Joseph Smith and Oiver Cowdery receiving the Aaronic Priesthood

[classylady]

When I was reading my scriptures tonight I had a question that I couldn't answer. In the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith History, starting with verse 69, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were conferred the Aaronic Priesthood by John the Baptist and commanded to baptize each other. Which they did. Then afterwards they ordained each other to the same Aaronic Priesthood - verse 71. What I'm not understanding, is if they already had the Priesthood from John the Baptist, which they needed to baptize each other, then why did they need to be ordained to that Priesthood again after baptism?  I feel this is something I knew at one time, but I'm not remembering my lessons. 

[anatess2]

John the Baptist conferred the power of the Aaronic Priesthood upon Joseph and Oliver so that they may have the proper authority to perform baptisms.  But John the Baptist did not ordain them to a Priesthood office.  Joseph and Oliver performed that ordination.

[Guest]

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/12/the-restoration-of-the-aaronic-and-melchizedek-priesthoods?lang=eng

That is the orders of things. One is to receive the priesthood AFTER baptism.  The stranger things was how they were ordained prior to baptism. But the reason for that is obvious.

[askandanswer]

I thought I replied to this on Friday morning, 7 hours after it was posted but I guess I forgot to press submit reply. This is almost certainly not the answer, but it does fit the facts: perhaps what John conferred was a single use, single purpose Priesthood, good only for the performance of one baptism. 

Perhaps the accounts in Mosiah 18: 12 - 14 and Acts 19:2-5 are slightly analogous, inasmuch as they don't conform with what is the standard procedure today. 

Mosiah 18: 12 - 14

12  And now it came to pass that Alma took Helam, he being one of the first, and went and stood forth in the water, and cried, saying: O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart.
13  And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world.
14  And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit.

Acts 19:2-5

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?  And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3  And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized?  And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4  Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5  When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

It may be worth noting that all three accounts occurred when the church was at a very early stage of its development

[Fether]

21 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

It may be worth noting that all three accounts occurred when the church was at a very early stage of its development

I think God's work is always organized in a fashion that fits the time and situation. Things like baptizing yourself, like in the cases of alma and Adam, and receiving the priesthood prior to baptism like with Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery are fantastic examples of where organization/policy do not have hold on doctrine.

now of course today, under normal circumstances, this would not happen because the organization has been established. But that does not mean it can't happen.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Fether said:

I think God's work is always organized in a fashion that fits the time and situation. Things like baptizing yourself, like in the cases of alma and Adam

Alma didn't baptize himself. Many GAs have addressed that. It was only a gesture, nothing more.

Adam didn't baptize himself. Read the PoGP.

Edited August 5, 2017 by Guest

[CV75]

On 8/3/2017 at 4:54 AM, classylady said:

When I was reading my scriptures tonight I had a question that I couldn't answer. In the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith History, starting with verse 69, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were conferred the Aaronic Priesthood by John the Baptist and commanded to baptize each other. Which they did. Then afterwards they ordained each other to the same Aaronic Priesthood - verse 71. What I'm not understanding, is if they already had the Priesthood from John the Baptist, which they needed to baptize each other, then why did they need to be ordained to that Priesthood again after baptism?  I feel this is something I knew at one time, but I'm not remembering my lessons. 

John the Baptist’s procedure in ordaining Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Aaronic Priesthood involved, first, his conferring the priesthood upon them, followed by their baptizing each other and then his instructing them to lay hands on each other and confer the priesthood that the angel had recently bestowed. Among the reasons suggested for this unusual pattern, other than “for so we were commanded,” are the following:

“First, to confer the Priesthood before baptism, is contrary to the order of the organized Church, therefore they were commanded to confer the Priesthood upon each other in the regular way; after they were baptized. Second, the angel did for them that which they could not do for themselves. There was no one living in mortality who held the keys of this Priesthood, therefore it was necessary that this messenger, who held the keys of the Aaronic Priesthood in the Dispensation of the Meridian of Time, should be sent to confer this power. It is contrary to the order of heaven for those who have passed beyond the veil to officiate and labor for the living on the earth, only wherein mortal man cannot act, and thereby it becomes necessary for those who have passed through the resurrection to act for them. Otherwise John would have followed the regular order, which is practiced in the Church, and would have first baptized Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery and then conferred upon them the Aaronic Priesthood.”

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/12/the-restoration-of-the-aaronic-and-melchizedek-priesthoods?lang=eng

 

[Fether]

7 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Alma didn't baptize himself. Many GAs have addressed that. It was only a gesture, nothing more.

Adam didn't baptize himself. Read the PoGP.

"when the Lord had spoken with Adam, our father, that Adam cried unto the Lord, and he was caught away by the Spirit of the Lord, and was carried down into the water, and was laid under the water, and was brought forth out of the water.
65 And thus he was baptized, and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was born of the Spirit, and became quickened in the inner man"

- Moses 6:64-65

I always took that as baptizing himself, but you are right. The spirit baptized him. Nevertheless, my point remains. That, under normal circumstances, would not happen today because if organization.

And I am curious about the Alma not baptizing himself. Do you have a source??

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Fether said:

And I am curious about the Alma not baptizing himself. Do you have a source??

From the Book of Mormon Seminary Manual.

Quote

President Joseph Fielding Smith (1876–1972) pointed out that “in the Book of Mosiah it is stated definitely that he had authority [see Mosiah 18:13].” President Smith reasoned that “if [Alma] had authority to baptize that is evidence that he had been baptized [already].” Therefore, he further explained, when Alma went down into the water with Helam, it “was not a case of Alma baptizing himself, but merely as a token to the Lord of his humility and full repentance” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, comp. Joseph Fielding Smith Jr. [1960], 3:203).

[askandanswer]

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

From the Book of Mormon Seminary Manual.

Its completely speculative and only slightly relevant but i wonder if what Alma did here was similar to the practice that was followed in the very early days of the church whereby members sometimes engaged in multiple baptisms as a form of renewal of their original baptismal covenants.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, askandanswer said:

Its completely speculative and only slightly relevant but i wonder if what Alma did here was similar to the practice that was followed in the very early days of the church whereby members sometimes engaged in multiple baptisms as a form of renewal of their original baptismal covenants.

Well, we're told not to do that.  (That's what my mission pres told me). I'm guessing that they over-did it to the point where it had no real meaning any more.

[Vort]

On 8/3/2017 at 1:54 AM, classylady said:

When I was reading my scriptures tonight I had a question that I couldn't answer. In the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith History, starting with verse 69, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were conferred the Aaronic Priesthood by John the Baptist and commanded to baptize each other. Which they did. Then afterwards they ordained each other to the same Aaronic Priesthood - verse 71. What I'm not understanding, is if they already had the Priesthood from John the Baptist, which they needed to baptize each other, then why did they need to be ordained to that Priesthood again after baptism?  I feel this is something I knew at one time, but I'm not remembering my lessons. 

It may possibly be relevant that John the Baptist conferred the Aaronic Priesthood on them, and later they ordained each other to that Priesthood. In normal use in the Church today, one "confers" the Priesthood upon a man, which gives the man the authority of that Priesthood, and then "ordains" him to an office in that Priesthood, which specifies in which capacities he acts. As no offices had yet been established in the Priesthood at the time John conferred it upon Joseph and Oliver, it is possible that Joseph and Oliver simply ordained each other to a generally inclusive office in the Aaronic Priesthood called, for the moment, "the Aaronic Priesthood", which we today would probably identify as "priest" (or perhaps "bishop").

It's also possible that Joseph and Oliver were, in effect, given the keys and authority to do exactly two things: (1) baptize the other; (2) confer the Aaronic Priesthood upon the other. This doesn't seem too likely to me, but it would not be outside how things are sometimes done. For example, the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon were not apostles. They never held the office of apostle and were never part of the Quorum of Twelve. To my knowledge, they never called themselves apostles, at least not in the Priesthood office sense or the Church governing sense. Yet they had the authority given them to choose and then ordain the original Twelve Apostles in this dispensation -- even though they themselves didn't hold any such office. In a similar vein, a stake president (who is by office a high priest) is authorized to ordain a man to the Priesthood office of patriarch, even though the stake president himself is (probably) not a patriarch (in the Priesthood office sense). So in some cases, it is possible to ordain someone to a Priesthood office which you yourself do not hold. Perhaps something similar went on with John the Baptist, Joseph Smith, and Oliver Cowdery.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Vort said:

the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon were not apostles. They never held the office of apostle and were never part of the Quorum of Twelve. To my knowledge, they never called themselves apostles, at least not in the Priesthood office sense or the Church governing sense. Yet they had the authority given them to choose and then ordain the original Twelve Apostles in this dispensation

While I appreciate the point about a Patriarch, I disagree. The presiding officer has all the keys for all offices over which he presides.

Joseph never said he held the office of Apostle.  But he certainly held the power, authority, & keys off the senior Apostle.  I once read that Oliver's title as "Second Elder" meant that he would have been second in-line to become Prophet rather than Brigham had he not fallen away.  In other words, his position as "Second Elder" gave him the de facto position of Pres of the 12.

The Stake president only holds the keys to ordained and allow others to act in that office, because his keys are only borrowed from the apostles.  Patriarchs used to be ordained by Apostles. Those keys are not otherwise inherent in the office as a bishop's is to president over the Aaronic priesthood of the ward.