since Jesus wasnt of the tribe of Levi, he must have had the Melchizedek Priesthood. It could also be highlighting the fact that theres a distinction between the two priesthoods, but I dont know why that needs to be emphasized. Involves is vagueit doesnt really tell the reader much.

Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/7 Aaronic Priesthood and the Melchizedek Priesthood. Because of this modern revelation, we can see how Christ could hold the Melchizedek Priesthood even though his lineage was through Judah, not Levi. We are fortunate to have this information since it is difficult to fully understand the Saviors priestly role without our non-biblical sources. For example, who was this Melchizedek in whom we find a higher priesthood? The Old Testament briefly mentions that he was the king of Salem (Jerusalem) and a high priest who blessed Abraham and received his tithing.55 But if we read inspired scripture, we learn that he also bestowed the priesthood on Abraham56 and was a man of mighty faith who convinced the people of his kingdom to repent.57 Because of his great works, Melchizedek was known as the Prince of peace and the king of heaven.58 These titles suggest that he was the Old Testament figure who resembled the Savior most closely.59 He was a prophet, priest, and king. Much of our understanding of the Saviors role as a high priest of the order of Melchizedek comes from the Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews. Paul was writing to a group of Jewish Christians who would have beenwere familiar with the Levitical priesthood and its responsibility for the sacrificial rites held in the temple. He told his readers that Jesus was the Apostle and High Priest of our profession.6061 Pauls intent was to show that the Savior, in hHis role as high priest, fulfilled and transcended the law of Moses, because hHethe Savior offered a perfect sacrifice through hHis Atonement. At the time of Jesus mortal ministry, the temple high priest was designated in Jewish tradition to represent the Lord. The high priestHe wore the name of the Lord on his forehead and was the only priesthood member allowed to enter the Holy of Holies and make the blood sacrifice on the annual Day of Atonement.6263 Paul maintained that Jesus was able to save all because hHe was sinless, unlike the high priests who presided in the temple. Consequently, there was no longer a need for daily sacrificesfirst for the priests sins and then for the peoples. The blameless Lord, the spotless Lamb of God6465 whose blood was far superior to any animals, offered a sacrifice beyond that which any other person could offer.6667 It is only through the shedding of hHis blood and through hHis atoning sacrifice that we can be reconciled fully with Heavenly Father. As Paul wrote in the ninth chapter of Hebrews:
Comment [BB21]: Is this used in the context of the title? Because then it can retain the capital. Otherwise, epistle means letter and doesnt need to be capitalized. Comment [ML20]: This sentence might state too much of the obvious, but it seems that this is the conclusion the paragraph was leading up to. The previous sentence seemed to imply something, so this sentence states it outright.

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/8

Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. . . . And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.68 69 The Savior understands our weaknesses and infirmities. He knows the temptations we face.7071 He has suffered for us. He is thus the perfect High Priest and the perfect Mediator for representing mankind to the Father. Yet hHe is much more than this: unlike other high priests, hHe was both priest and sacrifice.7273 In fact, hHis one sacrifice is of greater eternal worth than all of those sacrifices that had come before. Jesus Role as King The third part of the threefold office of Christ is king. Of the three, this is probably the Saviors best-known title. We find it in films, such as the 1961 epic King of Kings, and in some of the songs in our LDS hymnbook, such as I Believe in Christ and Jesus of Nazareth, Savior and King. Christs kingly duties are also easier to understand than hHis prophetic or priestly duties. We know that the Jesus who lived a mortal life is the Lord of the Old Testament, the one known ascalled Jehovah. He created the earth and continues to lead Hishis Church.7475 Thus hHe is our Holy Leader, our Lord who reigneth, our King of kings.7677 He had His mortal claims to kingship are due tobecause both Hishis earthly parents being were descendants of King David;, for it was prophesied by Samuel prophesied that one of Davids descendants would rule over Gods everlasting kingdom.7879 Like David, this Messiah would be a shepherd- king who would save Israel. Even before Jesus conception, the angel Gabriel told Mary:

Formatted: MEG Block Quote

Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

Comment [TC22]: Delete this? I need to delete more in this section, but dont know what to cut.

Formatted: MEG Block Quote

Formatted: Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/9 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.8081 Following Hishis birth, Jesus was recognized by the wise men from the east8283 and by Anna the prophetess8485 as the fulfillment of Samuels prophecy. However, Jesus was unlike any king who had come before. The Old Testament kings were leaders of nationsoften warrior-kings who led their people in battle8687 and administrator-kings who oversaw the running of the state.8889 Most kings eventually ran afoul of God in some way, usually because of their sinful acts.9091 For example, we read that when Solomon was old, . . . his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God.92 Others were simply wicked, like King Noah, who encouraged priestcraft and put Abinadi to death.93 MIn fact, many of us have been conditioned to dislike and mistrust the idea of a king. Yet as we search for exemplary kings who were in the image oflike the Savior, we need look no further than King Benjamin. Not only was he a just ruler who seemed to care little for his own aggrandizement, but he was also a genuine servant-king who cared for his people, worked alongside them, and taught them to serve each other. He exclaimed during his famous address: Behold, I say unto you that because I said unto you that I had spent my days in your service, I do not desire to boast, for I have only been in the service of God. And behold, I tell you these things that ye may learn wisdom; that ye may learn that when ye are in the service of your fellow beings ye are only in the service of your God.
94

Comment [BB23]: Word choice? Would it be better for GE to say something like distanced themselves from?

Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 pi, Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

Behold, ye have called me your king; and if I, whom ye call your king, do labor to serve you,
95

Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

then ought not ye to labor to serve one another?

This notion of a servant-king was perfected in the Lord. Indeed, He often resisted the title of king during his mortal ministry. The Gospel of John reports that after miraculously feeding the multitude,

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/10 Jesus . . . perceived that [the people who had witnessed his miracles] would come and take him by force, to make him a king, [so] he departed.96 He Christ also would not give Pilate or Herod the satisfaction of indicting hHim for the seditious act of designating himself King of the Jews. He told Pilate, My kingdom is not of this world. Then, when Pilate asked hHim, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth.9798 The Savior understood Hishis role. He was tasked with teaching the people a new covenant to the people and bringing mankind back from a fallen state into the presence of the Father through the Atonementthe ultimate sacrifice. 99100 He was already a king, so there was no need to be given the title. Even those who knew of Hishis divine kingship must have been confused, because Hishis mortal life represented the humble nature of Hishis sovereignty.101102 Recall that many interpreted the Old Testament was understood by many as prophesyingto prophesy a messiah who would be king. They thought, and that this king was to deliver the people from conquest and from the physical suffering that they endured at the hands of their rulers.103104 Instead, Jesus, who had authority over the entire world, turned the notion of a messianic king on its head.105 He was born in a stable. He traveled not with soldiers but with fishermen and tax collectors. He dined with Samaritans and sat with the poor and downtrodden. Not only did He refuse all earthly treasures that kings tended to receive, but He also showed the people a humble king, entering Jerusalem on a donkey. He did not come to Jerusalem for a rich, royal feast but to preside over a humble meal with His friends, even washing the feet of those in attendance.106 The mistake that they made by many was assuming that hHethis messiah would come as a warrior-king when the Savior actually came as a shepherd-king and as a servant-king. His sovereignty was not demonstrated by temporal wealth or political conquest but by Hishis victory over death and the freedom for mankind that this victory entailed.107108
Formatted: Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/11 We await Hishis triumphant return that will usher in the Millennium. His kingdom shall be fulfilled, and hHe will reign as king over the millennial earth. As we are taught in the Doctrine and Covenants, The Lord shall be in their midst, and his glory shall be upon them, and he will be their king and their lawgiver.109110 In closing, allow me to quote President Thomas S. Monson: Who is the King of glory, this Lord of hosts? He is our Master. He is our Savior. He is the Son of God. He is the Author of our Salvation. He beckons, Follow me. He instructs, Go, and do thou likewise. He pleads, Keep my commandments.111112 It is my desire that all of us may get to know the Savior better, including his roles as the perfect pProphet, Ppriest, and kKing. But recall some of the other names we use for the Savior: Son of God, the Anointed One, the Bread of Life, the Good Shepherd, the Living Water, the Lamb of God, the Truth, the Redeemer, Immanuelwhich means God is with usthe Master, and Jehovah. Now let me emphasize yet another name for hHim: Friend. I was mistaken in the conclusion that I drew from the dream I discussed earlier. He is my Ffriend, but as with all close and precious friendships, it requires effort to get to know the Savior better and to appreciate all that hHe does for me, for my family, and for the world. I offer my testimony that it is to hHim that we owe our lives and the promise of full potential as noble children of a Heavenly Father. May we love and honor hHim always. [COMP: there are phrases here that were in the original.] This speech was delivered at Brigham Young University on May 8, 2012. To read it online, visit http://speeches.byu.edu/?act=viewitem&id=2031.
Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Not Italic

John P. Hoffmann earned a bachelors degree in political science, a masters degree in justice studies, a PhD in criminal justice, and an MPH with emphases in Epidemiology and Behavioral Sciences. He was a professor in the BYU Department of Sociology when this devotional was given. I leave these words with you in His sacred name, amen.
Formatted: Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/12

John 8:12. Alma 38:9. I Know That My Redeemer Lives, Hymns, 2002, no. 136. I Know That My Redeemer Lives, Hymns, 2002, no. 136. Eusebius: The Church History, trans. Paul L. Maier (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel
Formatted: Normal,MEG Normal

Publications, 2007), 30; see also Michael F. Bird, Are You the One Who Is to Come?: The Historical Jesus and the Messianic Question (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2009), 16466.
6 John Calvin, A Compend of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. Hugh T. Kerr (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1964), 78; see also Rose M. Beal, Priest, Prophet and King: Jesus Christ, the Church and the Christian Person, in Gerard Mannion and Eduardus Van der Borght, eds., John Calvins Ecclesiology: Ecumenical Perspectives (London: T & T Clark International, 2011), 90106. 7 See Kim Riddlebarger, The Triple Cure: Jesus ChristOur Prophet, Priest, and King, Modern Reformation 4, no. 6 (November/December 1995): 1620; see also Bird, Are You the One? 165.

John E. Johnson, The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity, Bibliotheca

Sacra 152 (AprilJune 1995): 189.

9 See David Rolph Seely and Jo Ann H. Seely, Jesus the Messiah: Prophet, Priest, and King, in Paul H. Peterson, Gary L. Hatch, and Laura D. Card, eds., Jesus Christ: Son of God, Savior (Provo: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2002), 24951.

10

See David Rolph Seely and Jo Ann H. Seely, Jesus the Messiah: Prophet, Priest, and King, in

Paul H. Peterson, Gary L. Hatch, and Laura D. Card, eds., Jesus Christ: Son of God, Savior (Provo: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2002), 24951.
11

Leviticus 8:12; see also Exodus 29:7.

12

Leviticus 8:12; see also Exodus 29:7. See 1 Kings 19:16; see also Seely and Seely, Jesus the Messiah, 25152. See 1 Samuel 16:13. See Jacob 1:9; Ether 9:14
16

13

14

15

Formatted: Normal,MEG Normal Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 pi

See Jacob 1:9; Ether 9:14.

17

See Seely and Seely, Jesus the Messiah, 25354.

Teachings, 265.
19

18

Teachings, 265.
See John 12:3; Matthew 26:7, 12.

20

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/13

21

See John 12:3; Matthew 26:7, 12.

1 Nephi 1:1820.

22

23

1 Nephi 1:1820.
See D&C 136:36.

24

25

See D&C 136:36.

See Helaman 1316.

26

27

See Helaman 1316.

See Mosiah 1117.

28

29

See Mosiah 1117. See D&C 136:36.

See Matthew 4:111; Moses 1:1222.

30

31

32

See Matthew 4:111; Moses 1:1222.

See Luke 9:2830; Moses 1:12, 11.

33

34

See Luke 9:2830; Moses 1:12, 11.

See Exodus 1:22; 2:210; Matthew 2:78, 1116.

35

36

See Exodus 1:22; 2:210; Matthew 2:78, 1116.

See Seely and Seely, Jesus the Messiah, 25657. See also Exodus 7:1013; Luke 11:4550.

37

38

See Seely and Seely, Jesus the Messiah, 25657. See also Exodus 7:1013; Luke 11:4550.

39 See Luke 11:4750; see also Daniel J. Harrington, The Rejected Prophet, America (1522 January 2007): 46; and see Seely and Seely, Jesus the Messiah, 25758.

40

See Luke 11:4750; see also Daniel J. Harrington, The Rejected Prophet, America (1522

January 2007): 46; and see Seely and Seely, Jesus the Messiah, 25758.
41

See Harrington, The Rejected Prophet, 46.

42

See Harrington, The Rejected Prophet, 46.

43 See Paul E. Davies, Jesus and the Role of the Prophet,Journal of Biblical Literature 64, no. 2 (June 1945): 24154.

44

See Paul E. Davies, Jesus and the Role of the Prophet, Journal of Biblical Literature 64, no.

2 (June 1945): 24154.

45

See Luke 9:3031; JST, Luke 9:31. See also J. Severino Croatto, Jesus, Prophet Like Elijah,

and Prophet-Teacher Like Moses in LukeActs, Journal of Biblical Literature 124, no. 3 (fall 2005): 461.

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/14

46

See Daniel J. Harrington, The Transfiguration of Gods Prophet, America (26 February 2007):

31.
47 Robert J. Sherman, King, Priest, and Prophet: A Trinitarian Theology of Atonement (New York: T & T Clark International, 2004), 220. See also 3 Nephi 9:17; 3 Nephi 12:46; Hebrews 8:13.

48

Robert J. Sherman, King, Priest, and Prophet: A Trinitarian Theology of Atonement (New

York: T & T Clark International, 2004), 220. See also 3 Nephi 9:17; 3 Nephi 12:46; Hebrews 8:13.
49

1 Nephi 10:4.

50

1 Nephi 10:4.
See Bird, Are You the One? 166.

51

52

See Bird, Are You the One? 166.

Psalm 110:4.

53

54

Psalms 110:4. See Genesis 14:1820. See D&C 84:14. See Alma 13:1419. JST, Genesis 14:33, 36. See Andrew C. Skinner, Prophets, Priests, and Kings: Old Testament Figures Who Symbolize

55

56

57

58

59

Christ (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2005), 25.

60

Hebrews 3:1.

61

Hebrews 3:1. See Margaret Barker, The Great High Priest, BYU Studies42, nos. 34 (2003): 6870. See Margaret Barker, The Great High Priest, BYU Studies42, nos. 34 (2003): 6870.
Noel Due, Christ Ascended for UsJesus Our Ascended High Priest, Evangel 25, no. 2 (summer
Formatted: Normal,MEG Normal

62

63

64

2007): 56.
65

Noel Due, Christ Ascended for UsJesus Our Ascended High Priest, Evangel 25, no. 2

(summer 2007): 56.

66

See Hebrews 7:2428; 1 Peter 1:19; 3 Nephi 9:19.

67

See Hebrews 7:2428; 1 Peter 1:19; 3 Nephi 9:19.

Hebrews 9:1112, 15.

68

69

Hebrews 9:1112, 15.

70

See Hebrews 4:15.

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/15

71

See Hebrews 4:15.

72 See Gerald OCollins and Michael Keenan Jones, Jesus Our Priest: A Christian Approach to the Priesthood of Christ (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 46.

73

See Gerald OCollins and Michael Keenan Jones, Jesus Our Priest: A Christian Approach to

the Priesthood of Christ (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 46.
74

See 3 Nephi 9:15; 3 Nephi 27:7.

75

See 3 Nephi 9:15; 3 Nephi 27:7.

1 Timothy 6:15; see 2 Nephi 10:14; Revelation 3:21.

76

77

1 Timothy 6:15; see 2 Nephi 10:14; Revelation 3:21.

See 2 Samuel 7:1216.

78

79

See 2 Samuel 7:1216.

Luke 1:3233.

80

81

See Luke 1:3233.

Matthew 2:12.

82

83

Matthew 2:12.
See Luke 2:3638.

84

85

See Luke 2:3638.

See Genesis 14:8; Joshua 10:35.

86

87

See Genesis 14:8; Joshua 10:35.

See 1 Kings 4:21; 1 Chronicles 18:14.

88

89

See 1 Kings 4:21; 1 Chronicles 18:14.

See 1 Samuel 13:1314; 2 Samuel 11.

90

91

See 1 Samuel 13:1314; 2 Samuel 11. 1 Kings 11:4. See Mosiah 17:20.
Mosiah 2:1618.

92

93

94

95

See Mosiah 2:1618. John 6:15.

John 18:3637.

96

97

98

John 18:3637.
See 2 Nephi 9:67.

99

100

See 2 Nephi 9:67.

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/16

101 See Jey J. Kanagaraj, Jesus the King, Merkabah Mysticism and the Gospel of John, Tyndale Bulletin 47, no. 2 (November 1996): 34966.

102

See Jey J. Kanagaraj, Jesus the King, Merkabah Mysticism and the Gospel of John, Tyndale

Bulletin 47, no. 2 (November 1996): 34966.

103

See Jeremiah 23:5.

104

See Jeremiah 23:5. See Sherman, King, Priest, and Prophet, 11415. See John Witte Jr., No Ordinary King, Christianity Today55, no. 7 (July 2011): 55. See also

105

106

Matthew 21:710; John 13:512.

107

See Sherman, King, Priest, and Prophet, 119.

108

See Sherman, King, Priest, and Prophet, 119.

D&C 45:59.

109

110

D&C 45:59.
Thomas S. Monson, Finding Joy in the Journey, Ensign, November 2008, 88.

111

112

Thomas S. Monson, Finding Joy in the Journey, Ensign, November 2008, 88.

[COMP: there are phrases here that were in the original. Search for them.] This speech was delivered at Brigham Young University on May 8, 2012. To read it online, visit http://speeches.byu.edu/?act=viewitem&id=2031.

John P. Hoffmann earned a bachelors degree in political science, a masters degree in justice studies, a PhD in criminal justice, and an MPH with emphases in Epidemiology and Behavioral Sciences. He was a professor in the BYU Department of Sociology when this devotional was given.

Hoffman/Prophet, Priest, and King/17

Word count

Original (cleaned up): 4847 TC: 3271 (67%) GE: 3231 (66%) CE: MKG: Final:

During the last fifteen years, I have devoted a substantial percentage of my time has been devoted to interactionsto interacting and dialogues with persons of other faiths, particularly with members of with what have come to beones currently known as traditional Christian religions. This effort has resulted in some of the most enriching hours of my life as I have read and compared and contrasted and spoke and listened and corrected and been corrected. As a result of these interactions, Mmy heart has opened and expanded in ways that I never would have supposed, and my curiosity has ripened turned into appreciation and respect for men and women whose theological positions differ from my ownmine. As I have tried It has been an effort to better understand doctrinal similarities and differences between traditional Christians and Latter-day Saints, who insist they are Christian and Latter-day Saints who profess to be Christian. I have been willing to take seriously the writings and sermons of those not of my faith and to followed the counsel of President Gordon B. Hinckley, former President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Note some of his messages to the Latter-day Saints: We must not become disagreeable as we talk of doctrinal differences. There is no place for acrimony. . . . We can respect other religions and must do so. We must recognize the great good they accomplish. We must teach our children to be tolerant and friendly toward those not of our faith. We can and do work with those of other religions in the defense of those values which have made our civilization great and our society distinctive.

Formatted: Indent: First line: 3 pi, Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt, Line spacing: Double, Pattern: Clear

Comment [RM1]: This might be too much of a cut.

Comment [BB2]: Added to improve the transition from sentence 1 to sentence 2.

Comment [RM3]: I dont know what the significance of this difference of wording is. If the difference has important meaning, we can reinsert the phrase.

Formatted: Indent: First line: 3 pi, Line spacing: Double

[1] We must never forget that we live in a world of great diversity. The people of the earth are all our Fathers children and they are of many and varied religious persuasions. We must cultivate tolerance and appreciation and respect one another. We have differences of doctrine. This does not need notto bring aboutcause animosity or any kind of holier-than-thou attitude.[2]

Formatted: Indent: First line: 3 pi, Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt, Line spacing: Double, Pattern: Clear

Now, brethren and sisters, let us . . . do a little better than we have done in the past. We can all be a little kinder, a little more generous, a little more thoughtful of one another. We can be a little more tolerant and friendly to those not of our faith, going out of our way to show our respect for them. We cannot afford to be arrogant or self-righteous. It is our obligation to reach out in helpfulness, not only to our own but to all others as well. Their interest in and respect for this Church will increase as we do so.[3] I am persuaded that President Hinckley meant what he said and said what he meant. I am simple enough in my faith to believe that one of the most significant endeavors with which we can be involved with is the sweet labor of love, of conversation, of give and take, of sharing and comparing and contrasting and learningthe work of religious dialogue, the effort associated with coming to better understanding others and thereby better understanding ourselves through religious dialogue. One cannot seriously engage the thought and heart of another without being touched and, in some cases, transformed. My friend John Stackhouse wrote the following about religious conversation in his book, Humble Apologetics: It may be that we disagree religiously because one of us has a superior interpretation of the same reality were all talking about. It may also be, however, that we disagree because we are talking about different parts of a complex reality. And it may conceivably be a matter of both problems. The skillful apologist tries to sort that all out with her neighbor as well as she can.[6] If one is not sufficiently sympathetic, not sufficiently vulnerable to changing ones mind, not sufficiently willing to entertain the idea that these people might just be rightthen it is most unlikely that one will enter into that religion far enough to understand its essence.[7]

I have learned much about Christian history and theology through building friendships and bridges of understanding with men and women throughout and beyond this country, and, in the process, I have learned half as much about Mormonism. One cannot seriously engage the thought and heart of another without being touched and, in some cases, transformed. My friend John Stackhouse of Regent College in Vancouver, BC, has written the following in his book, Humble Apologetics:
Comment [BB4]: This almost feels like we are about to introduce another idea. Perhaps find another sentence to conclude this section, or a way to make this sound more conclusive?

If I go no further than to think that its okay for you to do your thing and I to do mine, then where is the incentive to seriously consider whether I should adopt your thing and abandon mine?[4] Our objective as those called to love God and our neighborsto seek their best interestsis to offer whatever assistance we can to our neighbors toward their full maturity: toward full health in themselves and in their relationships, and especially toward God. Our mission must be as broad as Gods mission, and that mission is to bring shalomto the whole world. In short, when it comes to our neighbors, our goal is to help our neighbors to be fully converted into all God wants them to be.[5] It may be that we disagree religiously because one of us has a superior interpretation of the same reality were all talking about. It may also be, however, that we disagree because we are talking about different parts of a complex reality. And it may conceivably be a matter of both problems. The skillful apologist tries to sort that all out with her neighbor as well as she can.[6] If one is not sufficiently sympathetic, not sufficiently vulnerable to changing ones mind, not sufficiently willing to entertain the idea that these people might just be rightthen it is most unlikely that one will enter into that religion far enough to understand its essence.[7] Defining Ourselves I am wholly persuadedbelieve that it is appropriate and fair-minded for a people or a religious body group to be permitted to define themselves. Stephen Robinson and I once sat with three representatives of the Southern Baptist Convention in Kansas City in 1997. After six or seven hours of conversation, questions, answers, misstatements, and rebuttals, one of their themnumber turned to us me with great earnestness and said earnestly: Steve, Bob, if we could only convince you to give your lifeves to Jesus. Turn to him now. He will receive you with open arms. Its hard to describe what I felt at the time. How do I kindly but firmly proclaim, Oh marvel of marvels and wonder of wonders, Aas a Latterday Saint I have already found Jesus Christ, have tasted of the sweet fruit of his gospel, have experienced firsthand his cleansing and transforming power, and I have a hope in him that has banished doubt and fear from my soul? I have wondered how those three might have felt if Stephen or I had said to them what they said to me. I have Nno doubt that they would have felt that I didnt understand their religion.: Bill,
Comment [RM7]: This sentence is meant to make the feeling explicit in case it's not obvious from the story. The illustrations might be more poignantwhat do you think? Comment [RM6]: This story could be cut down. (but Millet might be emotionally attached to it). Comment [RM5]: I would like to take Steve out because he doesn't do anything in the story. Do you think that's ok?

Ted, and Eric, if we could only convince you to accept the truthfulness of the Bible, to receive it as the word of God, to study its pages and allow it to enlighten your minds and hearts and bring you closer to the Master. It would be like turning to a devout Roman Catholic and pleading with her to acknowledge Mary as a critical part of the Catholic faith or like bearing testimony to a Muslim of the significant role of Muhammad. On a personal note, I really am not too troubled too much when people state that Latter-day Saints are not Christian, especially if the one making the judgment is the kind of person who would have historical or doctrinal reasons for doing so. The most difficult times for me are when persons of other faiths hear me speak or read my writings and conclude that I am a liar, I am deceptive, or I am a part of some grand Mormon conspiracy bent on convincing a nave public that Latter-day Saints are just like everyone else. We are not like everyone else, but much of what others find the perceived peculiarities areis simply a misunderstandings of who we are. Defining ourselves includes letting us explain who we are today. Most anti-Mormon polemic arguments areis filled with statements and declarations from our own people in the past that are at best an anomaly and at worst a distortion of what the Church believes and stands for today. While Mormonism will forevermore be linked to a past containing visions and revelations and angels and golden plates, we must, if we truly admit to being a living church (D&C 1:30), focus more and more upon what the Church is now and what it is becoming. My friend Joseph McConkie made an observation once that I think I will never forget. He said: We have the scholarship of the early brethren to build upon; we have the advantage of additional history; we have inched our way up the mountain of our destiny and. . . now stand in a position to see things with greater clarity than did they. . . . We live in finer houses than did our pioneer forefathers, but this does not argue that we are better or that our rewards will be greater. In like manner our understanding of gospel principles should be better housed, and we should constantly be seeking to make it so. There is no honor in our reading by oil lamps when we have been granted better light.[8]
Comment [RM10]: Not sure this sentence fully captures the tone and direction of the article, but the paragraph needed a sentence to round it out. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Highlight Formatted: Highlight Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Highlight Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Highlight Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Highlight Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Highlight Comment [RM11]: This section needed a better transition and clear topic sentence to make it clear where its coming in the section. Comment [RM8]: This entry to the sentence is to reflect the title he had to the section this paragraph used to belong to, "A Personal Aside." Comment [RM9]: I thought of maybe taking this paragraph out, but it seems to preview the content of the sections well, and it's in his own words.

This mirrors is similar to the sentiments ofwhat Elder James E. Talmage, expressed in 1932: The revelation of fundamental truths, he explained, through the prophets is progressive, and additional light is given through successive revealments.[9] In that light, I would ask simply that those who wish to discuss or investigate or even challenge Mormonism to engage the twenty-first-century Church. Some things have changed, and thats just as it should be. Some things are taught differently, but thats just as it should be. Is it not the case that our understanding, our grasp, our focus, or our emphasis upon a given doctrine may change over time? I hope so, for that is what members of a living church do. I have very happy memories of attending church as a little boy. I loved the people in the Hiawatha Street chapel in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. I enjoyed being with them. I loved our fun activities, our dance and speech festivals, our trips to the stake farm in Kentwood. I loved being taught by the people there, and I still have warm and tender feelings associated with what I was taught by those dedicated (and now deceased) Latter-day Saints. But I dont remember learning much about the scriptures, except for a few Bible stories. In fact, I dont remember ever reading the scriptures in church or at home when I was young. I do remember many uplifting talks on the Word of Wisdom, on chastity, on missionary work, on being honest and faithful. To quote Elder Neal A. Maxwell, one Church leader, commented on this change of emphasis: In my Primary days, we sang Give, Said the Little Stream (Childrens Songbook, 236)certainly sweet and motivating but not exactly theologically drenched. Todays children, as you know, sing the more spiritually focused Im Trying to Be like Jesus (Childrens Songbook, 7879).[10] In my boyhood congregation and in my home, doctrinal teachings werent discussed too often; that is in marked contrast with things today. The doctrines were there in the scriptures all along, but it was only in recent decades that we have we begun to talk of Christ, rejoice in Christ, and preach of Christ on a regular basis. Why? Because we want to be accepted into mainstream Christianity? Hardly. No, mMore than ever before we sense the need to discuss Christ, so that we and our children may know to what source [we] may look for a remission of [our] sins (2 Nephi 25:26). In recent years, Elder Bruce C. Hafen observed that, we Latter-day Saints have been teaching, singing, and testifying much more about the Savior Jesus Christ. I rejoice that we are rejoicing more.[11]
Comment [RM14]: The idea of being accepted into mainstream Christianity was developed further later; I moved that section up here and deleted this reference. Comment [RM13]: We may be able to keep some of this, but Elder Maxwells quote seems to make the point just as well. Comment [RM12]: Some of this wording should probably be changed for our audience.

Some suggest that these changes are evidenceIn that regard, some have suggested that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is attempting to moveseems to be moving into the mainstream of Christianity, or at least attempting to do so. What of this claim? For one thing, Latter-day Saint leaders have encouraged members of the Church to get to know their neighbors better; be more involved in community and civic and political affairs; show greater love, acceptance, and tolerance for those of other faiths; and in general help the world to know that we are not, strictly speaking, a weird bunch. Second, the Church is seeking to be better understood, to teach their doctrine in a manner that would (a) allow others to see clearly where we stand on important issues and (b) eliminate misperceptions and misrepresentations. While there is, for example, a greater stress in the present Church upon the divine sonship of Christ, the nature of his atoning sacrifice, and the vital place of his redeeming mercy and grace, these matters have been in LDS scripture since the days of Joseph Smith; what has changed is the emphasis, not the content. ITo be frank, it would be foolish for Latter-day Saints to stray from their moorings and seektry to blend in with everyone else. People are joining our Church in ever-increasing numbers, not because we are just like the Roman Catholics or the Greek Orthodox or the Baptists or the Methodists or the Presbyterians down the street; they choose to leave their former faith and be baptized as Latter-day Saints because of distinctive LDS theology. Our strength lies inis our distinctive teachings and lifestyle. In that spirit, President Hinckley said: Our membership has grown. I believe it has grown in faithfulness. . . . Those who observe us say that we are moving into the mainstream of religion. We are not changing. The worlds perception of us is changing. We teach the same doctrine. We have the same organization. We labor to perform the same good works. But the old hatred is disappearing; the old persecution is dying. People are better informed. They are coming to realize what we stand for and what we do.[20] Latter-day Saint Christianity? Why is it that some dont think Latter-day Saints are Christians? Who, exactly, is a Christian? The outcry that Latter-day Saints are not Christian is a relatively recent phenomenon. . I dont remember reading that the nineteenth-century attackers of the Mormons in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri,
Comment [BB18]: Will we want the headings to be indented? Comment [RM17]: We could retain some of this sentence and then shorten President Hinckleys quote. Comment [B15]: I deleted (a) and (b) because the information flowed well and was clear enough without it. Comment [RM16]: The sentence deleted here seemed to be repeating what has already been stated.

Illinois, or even the Great Basin referred to us as non-Christian. They disagreed with us, of course. They thought the idea of a First Vision or of angels or gold plates was bizarre. But I dont remember reading that the early Saints were called non-Christian. Nor do I remember ever being called a non-Christian as a boy growing up in the Bible Belt. I really did not hear much of this kind of rhetoric until the 1970s, when Walter Martin was in his heydaypopular and published his Kingdom of the Cults. Well, wWhat are some standard definitions of a Christian? From the 1828 Websters dictionary: a. b. c. of Christ. d. Relating to Christ, or to his doctrines, precepts and example. A believer in the religion of Christ. A professor of his belief in the religion of Christ. A real disciple of Christ; one who . . . studies to follow the example, and obey the precepts,

From The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary: a. b. A member of a particular sect using this name. A civilized human being; a decent, respectable person.

From the Harpers Bible Dictionary: Although certainty is not possible, the term was likely coined by non-Christians. Whatever the origin, Christian is the term that was increasingly applied to Jesus followers in the late first and early second centuries.

From the Holman Bible Dictionary: A Christian is an adherent of Christ; one committed to Christ; a follower of Christ.
Comment [RM19]: We could insert more in the endnotes to retain them but not lose readers in a long list of definitions.

In the Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms by Donald K. McKim:

Name applied originally in Antioch to followers of Jesus Christ (Acts 11:26) and now used to designate those who believe in Jesus Christ and seek to live in the ways he taught.

From The Amsterdam Declaration (2000): A Christian is a believer in God who is enabled by the Holy Spirit to submit to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior in a personal relationship of disciple to master and to live the life of Gods kingdom. The word Christian should not be equated with any particular cultural, ethnic, political, or ideological tradition
Comment [BB20]: Small caps?

or group. Those who know and love Jesus are also called Christ-followers, believers and disciples.[12] More than any other single reason for exclusion, I have been told that Mormons arent Christian because we do not accept the creeds that sought to define the relationship between the members of the Godhead, beginning with Nicea in AD 325. Acceptance of the Nicene Creed is not required to be called a Christian according to the definitions I listed above. In addition, Latter-day Saint teachings on this topic might be referred to as a variation on the concept of social trinitarianism (the belief that God exists as three persons), a concept that .other Christians accept. We do believe that there are three members of the GodheadFather, Son, and Holy Spirit; that each of the members of the Godhead possesses all of the attributes of Godliness in perfection; and that the love and unity that exist among these three persons indeed, they are infinitely more one than they are separateis of such magnitude that they constitute a divine community that is often referred to in scripture, including the Book of Mormon, as one eternal God (see 2 Nephi 31:21; Alma 11:44; 3 Nephi 11:27, 36; 28:10; Mormon 7:7). Latter-day Saint teachings on this topic might be referred to as a variation on the concept of social trinitarianism. Second, Mormons are not considered Christians by many within the Christian world because we are not a part of the Christian tradition or the historic line of Christian churches. While weWe are not Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant because we are a restored church instead of reformed or refined from an existing church, we do share common roots of ancestry with those traditions. What is, then, the Latter-day Saint Christian genealogy? One only has to reflect for a moment to realize that Mormonism did not spring

Comment [RM21]: But why should we be considered Christian? The implied thing here is that this is an arbitrary definition of Christian, or that this doesnt mean that were not Christian by the more broad definitions just statedbut those justifications arent made explicit. Is the point that other people who are considered Christians believe in social trinitarianism? OR Is the point that this definition of the Godhead was created after Christand is not in the definitions of being a Christian? Comment [BB22]: Do we need to include a brief definition of what trinitarianism is? Comment [RM23]: But why should we be considered Christian? The implied thing here is that this is an arbitrary definition of Christian, or that this doesnt mean that were not Christian by the more broad definitions just statedbut those justifications arent made explicit. Is the point that other people who are considered Christians believe in social trinitarianism? OR Is the point that this definition of the Godhead was created after Christand is not in the definitions of being a Christian? Comment [RM24]: To me, this paragraph is a bit obscure and doesnt initially convey the meaning I think its meant to. Here it seems like its saying we broke off of Catholicism just like Protestants (doctrinally, adapting structure, etc.); What I think its really saying is that the people that joined it came largely from Protestantism. Does this seem to retain the authors meaning?

into existence ex nihilo. That is, most of those who followed Joseph Smith and joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints came from Protestant traditionsindeed, large numbers of Methodists converted to Mormonism and so they had air link with Protestantism roots and thus Catholicismthe same roots as would be the samethat is similar to as that of a Protestant or Catholic today. Latter-day Saints also hold in honorable remembrance such notables as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Clement, Origen, Jerome, Wycliffe, Tyndale, and so forth. They are our people, our Christian heroes as well as those of more traditional Christians, for they laid the foundation for the preservation of significant elements of Christianity. In speaking of the primitive church, President Boyd K. Packer observed that the flame flickered and dimmed. . . . But always, as it had from the beginning, the Spirit of God inspired worthy souls. We owe an immense debt to the protesters and the reformers who preserved the scriptures and translated them. They knew something had been lost. They kept the flame alive as best they could. Many of them were martyrs.[13] On another occasion he taught: The line of priesthood authority was broken. But mankind was not left in total darkness or completely without revelation or inspiration. The idea that with the Crucifixion of Christ the heavens were closed and they opened in the First Vision is not true. The Light of Christ would be everywhere present to attend the children of God; the Holy Ghost would visit seeking souls. The prayers of the righteous would not go unanswered.[14] Similarly, Elder Dallin H. Oaks explained, We are indebted to the men and women who kept the light of faith and learning alive through the centuries to the present day. . . . We have only to contrast the lesser light that exists among peoples unfamiliar with the names of God and Jesus Christ to realize the great contribution made by Christian teachers through the ages. We honor them as servants of God.[15] I am often told quite often that another reason for the rejection of Latter-day Saints as Christian is because that we do not believe in the sufficiency of the Bible to be sufficient. One place where the idea of sufficiency of the Bible is explained is in tTo be sure, Joseph Smith would have disagreed, for example, with the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, which that declares: The New Testament canon is . . . now closed, inasmuch as no new apostolic witness to the historical Christ can now be borne. No
Comment [BB29]: Should this be Christian or Christians? Comment [RM28]: Could be an insult to people who arent Christian. Comment [RM25]: I wasnt sure what the original sentence meant. Do you think this edit retains the meaning of the author? Comment [B26]: I think he is saying that many converts in the early church come from Protestant rootsthe same roots for Catholics and Protestants today. I changed the sentence to fit this meaning. Please change it if it is not the authors intended meaning. Comment [RM27]: This is a separate pointthat we honor the Christian heroes that came between Paul and Joseph Smith.

new revelation (as distinct from Spirit-given understanding of existing revelation) will be given until Christ comes again.[16] For Latter-day Saints, such a statement about revelation is much more than the Bible itself reveals. As Joseph Smith taught, one would need to have received a modern revelation in order to know for certain that there will would be no more revelation beyond the Bible.[17] Further, Stephen Robinson has written, When [traditional Christians] accuse Mormons of not believing the Bible, they usually mean that we do not believe interpretations formulated by postbiblical councils. If [Christians] are going to insist on the doctrine of sola scriptura [by scripture alone] . . . , then they ought to stop ascribing scriptural authority to postbiblical traditions.[18] As to additional doctrines that Latter-day Saints accept but which are not a part of present-day Christendom, we might ask: Would the early Christians who for decades had access only had access to the Gospel of Mark have considered the deeper spiritual realities set forthfound later in the Gospel of John to represent a portrait of a different Jesus? Hardly. Thus the current mantra of Mormons worship a different Jesus is a misrepresentation of the facts. Latter-day Saints clearly worship the historical Jesusthe man who was born in Bethlehem, lived and ministered during the reign of Tiberius Caesar, functioned under the oversight of Caiaphas (Jews) and Pilate (Romans), gave his life as a sacrificial offering to atone for the sins of humankind, and rose from the grave in glorious resurrected immortality. That there may beare differences on certain points of theology is not unimportantmay be important, but it does not merit the misleading concept that Mormons somehow worship a different Jesus. A Double Standard? I raise another question: Has modern Christianity unwittingly created a type of double standard in terms of (a) what is required to be saved and (b) what it takes to be a Christian? At the time of Paul and Silass miraculous release from prison, the Philippian jailer asked the question of questions: Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house (Acts 16:3031). Paul wrote to the Roman saints that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Comment [BB32]: I changed this because we use may later in the sentence, but are might be a stronger word than he intended. Another suggestion is to change the part later in the sentence may be important to something without may. Comment [Copyedit33]: Do we indent headings? Comment [B34]: I deleted these for the same reasons as those above: the sentence flows well and is clear enough without them. Comment [B31]: Any ideas for a better word to substitute set forth? Comment [BB30]: Do we need this comma? If we keep it, would it be preferable to place it before the ellipses?

For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. . . . For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved (Romans 10:910, 13). Could it be, therefore, that a Latter-day Saint who professes total faith in and reliance upon Jesus Christ and who seeks in gratitude to keep his commandments can be saved but at the same time not qualify to be called a Christian? If one can be saved but is not allowed to be called a Christian, then in fact a double standard is in effect. So while most professing Christian faith traditions believe that knowing the truth and keeping the doctrine pure are very important in ones religious walk and talk, we ask: How much does precise, exact, and totally accurate theology matter? Must the man or woman in the pew be able to explain such matters as the Trinity as clearly and articulately as a theologian or pastor? Does salvation come through correct theology or ones relationship with Christ? Will a man or woman be judged as to the depth of their Christianity and thus their commitment to the Lamb of God by the extent to which they understand or can explain theological concepts? How much bad theology can the grace of Jesus Christ cover? These are certainly questions deserving of continuing conversation. It does not appear to me that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will fade from the scene and go away. We are here to stay, and I would propose that we and the religious world need to find more effective measures to deal with one another. President Hinckley offered an optimistic projection: I see a wonderful future in a very uncertain world, he declared. If we will cling to our values, if we will build on our inheritance, if we will walk in obedience before the Lord, if we will simply live the gospel, we will be blessed in a magnificent and wonderful way. We will be looked upon as a peculiar people who have found the key to a peculiar happiness.[19] A Personal Aside It does not do irreparable damage to my feelings of worth to have someone disagree with me, express that my position is weak or unfounded, or even state that my conclusions are downright false. I really am not troubled too much when people state that Latter-day Saints are not Christian, especially if the one making the judgment is the kind of person who would have historical or doctrinal reasons for doing so. The most difficult times for me are when persons of other faiths hear me speak or read my
Comment [RM35]: This quote doesnt seem to directly address the issue discussed in the section it concludes.

writings and conclude that I am a liar, I am deceptive, or I am a part of some grand Mormon conspiracy bent on convincing a nave public that Latter-day Saints are just like everyone else. In that regard, some have suggested that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints seems to be moving into the mainstream of Christianity, or at least attempting to do so. What of this claim? For one thing, Latter-day Saint leaders have encouraged members of the Church to get to know their neighbors better; be more involved in community and civic and political affairs; show greater love, acceptance, and tolerance for those of other faiths; and in general help the world to know that we are not, strictly speaking, a weird bunch. Second, the Church is seeking to be better understood, to teach their doctrine in a manner that would (a) allow others to see clearly where we stand on important issues and (b) eliminate misperceptions and misrepresentations. While there is, for example, a greater stress in the present Church upon the divine sonship of Christ, the nature of his atoning sacrifice, and the vital place of his redeeming mercy and grace, these matters have been in LDS scripture since the days of Joseph Smith; what has changed is the emphasis, not the content. To be frank, it would be foolish for Latter-day Saints to stray from their moorings and seek to blend in with everyone else. People are joining our Church in ever-increasing numbers, not because we are just like the Roman Catholics or the Greek Orthodox or the Baptists or the Methodists or the Presbyterians down the street; they choose to leave their former faith and be baptized as Latter-day Saints because of distinctive LDS theology. Our strength lies in our distinctive teachings and lifestyle. In that spirit, President Hinckley said: Our membership has grown. I believe it has grown in faithfulness. . . . Those who observe us say that we are moving into the mainstream of religion. We are not changing. The worlds perception of us is changing. We teach the same doctrine. We have the same organization. We labor to perform the same good works. But the old hatred is disappearing; the old persecution is dying. People are better informed. They are coming to realize what we stand for and what we do.[20] Conclusion Given the challenges that we face in our society, it seems so foolish for men and women who believe in God, whose hearts and lives have been surrendered to that God, to allow doctrinal differences

to prevent them from working together. Okay, you believe in a triune God, that the Almighty is a spirit, and that he created all things ex nihilo. I believe that God is an exalted man, that he is a separate and distinct being from the Son and the Holy Spirit. One person believes in heaven, while another believes in nirvana. One believes that the Sabbath should be observed on Saturday, while her neighbor feels that the day of corporate worship should be on Friday. This one speaks in tongues, and that one spends much of his time leading marches against social injustice, while a third believes that little children should be baptized. One good Baptist is a strict Calvinist, while another tends to take freedom of the will quite seriously. And so on, and so on. Doctrinal differences, while important, need not result in suspicion or paranoia. It is hard for me to fathom that the God and Father of us all is pleased with name-calling, marginalization, or demonization on the part of those who claim to be his children and who delight in truth. It must cause great pain to our Lord and Savior, he who pleaded in his great Intercessor Prayer for the unity of his followers (see John 17:2023), to witness the bickering and ill will that too often characterize the rhetoric and behavior of the religious. One can be thoroughly committed to her faith and way of life and still be kind. One can be completely convinced that he has the truth without tearing down another person or being sarcastic. And one can have no intention whatsoever of changing faiths and still be interested, curious, and respectful of what others teach and hold dearbelieve. I am inspired and motivated by the following statement from the Prophet Joseph Smith: If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way. Do you believe in Jesus Christ and the Gospel of salvation which He revealed? So do I. Christians should cease wrangling and contending with each other, and cultivate the principles of union and friendship in their midst; and they will do it before the millennium can be ushered in and Christ takes possession of His kingdom.[21] Now, while I have spent a significant portion of my time in the last fifteen years involved in religious outreach, seeking, while I have sought to the best of my limited abilities to read and
Comment [RM36]: Much of the last two paragraphs are Robert L. Millets testimony. Since the audience for Discipleship are members, do you think we can significantly shorten this part?

understand and grasp what it is exactly that men and women of other faiths believe., and while I have no hesitation in admitting that I have learned a great deal from my friends of other faiths , matters that have done much to open new windows of gospel understanding to megiven me new insights into the gospel, yet , I profess that I am a believing Latter-day Saint, that I am as devoted to the restored gospel today as I have ever been., and that all that I have felt and learned and experienced since 1997 has contributed to my lifelong commitment to Mormonism. It is my conviction that not only is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the custodian of Gods divine authority but that it also provides a more complete, compelling, and consoling picture of the purpose of life and of Gods plan for the redemption and glorification of his children than any other religious tradition. My ultimate trust is in God the Eternal Father and in his redeeming Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. My worship is reserved for them. The same Spirit that affirms the reality of God and the salvation of Christ whispers to my soul that Joseph Smith was divinely called and that the keys of the kingdom of God have continued in rightful succession to the present day. These things I know, and I know them in the only way spiritual and eternal things can be known, by the power of the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 2:1114). Mormonism is as stimulating and satisfying to my mind as it is stirring and settling to my heart; the Lord has thus provided a reason for the hope within me (see 1 Peter 3:15). My sincere hope is tThat the Father and the Son will bless honest seekers after truth with that Spirit that unitesunites and welds hearts and minds together so that eventually peace may prevail among people of goodwill. is my sincere hope. Notes
Comment [BB37]: Is this a fitting way to reword this sentence?

[1] Gordon B. Hinckley, in Conference Report, April 1998, 3. [2] Gordon B. Hinckley, in Conference Report, April 1999, 3. [3] Gordon B. Hinckley, in Conference Report, April 1999, 116; see also April 2000, 110; April 2001, 4.

[4] John Gordon Stackhouse, Humble Apologetics: Defending the Faith Today (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 41. [5] Stackhouse, Humble Apologetics, 7273; emphasis in original. [6] Stackhouse, Humble Apologetics, 9495. [7] Stackhouse, Humble Apologetics, 1012. [8] Joseph Fielding McConkie, The Gathering of Israel and the Return of Christ, Sixth Annual Church Educational System Religious Educators Symposium, August 1982, Brigham Young University, typescript, 3, 5. [9] James E. Talmage to Leland E. Anderson, January 29, 1932; copy in my possession. [10] Neal A. Maxwell, Remember How Merciful the Lord Hath Been, Ensign, May 2004, 44. [11] Bruce C. Hafen, in Conference Report, April 2004, 100. [12] In J. I. Packer and Thomas C. Oden, One Faith: The Evangelical Consensus (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 12122. [13] Boyd K. Packer, in Conference Report, April 2000, 7. [14] Boyd K. Packer, The Light of Christ, Ensign, April 2005, 11. [15] Dallin H. Oaks, in Conference Report, April 1995, 113; see also the tribute paid to these great men and women by Robert D. Hales, in Preparations for the Restoration and the Second Coming: My Hand Shall Be Over Thee, Ensign, November 2005, 8892. [16] Cited in Packer and Oden, One Faith, 42. [17] See History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ed. B. H. Roberts, 2nded. rev. (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1980), 2:25. [18] Craig L. Blomberg and Stephen E. Robinson, How Wide the Divide? (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 72. [19] Gordon B. Hinckley, in Conference Report, October 1997, 94. [20] Gordon B. Hinckley, in Conference Report, October 2001, 34. [21] History of the Church, 5:499; emphasis added.

Formatted: Normal,MEG Normal

Formatted: Indent: First line: 3 pi

Word Counts: Orig: 4773 (without endnotes) /5092 (with endnotes) TC: 2943/3210 target: 3102/3309 GE: CE: MKG: Final:

Formatted: Indent: First line: 3 pi, Line spacing: Double

Formatted: Normal,MEG Normal