Wright presents an insightful comparison of the parallels between Alma chapters 12- 13 and the New Testament Epistle to the Hebrews. 18 He assumes that Joseph Smith was the author, not the translator, of the Book of Mormon, and that Joseph borrowed directly from the KJV of Hebrews for these chapters.

Wright contends that Alma 13:17-19 is a reworking of Hebrews 7: 1-4, noting six elements shared by the two texts and appearing in the same order in both. Of the six elements, the fifth seems weak, paralleling Melchizedek's being "without father, without mother, without descent" (Hebrews 7:3) with his having reigned "under his father" (Alma 13: 18). The fourth element is only a partial parallel; while Hebrews 7:2 interprets both the name and the title of Melchizedek ("king of righteousness ... king of peace"), Alma 13: 18 speaks only of "the prince of peace," though it does add the story of Melchizedek's faith and his preaching to the people.

But these are small points compared to the fact that Wright's list is incomplete. Alma actually begins with a description of the priesthood "after the order of the Son" (Alma 13: 1-9), stating that Melchizedek "was also a high priest after this same order .. . who also took upon him the high priesthood forever" (Alma 13: 14). The first part of Alma 13: 14 has parallels with Hebrews 6:20, the verse immediately preceding the Hebrews 7: 1-4 passage examined by Wright but not included in his list. The second part of Alma 13:14 parallels the statement in Hebrews 7:3 that Melchizedek "abideth a priest continually," also omitted from Wright's list, where it should appear after number 5, along with other items also omitted by Wright (Me1chizedek "having neither beginning of days, nor end of life" and being "like unto the Son of God," which parallels Alma 13: 1-14, noted earlier). Were we to add all these to the list, it would no longer be in order. Abraham's payment of tithes to Melchizedek is also mentioned early in Alma's discussion (Alma 13: I 5) and parallels Hebrews7:2, which should be inserted after number 3 in Wright's list; this also destroys the order. As we can readily see, had Wright's list been complete. the unique order of his "six elements" would not exist

But my rejection of Wright’s ordered list does not address the fact that there are clear parallels between the material in Hebrew 7 and Alma 13-even more parallels than those enumerated by Wright. Latter-day Saints have long known of the parallels and have assumed that both texts were based on an earlier story available to the Nephites on the brass plates of Laban. This view is supported by Joseph Smith's additions to Genesis 14, but these can readily be seen by nonbelievers as an attempt to resolve what is otherwise a problem by inventing a nonexistent text that could be viewed as ancestral to both the New Testament and Book of Mormon accounts of Melchizedek.

There are, in fact, pre-Christian documents that see Melchizedek in ways not found in the normal Genesis 14 account though known to Hebrews 7 and Alma 13. One of these, which is given short shrift by Wright, is the Melchizedek text from Qumran (11QMelch), which depicts Melchizedek as a divine,

heavenly being who, at the end of the world, will judge the wicked and rescue the righteous, making expiation for them, removing their iniquities, and raising them up (perhaps referring to resurrection). The text is replete with citations from some of the major messianic passages of the Old Testament, including Isaiah 52:7 and 61:2-3 and even Daniel 9:25, where the word "messiah" is used. The Isaiah passage has a herald proclaiming peace (šIm) and declaring "thy God ['ēlohîm] is king," using the same term (melek) that forms the first element in the name Melchizedek. In 11QMelch, Melchizedek is identified with the 'e16him in the council of God ('ēl) in Psalm 82: 1-2 (which is cited), perhaps because in Genesis 14: 18, he is the "priest of the most high God ['ēl 'elyon]."

Kobelski notes that some early Christians considered Melchizedek to be an angeL He compares the Hebrew title mlk slm , "king of Salem," with the mlk šlm, "angel of peace" mentioned in one of the Dead Sea Scrolls (4Q228 1. 1.8), 1 Enoch 40:8; 52:5; and in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Dan 6:5; Asher 6:67; Benjamin 6: 1). Kobelski, who is cited by Wright but apparently not taken seriously, lists seven points of comparison between 11QMelch and the Epistle to the Hebrews22 and notes that some scholars have seen Hebrews 7:3, which is poetic in style, as a pre·Christian text used by the author of Hebrews)3 This verse contains Wright's element number 5, along with three other points omitted from his list but which likewise have parallels in Alma 13.

But the Qumran document is not the only one to ascribe to Melchizedek the qualities known from Hebrews 7 and Alma 13. Some manuscripts of the Slavonic book of 2 Enoch 71-72 tell of Melchizedek's miraculous birth from his dead mother's corpse. Conceived without intercourse, he was born fully developed and able to speak. In manuscript J, God calls him "my child." He is clothed in priestly robes and taken to heaven without tasting death to serve there as priest over all priests. As with Hebrews 7, the parallels with Jesus are obvious.

Some of these elements in the 2 Enoch account are found in Joseph Smith's reworking of Genesis 14:25-40, where we read of Melchizedek's childhood prowess (Genesis 14:26). God's approval of him (Genesis 14:27; cr. the words of God regarding Jesus in Matthew 3: 17). and of the translation of Melchizedek and other high priests, such as Enoch (Genesis 14:32-34). The theme of translation for priests of the order of Melchizedek seems to be alluded 10 in Alma 13:6, 12- 13, where we read that they "entered into his rest. " The expression is also found in Hebrews 3: 11, 18; 4: 1, 3-5, 8- 11 and is reflected by the fact that Jesus, like Melchizedek, entered into the heavenly temple to serve as priest (Hebrews 8: I; 9:24) and is said to have gone there as a "forerunner" for us (Hebrews 6: 19-20)

Some of the JST additions to Genesis 14 are also found in 11QMelch. For example, in Genesis 14:35 JST, there is mention of "the sons of God," paralleling the same term in 11QMelch 2.14. [n Genesis 14:36 JST, Melchizedek is given the additional title "king of heaven," which corresponds to his role as heavenly priest in both 11 QMelch and 2 Enoch.

The king addressed in Psalm 110 is invited to sit down beside God, i.e., in the heavens, in a judgment scene during which the wicked are destroyed. Verse 1. in which God invites the addressee to sit beside him, refers to Christ, according to Hebrews 7: 13. Verse 4, "thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek," which is likewise said to refer to Christ in Hebrews 5:6-11, seems to lie behind Hebrews 6:20 and Alma 13: 14. An early Arabic Christian document, the Book of the Rolls f.124b, interpreted "for ever" as meaning that Melchizedek would never die. In addition to the straightforward translation of Melchizedek in 2 Enoch, his undying nature is also implied in the words "nor end of life" and "continually" in Hebrews 7:3 and by the term "for ever" in Hebrews 6:20.

Wright objects to the wording of Alma 13:15. which has Abraham paying tithes "of all he possessed" rather than of the booty taken in combat. But the word "possessed," if it derives from the same root as "possessor" in the title of God ("possessor of heaven and earth") in Genesis 14: 19. has the primary meaning of "acquire," in which case it may refer only to the booty.

Wright contends that the term "high" in "high priest" (Alma 13: 18) was taken by Joseph Smith from the title "most high God" since, in Hebrews 7:1 (which follows Genesis 14:18), Melchizedek is called "priest of the most high God." But his footnote admits that Melchizedek was called a high priest by Philo and was said in Targum Neofiti to be "in the high priesthood." In view of these other interpretations, need one insist that Joseph Smith depended on the Epistle to the Hebrews for his text?

Wright notes that the title "prince of peace," instead of "king of peace," in Alma 13: 18 derives from Isaiah 9:6. In view of the fact that Melchizedek is being compared to Christ, this is no surprising. But why must one attribute the borrowing to Joseph Smith when the writings of Isaiah were available to Alma? What is more surprising, in my view, is that the author of Hebrews didn't use the Isaiah passage.

Noting that "king of peace" and "prince of peace" are not the same, Wright states that Alma 13 "does not betray linguistic interpretation," since it derives the title from Melchizedek's establishment of peace, expanding the story beyond that given in Hebrews 7. He fails to tell us that Alma 13: 18 adds that Melchizedek's title "prince of peace" was given because "he was the king of Salem." This is clearly a linguistic interpretation. Moreover, Philo notes that Me1chizedek was given the title because he loved peace and was worthy of the priesthood; he adds that as a "just king." Melchizedek is the interpreter of the law.

This brings us to another point. Wright chides Joseph Smith for having Book of Mormon priests involved in teaching rather than in cultic duties as in Old Testament times. Again, he is wrong. One of the principal duties of the priests under the Mosaic code was to teach (Leviticus 10:1; 14:57; Deuteronomy 17:9- 11; 24:8; 33:8-10; Ezekiel 44:23; Micah 3:11). One of the most renowned priests in the Bible, Ezra, was noted for his teaching. not his work at the altar. and is considered in Judaism to be the redactor of what became the Old Testament.

Wright can take some comfort in the fact that I agree with his assessment that the Joseph Smith Translation often has changes that are secondary to the Bible text rather than a restoration of original text. There is much evidence for this, including the fact that the Prophet sometimes made a change which he later modified again or returned to its original form. This does not, however, invalidate everything Joseph Smith added or modified. As with the Book of Mormon, he was probably studying it out in his mind. In some very important passages. he added material that can be shown from subsequent documentary discoveries to have an ancient foundation. Examples will appear in my forth· coming book on the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, which will be published by F.A.R.M.S. as part of its Ancient Texts series.