WAS CHRIST'S CHURCH REALLY RESTORED?

What exactly was restored—and how can we know that God authorized it?

The word restoration sounds thoroughly biblical.

Something has been lost.

God brings it back.

And the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints makes an extraordinary claim: after the apostles died, Christ's church lost divine priesthood authority. Centuries later, God restored that authority through Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery.

Official LDS teaching says that John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1829 and conferred the Aaronic Priesthood upon them. It further teaches that Peter, James and John subsequently appeared and conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood. Church of Jesus Christ

If that happened, it matters enormously.

But before accepting—or rejecting—the claim, we should ask a very basic question:

Is this what the New Testament says needed to be restored?

Let's begin with the text.

1. Why Was a Restoration Necessary?

According to LDS teaching, knowledge of Christianity wasn't enough.

People still had Bibles.

People still believed in Jesus.

People were still baptizing.

Churches still existed.

But something essential had disappeared:

priesthood authority.

The LDS claim is that proper authority had to be returned from heaven before Christ's church could again exist in its fullness. Official LDS sources therefore describe Joseph Smith's reception of priesthood authority as necessary for establishing Christ's church and performing saving ordinances. Church of Jesus Christ

That gives us a very precise question.

Does the New Testament teach that Christ established a priesthood authority that would disappear when the apostles died?

2. Who Are the Priests in the New Testament Church?

This is a good place to begin.

Under the Old Covenant, Israel had an identifiable priesthood.

The descendants of Aaron served as priests.

There was a high priest.

There were sacrifices.

There was a sanctuary.

But when we enter the New Testament church, something remarkable happens.

Peter writes to ordinary Christians:

“You yourselves, as living stones, are built up as a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood.”
— 1 Peter 2:5

A few verses later:

“You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation.”
— 1 Peter 2:9

Peter isn't addressing a special priestly class within the church.

He is addressing Christians.

The church itself is described as a priesthood.

3. Revelation Says the Same Thing

John describes Jesus as the One who:

“has appointed us as a kingdom, as priests serving his God and Father.”
— Revelation 1:6

Later Revelation again describes Christ's redeemed people as a kingdom and priests.

That is quite different from saying:

Only certain Christians possess priesthood authority inherited through a special institutional line.

The New Testament picture begins with something broader:

God's redeemed people are His priestly people.

4. What Happened to the Aaronic Priesthood?

This question becomes particularly important because LDS teaching says John the Baptist restored the Aaronic Priesthood in 1829. Church of Jesus Christ

But what did the Aaronic priesthood do in Scripture?

Aaron and his descendants served under the Mosaic covenant.

They ministered at the sanctuary.

They offered animal sacrifices.

The high priest entered the Most Holy Place.

Then we reach Hebrews.

Hebrews doesn't tell Christians that the Aaronic priesthood disappeared temporarily and would someday need restoration.

It tells us something much bigger happened.

5. The Priesthood Changed

Hebrews 7:11 asks what would have happened if perfection had been possible through the Levitical priesthood.

Then verse 12 says:

“For when the priesthood changes, a change in the law must come as well.”

Why?

Because Jesus did not descend from Levi.

He came from Judah.

Jesus therefore isn't another Aaronic priest.

His priesthood is of an entirely different order.

6. Jesus Is Our High Priest

Hebrews repeatedly identifies Jesus as our High Priest.

And His priesthood isn't temporary.

Hebrews 7:24 says that because Jesus lives forever, He holds His priesthood permanently.

That word matters enormously.

Jesus died.

Jesus rose.

Jesus lives forever.

Therefore His priesthood doesn't pass from one dying high priest to another.

Christ remains High Priest.

So before talking about restoring priesthood authority, perhaps we should first ask:

What priesthood does the New Testament say Christians actually need?

The answer in Hebrews repeatedly points us toward Jesus Himself.

7. “Melchizedek Priesthood”—What Does Hebrews Mean?

The expression naturally catches our attention because LDS teaching speaks frequently of the Melchizedek Priesthood.

Hebrews certainly connects Jesus with Melchizedek.

Psalm 110:4 had said:

“You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.”

Hebrews applies that prophecy to Christ.

But notice something important.

Hebrews never establishes an organization of Christian men called the Melchizedek Priesthood.

The argument is about Jesus' unique priesthood.

Melchizedek provides the pattern:

a priesthood not based upon descent from Aaron and pointing toward a priest who continues forever.

The emphasis isn't:

Christians must receive Melchizedek priesthood offices.

It is:

Jesus is our eternal High Priest.

8. What About the Apostles?

The apostles unquestionably possessed authority.

Jesus chose them.

He commissioned them.

They preached.

They performed signs.

They laid hands upon people.

They appointed leaders.

Their teaching became foundational for the church.

Ephesians 2:20 even describes God's household as:

“built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone.”

That's important.

A foundation is laid.

The building then rises upon it.

The New Testament doesn't describe every generation as requiring another foundation of apostles.

Rather, Christians continue upon the apostolic foundation already laid.

9. Did the Apostles Pass Their Apostleship to Successors?

Here we need to be especially careful.

The apostles certainly appointed elders.

Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in congregations.

Paul instructed Titus to appoint elders in every town.

Timothy was instructed about overseers and deacons.

But where do we find Peter appointing another apostle to become Peter's successor?

Where does Paul appoint someone to become the next Paul?

Timothy receives enormous responsibility, but Paul never calls Timothy one of the Twelve.

Titus isn't described that way either.

The ordinary pattern after churches were established is:

elders/overseers and deacons.

That is something we'll want to keep watching carefully.

10. But What About Matthias?

Acts 1 records Matthias replacing Judas.

Doesn't that establish apostolic succession?

Look closely at the circumstances.

Peter explains that Judas' place among the Twelve must be filled.

But the qualifications are unusually specific.

The replacement must have accompanied Jesus' disciples beginning with John's baptism and continued through Jesus' ministry until the Ascension.

Most importantly, he must become:

“a witness with us of his resurrection.”

— Acts 1:22

That qualification couldn't simply be reproduced century after century.

Matthias replaced Judas in a very particular historical role.

Acts doesn't tell us that when each apostle subsequently died another man was appointed to maintain a permanent Quorum of Twelve.

Indeed, when James is killed in Acts 12, Luke records his death but doesn't record another apostle being selected to replace him.

That's significant.

11. What About Laying on of Hands?

The New Testament certainly uses laying on of hands.

People receive blessings.

Church workers are commissioned.

Spiritual gifts are imparted.

Leaders are appointed.

But laying hands upon someone doesn't automatically establish the later LDS system of Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthood offices.

We have to allow each passage to say what it actually says.

This is exactly where TEXT B4 TRADITION matters.

We cannot begin with a later organizational structure and then search the New Testament for vocabulary that sounds similar.

We must begin with the New Testament and ask:

What structure does the text itself reveal?

12. Then What Was Restored in 1829?

Now we can state the LDS claim fairly.

Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery testified that John the Baptist appeared on May 15, 1829 and conferred the Aaronic Priesthood upon them.

They further testified that Peter, James and John later conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood.

Current LDS teaching continues to present these events as the restoration of divine authority necessary for Christ's restored church. Church of Jesus Christ

We shouldn't ridicule that claim.

We should test it.

And the first test isn't:

Could an angel appear?

Certainly Scripture records angels appearing.

Nor is it:

Could God give someone authority?

Certainly He could.

The more fundamental question is:

Does the authority supposedly restored correspond to the priesthood and church structure revealed in the New Testament?

13. Something Doesn't Automatically Become Biblical Because Biblical Names Are Used

Consider the vocabulary:

Aaronic.
Melchizedek.
Priesthood.
Apostles.
Prophets.
Elders.
Bishops.

Every one of those terms has biblical roots.

But using biblical names doesn't prove that the organization attached to those names is the organization described in Scripture.

We still have to ask:

What did “priesthood” mean in the Bible?

What did an apostle do?

Who were elders and overseers?

What does Hebrews mean by the priesthood of Melchizedek?

That's exegesis.

14. Hebrews Creates a Particularly Serious Question

If the Aaronic priesthood needed to be restored to Christianity, why does Hebrews emphasize that the former priesthood belonged to a covenant superseded by Christ?

And if Christians need to possess a Melchizedek priesthood institution, why does Hebrews repeatedly present Jesus Himself as the permanent priest after the order of Melchizedek?

Hebrews says:

Christ lives forever.

Therefore:

His priesthood is permanent.

That doesn't sound like a priesthood that disappeared from the earth when the apostles died.

It sounds like one that continues because Jesus continues.

15. Perhaps We Have Been Asking the Wrong Question

The question may not be:

“Who restored Christ's priesthood?”

Perhaps the prior question is:

Did Christ's priesthood ever disappear?

Jesus didn't die and remain dead.

He rose.

He ascended.

He reigns.

He intercedes.

And Hebrews says He remains our High Priest.

So before accepting the claim that priesthood authority vanished and had to be restored in 1829, we need clear biblical evidence that the priesthood Christ established was capable of disappearing in the first place.

16. What Have We Established So Far?

Our first study found:

Apostasy was predicted.

But we did not find a prediction that Christ's entire church would disappear.

Our second study found:

The apostles died.

But Christians and congregations continued.

Now this study has found something else:

The New Testament certainly teaches divine authority.

The apostles certainly possessed authority.

Churches certainly had appointed leaders.

But the New Testament does not obviously present the system that LDS teaching says disappeared and was restored in 1829.

Instead, we find:

Christians collectively described as a royal priesthood.

Jesus as our permanent High Priest.

Jesus' priesthood as one that continues forever.

The apostles forming the foundation of the church.

Elders/overseers leading local congregations.

That deserves serious thought.

17. But We Still Haven't Settled Joseph Smith

And we shouldn't pretend that we have.

A Latter-day Saint could reasonably respond:

“But what if God really did send John the Baptist, Peter, James and John to Joseph Smith? Wouldn't that establish his authority?”

That's a fair question.

And it leads us directly to the next stage of our investigation.

Because Scripture itself tells us what to do when someone claims to bring a message or authority from heaven.

We don't have to invent the test.

The Bible gives us one.

So our next question should probably be:

HOW SHOULD WE TEST A NEW REVELATION?

Because before we accept—or reject—Joseph Smith's claims simply because they are extraordinary, we should ask:

How did God tell us to test someone who claims that heaven has spoken?

That's where I would go next.

TEXT B4 TRADITION
Read First. Conclude Later.

Return to HOME page

Return to MORMON page