Mormons: What does it mean that Michael holds the keys of Salvation?

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I don’t understand this:

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

 

[ParkerD]

I don’t understand this:

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

Chesterton,
A person reading that verse would want to understand that that verse ties to Revelation 12:7 and to Daniel 7.

Michael the Archangel was a prince warrior in the war in heaven prior to this world being populated, and accepted the stewardship to come to earth as Adam and prepare his posterity for the eventual judgment day when Christ would judge Adam and Eve and all their posterity.

The Ancient of Days in Daniel 7 is Michael, and he eventually gives the “keys of salvation” (which includes priesthood keys for ordinances on earth in preparation for heaven) to Christ who is the ultimate holder of those keys. Christ delegated them to men on earth so that they could complete their stewardships through the authority given to them, thus in an orderly way and always under the direction of Christ, who holds the Key of David (Revelation 3:7).

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Chesterton,
A person reading that verse would want to understand that that verse ties to Revelation 12:7 and to Daniel 7.

Michael the Archangel was a prince warrior in the war in heaven prior to this world being populated, and accepted the stewardship to come to earth as Adam and prepare his posterity for the eventual judgment day when Christ would judge Adam and Eve and all their posterity.

The Ancient of Days in Daniel 7 is Michael, and he eventually gives the “keys of salvation” (which includes priesthood keys for ordinances on earth in preparation for heaven) to Christ who is the ultimate holder of those keys. Christ delegated them to men on earth so that they could complete their stewardships through the authority given to them, thus in an orderly way and always under the direction of Christ, who holds the Key of David (Revelation 3:7).

I don’t see the relevance of those passages.

Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom to Peter.

This Mormon teaching seems to be a direct effort to contradict Catholic teaching and scripture.

Do you agree that Jesus gave the keys to Peter? If so, what does this mean to Mormons?

 

[ParkerD]

I don’t see the relevance of those passages.

Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom to Peter.

This Mormon teaching seems to be a direct effort to contradict Catholic teaching and scripture.

Do you agree that Jesus gave the keys to Peter? If so, what does this mean to Mormons?

Chesterton,
Daniel 7:13-14 describes the vision Daniel had of the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man who came “with the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days” and at that point the Son of Man receives “His kingdom” “which shall not be destroyed.” So this is the point of transition that is particularly relevant to the verse you cited from D & C.

Jesus did indeed give the “keys of the Kingdom” to Peter, but there was a whole lot of history of the world before that point in time, of course. Adam had a stewardship over the whole human family, his posterity. Peter had a major stewardship as the chief apostle, and certainly filled his role very well. But he did not have the same role as Michael the Archangel, who became Adam on the earth and has a role during the end times as noted in Daniel’s vision.

Christ holds the key of David, always. He does not delegate that key.

 

[JHow]

…Michael the Archangel, who became Adam on the earth …

Archangel Michael became the man Adam?

 

[SteveVH]

Chesterton,
Daniel 7:13-14 describes the vision Daniel had of the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man who came “with the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days” and at that point the Son of Man receives “His kingdom” “which shall not be destroyed.” So this is the point of transition that is particularly relevant to the verse you cited from D & C.

Jesus did indeed give the “keys of the Kingdom” to Peter, but there was a whole lot of history of the world before that point in time, of course. Adam had a stewardship over the whole human family, his posterity. Peter had a major stewardship as the chief apostle, and certainly filled his role very well. But he did not have the same role as Michael the Archangel, who became Adam on the earth and has a role during the end times as noted in Daniel’s vision.

Christ holds the key of David, always. He does not delegate that key.

It seems that God chose a very poor steward in light of the fact that he chose to collaborate with the very enemy against whom he was to battle.

 

[ParkerD]

It seems that God chose a very poor steward in light of the fact that he chose to collaborate with the very enemy against whom he was to battle.

SteveVH,
I don’t get it. Perhaps you can explain?

 

[zerinus]

I don’t understand this:

D&C 78:16; “Who hath appointed Michael your prince, and established his feet, and set him upon high, and given unto him the keys of salvation under the counsel and direction of the Holy One, who is without beginning of days or end of life.”

As you may know, Mormons believe in the preexistence, meaning that our spirits were created by God before they were born as mortals on earth. Michael was one of God greatest spirits in the preexistence, who was privileged to be the first man to be placed on this earth, known as Adam. He is now as a resurrected being acts as the archangel Michael, and holds the keys of patriarchal authority over the entire human race, who are his literal descendants, and stands next to Jesus Christ in authority over the human race.

Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom to Peter.

He did. But each gospel dispensation has had its own leader and head, each of whom held the keys of their respective dispensations, and still hold their respective keys. Adam was at the head of the first dispensation, followed by Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses. Those who held the keys of their respective dispensations still hold those keys, even though other dispensations have superseded theirs.

This Mormon teaching seems to be a direct effort to contradict Catholic teaching and scripture.

It has absolutely nothing to do with that at all. You simply do not understand the Mormon teaching. Adam holds the keys of his own dispensation, and so does Peter. The keys are not the same.

Do you agree that Jesus gave the keys to Peter?

Yes, he held the keys of his own dispensation, not that of Adam.

If so, what does this mean to Mormons?

It means exactly what it says, which doesn’t contradict the keys that were given to Peter. You are trying to understand Mormon theology in the context of traditional Christian theology. Mormonism can best be understood within the context of its own theology. Have you heard of the parable of putting old wine in new bottles, or new wine in old bottles? Mormonism is like that. It is like “new wine” which must be put in “new bottles,” not in old bottles.

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH,
I don’t get it. Perhaps you can explain?

Sure. You stated the following, a portion of which I agree with:

"Michael the Archangel was a prince warrior in the war in heaven prior to this world being populated, and accepted the stewardship to come to earth as Adam and prepare his posterity for the eventual judgment day when Christ would judge Adam and Eve and all their posterity.

Michael the Archangel was a warrior who led the battle which ended in tossing Lucifer and his followers out of heaven and into hell. If we follow your line of thought and accept that Michael became “incarnate” in the person of Adam we see that he then disobeyed God, choosing sin over the will of God. Not the best example to give his posterity and certainly not a good steward. When we choose sin, we collaborate with the enemy. In this case Michael would have had to collaborate with the very enemy he was fighting against.

 

[JHow]

…Mormons believe in the preexistence, meaning that our spirits were created by God before they were born as mortals on earth…

Are we conscious in this pre-existence?

 

[dianaiad]

Are we conscious in this pre-existence?

Yes. Conscious, aware, and with the ability to make choices.

 

[zerinus]

Are we conscious in this pre-existence?

For the most part, no.

EDIT: Did you mean conscious of or in? I assumed you mean of.

 

[RebeccaJ]

“Ancient of Days” for both Christians and Jews means “God”.

 

[SteveVH]

As you may know, Mormons believe in the preexistence, meaning that our spirits were created by God before they were born as mortals on earth. Michael was one of God greatest spirits in the preexistence, who was privileged to be the first man to be placed on this earth, known as Adam. He is now as a resurrected being acts as the archangel Michael, and holds the keys of patriarchal authority over the entire human race, who are his literal descendants, and stands next to Jesus Christ in authority over the human race.

One problem you are going to have in convincing Catholics is that we believe that creatures, once created, do not change into other creatures. Angels will always be angels and humans will always be humans, even when we receive glorified bodies, they will still be glorified human bodies. To believe that an angel became incarnate is a very strange belief for Catholics and I would say most other Christians as well.

He did. But each gospel dispensation has had its own leader and head, each of whom held the keys of their respective dispensations, and still hold their respective keys. Adam was at the head of the first dispensation, followed by Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses. Those who held the keys of their respective dispensations still hold those keys, even though other dispensations have superseded theirs.

I’m probably just missing something here but I have never found in Scripture that the*“keys to the kingdom of heaven”* were given to anyone other than Peter. Can you please direct me to your source for this belief?

It has absolutely nothing to do with that at all. You simply do not understand the Mormon teaching. Adam holds the keys of his own dispensation, and so does Peter. The keys are not the same.

What exactly do you mean by “dispensation”?

It means exactly what it says, which doesn’t contradict the keys that were given to Peter. You are trying to understand Mormon theology in the context of traditional Christian theology. Mormonism can best be understood within the context of its own theology. Have you heard of the parable of putting old wine in new bottles, or new wine in old bottles? Mormonism is like that. It is like “new wine” which must be put in “new bottles,” not in old bottles.

Can this be construed as “another gospel”, as it does not fit in with biblical teaching?

Thanks.

 

[JHow]

For the most part, no.

EDIT: Did you mean conscious of or in? I assumed you mean of.

Yes, I meant “in”. As in, when we were IN the pre-existence, were we concious beings? Diana said “yes”. An alternative is that we could have been floating around, existing, but unaware (like unborn children perhaps)? It is a relevant question, because in the story about Michael it seems like he was a concious being in his pre-existence, holding conversations and so on.

I did not expect us to be concious “of” the pre-existence. This would be outside of my and most people’s experience, I think.

 

[dianaiad]

For the most part, no.

EDIT: Did you mean conscious of or in? I assumed you mean of.

I think we are having a cross communication problem, Zerinus…

 

[dianaiad]

Yes, I meant “in”. As in, when we were IN the pre-existence, were we concious beings? Diana said “yes”. An alternative is that we could have been floating around, existing, but unaware (like unborn children perhaps)? It is a relevant question, because in the story about Michael it seems like he was a concious being in his pre-existence, holding conversations and so on.

I did not expect us to be concious “of” the pre-existence. This would be outside of my and most people’s experience, I think.

The answer, then is 'yes…" we do believe that we were very much aware and concious in the pre-existence…and no, we are not now aware OF having been so.

…it would rather defeat the purpose of mortal life, I think.

 

[zerinus]

Yes, I meant “in”. As in, when we were IN the pre-existence, were we concious beings? Diana said “yes”. An alternative is that we could have been floating around, existing, but unaware (like unborn children perhaps)? It is a relevant question, because in the story about Michael it seems like he was a concious being in his pre-existence, holding conversations and so on.

I did not expect us to be concious “of” the pre-existence. This would be outside of my and most people’s experience, I think.

Then dianaiad gave you the right answer.

 

[ParkerD]

Sure. You stated the following, a portion of which I agree with:

Michael the Archangel was a warrior who led the battle which ended in tossing Lucifer and his followers out of heaven and into hell. If we follow your line of thought and accept that Michael became “incarnate” in the person of Adam we see that he then disobeyed God, choosing sin over the will of God. Not the best example to give his posterity and certainly not a good steward. When we choose sin, we collaborate with the enemy. In this case Michael would have had to collaborate with the very enemy he was fighting against.

SteveVH,
First, note from Revelation 12:7 that the Devil and his “angels” were “cast down to earth” where he makes war with the saints.

Note also Daniel 12:1 where Michael the prince becomes involved during the end times, during a time of great tribulation when “none of the wicked shall understand” (v. 10) the signs of the times.

Daniel 7, Daniel 12, and Genesis 2 are completely reliable and noteworthy with respect to both Michael and Adam. Adam kept the commandment he had received to “be with Eve” after Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit. He wasn’t rebelling against God, nor siding with Lucifer. He had a choice that was a quandary, and brought opposition into the world as a result of the choice he made to remain with Eve and be her helpmeet as well as she his.

 

[KathleenGee]

I have always understood that God created all creatures with much love and care, that His will for our existence is sufficient for us to exist.

Jesus told us not to worry about tomorrow because the Heavenly Father showed His love for the birds, and the flowers in the field were more beautiful than the treasure of Solomon…so how much more He cares for us.