It is, indeed, hard to find an earthly model of a Kingdom where every member is King/Queen–or at least multiple King/Queens exist. That model really needs the Zion concept of one heart/one mind/no poor–taken to the ultimate end. I love the fit of the title “King of Kings” to Jesus as you described it.

So if an earthly model of a king is not helpful, what about the connection between king and priest? This also leads to Hawkgrrrl’s question about why Melchizedek always get so much credit?

Melchizedek was King of Salem AND a High Priest. (The name Melchizedek according to the footnote of Genesis 14:18 means King of Righteousness). These offices in the times of Israel were separated. Kings came from the tribe of Judah and Priests came from the tribe of Levi. In a non-denominational Christian web article by Jack Kelley, it is pointed out that never since the founding of Israel had one man been King and Priest, but that the reunion of these two offices would occur by the Messiah as prophesied in Zechariah 6:9-13. This was possible through Jesus because He was a Priest in the higher order of Melchizedek AND descended from the kingly lineage.

Jack Kelley uses Revelations 1:5-6 to point out that the faithful followers of Jesus become kings and priests unto God, and he uses the KJV to discuss this verse because modern translations change this to say instead that the followers of Jesus become “a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father”. His answer to the question “king of what?” is still limited, but he does have this interesting idea:

“Maybe the rest of the universe is waiting for us so it’s purpose can be fulfilled. Maybe we’re each going to be ruling part of it. Not as gods, as my Mormon friends would have us believe, but as kings and priests of the one true God.”

Here is the link to his interesting article, if the link is accepted:

http://gracethrufaith.com/selah/thy-kingdom-come/melchizedek-jesus-and-us/

Since this is a topic which is accompanied generally by “things which cannot be written”, I would take any such talk with a full salt block.

Elaborate? Not really. I think we see it the same though; only difference may be that he’s God and eternal parent too?

Rigel #14,

I think we’re safe in saying that “king” is one of the titles associated with the highest level in the CK -and hence Jesus is King of Kings ie us (eventually), but I wouldn’t look to earthly models as relevant at since the very first kings were probably modeled on Jehovah himself, and then they evolved the concept.

But then again there isn’t much revealed on the CK, just a few versus, so I feel like I’m guessing when talking about this Maybe someone out there knows of a GA talk which sheds more light on the matter.

I like how you worded this Carlos. I’ve wondered what the use of the term “king” means in relating to the Celestial Kingdom. We know so little about the CK, about the only thing one can do is to look at some earthly models of royalty titles. Does anyone really desire to be a king, however, based upon the earthly models? Nephi didn’t want it, so there is also a negative to being a king learned from BofM study.

Also, how can one be a “king” to a higher nobility? I was unfamiliar with terms of nobility and was thinking that king/queen were the highest forms of nobility. Emperer and Empress are generally considered the highest of monarchical titles. If you are thinking of Emperor Palpatine, then this doesn’t inspire .

According to Wikipedia, under the Holy Roman Empire, Emperors were crowned as emperor by the Pope several years after they had ascended to the office of king in their home country. It was intended to be the highest office, although, politically, it didn’t always turn out that way.

So by this earthly model, being a king or queen could be viewed as attaining the second highest level of monarchy.

Ya’ think?

Ray – My favorite Ridgon story is about his play for the succession (against successful BY), and how due to his unwillingness to submit to the decision of the Qof12, they ex’d him. So, then he turned around and ex’d all of them. Classic! Sometimes church just doesn’t seem nearly as exciting now as it did back then.

“Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God— (does “sons of God” qualify or soften the meaning here, making it clear we are not “equal” with God?)”

I understand it that we are ‘men’ who after accepting the Lord become ‘Sons of God’ who are untitled to everything He has including his equal in power and ability but He is still our parent so we are under His presidency (and his wife) for ever. In that sense -parent/child relation- we aren’t his equal and never can be just like we aren’t with our earthy parent although we may become fitter, stronger and more powerful than them in this life.

I think the more relevant distinction is the use of “gods” and “God”.

and adulterers, (Wouldn’t it be weird if you’re all saving your DH’s seat in the CK, and he just doesn’t show, and then you find out this way?)

I was laughing at some of the others, but this one . . .

Oh, and the Rigdon speculation at the beginning. Classic.

CarlosJC – good points all, and I agree, this is a lot of material to cover in one lesson.

……

Anyway, about ‘who have received of his fulness’, isn’t it in the Temple sense up to celestial marriage?

“priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek,”: for the endowment and celestial marriage.

Its what I believe but i don’t have hard references to back this up, sorry

People who have been excommunicated and regretted it the sin committed, can surely explain what this means, and how true it is.

2) I’ve often thought about all this since none of use will die perfect, ie celestial, we all need time in the spirit world and in the millennium to overcome many things and fix many issues -like marriage for some, child rearing for others, psychological scars and wounds for most, genealogy for all to reach back to Adam-.

So I think that IF we can at very least fall into the millennium, we’re doing OK. The point is for members to reach the celestial level at the END of it, when that final judgment actually happens. The ‘back of the bus people’ won’t have a part of that millennium at all but most who are today without law but honorable etc, may actually have a part of it and a chance of going up to the front of the bus, I guess.

So I really can’t see how the ‘pepsi people’ fit in during the millennium. They will be worthy of a resurrection into that kingdom -by very definition a terrestrial one and they have terrestrial bodies- so its these people who may have problems here with section 76. Or will they resurrect into that millenium with an everlastingly terrestrial body? I’m not sure.

The New Testament mentions TWO kinds of sorcery: MAGIC (In Greek, “mageia”) and DRUGS (In Greek, “pharmakeia”).