LDS Joseph Smith's Claim of an Apostasy is a Lie

[mmksparbud]

Where does it say if you are not baptized, you are damned??

 

[Rescued One]

If your not save then what are you?

Where is the verse that says the unbaptized are condemned?

 

[Rescued One]

If your not save then what are you?

An unbeliever, a non-Christian.

Where is the verse that says the unbaptized are condemned?

 

[Ironhold]

The Bible tells you who will go to hell. Read it and if you are able to believe and understand it, you will have your answer.

I want your personal beliefs, not some random dodge.

 

[Ironhold]

Ye must be born again; that isn't something we can do for ourselves. The new birth results in a new creature who has been turned from darkness to light.

2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

We are no longer slaves to sin.

Either you missed the point of what I was saying, or you tried to move the goalposts.

Can anyone else here please answer my question?

What of people who loudly proclaim themselves to be "Good Christians" when their actions clearly show themselves to be anything but? I'm talking about people like Jimmy Swaggert, Ed Decker, Jack Chick, and those kinds of fellows, so no dodging or redirecting, please.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Either you missed the point of what I was saying, or you tried to move the goalposts.

Can anyone else here please answer my question?

What of people who loudly proclaim themselves to be "Good Christians" when their actions clearly show themselves to be anything but? I'm talking about people like Jimmy Swaggert, Ed Decker, Jack Chick, and those kinds of fellows, so no dodging or redirecting, please.

I hope this will help... This passage talks about how false prophets/teachers/Christians will be recognized by their fruits. A good tree brings forth good fruit but a bad one brings forth thorns.
Matthew 7
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

 

[Ironhold]

I hope this will help... This passage talks about how false prophets/teachers/Christians will be recognized by their fruits. A good tree brings forth good fruit but a bad one brings forth thorns.
Matthew 7
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Thank you.

It's been my unfortunate and personal experience that the louder someone is at proclaiming how "good" a "Christian" they are, the worse an example of Christianity they actually are. The best examples of Christianity are the ones that focus on being the best kind of person that they can be.

 

[ViaCrucis]

If it says with baptism you are saved then it makes sense to me that if you don't hav baptism you can not be saved.

Scripture says that baptism is salvific, yes. What Scripture doesn't say is that the un-baptized are, by virtue of not being baptized, not saved.

The traditional, sacramental understanding of Baptism held by Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox and others is that Baptism is the normative means by which one is joined together with Christ and the saving work of Christ--His death and resurrection--applied to us by God. However, from the beginning Christians have understood that simply not being baptized doesn't amount to damnation. The early Church spoke of a "baptism of blood" and a "baptism of desire". In the ancient Church when one desired to become a Christian they became catechumens, a process of learning (catechesis) that lasted about a year, at the end of which catechumens and children would receive Baptism (usually on or around Pascha/Easter). If a catechumen was martyred before she or he could be baptized, the Church spoke of this as a "baptism of blood" that their martyrdom was itself a kind of baptism. Similarly if one died or was otherwise unable to be baptized and died before being able to do so, it was said they had a "baptism of desire". The point of this was to speak of the fact that though unable to receive Christian Baptism it was by no fault of their own, and so the Church believed God would look upon them as though they had been baptized.

Personally, I like how Luther speaks of it,

"We must keep the ordered power in mind and form our opinion on the basis of it. God is able to save without Baptism, just as we believe that infants who, as sometimes happens through the neglect of their parents or through some other mishap, do not receive Baptism are not damned on this account. But in the church we must judge and teach, in accordance with God’s ordered power, that without the outward Baptism no one is saved. Thus it is due to God’s ordered power that water makes wet, that fire burns, etc. But in Babylon Daniel’s companions continued to live unharmed in the midst of the fire (Dan. 3:25). This took place through God’s absolute power, in accordance with which He acted at that time; but He does not command us to act in accordance with this absolute power, for He wants us to act in accordance with the ordered power."

Luther makes a distinction between God's ordered power and God's absolute power. The example of fire is a good one, but God's ordered power fire burns--it's what fire does, naturally, it's how God has ordered the universe that fire burns and we should expect that it will burn--yet in the case of Daniel's companions thrown into the furnace the fire did not burn them, because God's absolute power was such that they were preserved, the fire did not burn. God has so ordered that the Church baptize because of what Baptism is and what Baptism does, and we are right to believe in what God has said about it; but it does not follow that God cannot save apart from Baptism, Luther here gives the example of the unbaptized infant who the Church will not call damned for not having received Baptism.

This is why you will frequently see those who adhere to the traditional, sacramental view speaking of Baptism as the "normative means". It's what is normal, what is standard, ordinary, how God has said things happen. That "baptism now saves you" (as St. Peter says) does not mean the opposite, that "without baptism damns you". We should affirm what is said, not what is not said.

This, by the way, is why Lutheran affirm single predestination as opposed to double predestination as the Calvinists teach. That God has predestined His elect to salvation from before the foundation of the world does not mean that He has chosen or predestined anyone to damnation, on the contrary, it is the will of God that all be saved.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Rescued One]

Either you missed the point of what I was saying, or you tried to move the goalposts.

Can anyone else here please answer my question?

What of people who loudly proclaim themselves to be "Good Christians" when their actions clearly show themselves to be anything but? I'm talking about people like Jimmy Swaggert, Ed Decker, Jack Chick, and those kinds of fellows, so no dodging or redirecting, please.

Whose place is it to judge them? I don't follow them. I didn't dodge or redirect. I didn't move the goalposts. A Christian isn't just any person who claims they are. Without the new birth resulting in an obvious love of Christ, there are no Christians. OTOH, since Christians are subject to temptation I won't presume to know who has been forgiven and who hasn't unless I know the person well enough to understand where they're coming from and where they're headed. I don't know those people that you mentioned at all.

BTW, I've never heard a Christian say, "I'm a good Christian."

 

[Rescued One]

This, by the way, is why Lutheran affirm single predestination as opposed to double predestination as the Calvinists teach. That God has predestined His elect to salvation from before the foundation of the world does not mean that He has chosen or predestined anyone to damnation, on the contrary, it is the will of God that all be saved.

-CryptoLutheran

Not all Calvinists believe in double predestination. I've seen Calvinists argue both sides. But if it is God's will that all be saved, why doesn't He save all? I heard a Wesleyan preacher say He can't. I don't believe that.

 

[Peter1000]

Where does it say if you are not baptized, you are damned??

In Mark 16:16, Jesus says that if you believe and are baptized you will be saved. There is a huge implication attached to this scripture that yells out at you that if you do not believe and are not baptized, you will be damned.

I know Jesus did not use the word baptized. Why should he, if you do not believe in Jesus Christ, you will not be baptized for the remission of sins in the name of the Father and the Son and in the HS. There could be a few people that are baptized for some refreshing purpose without truely believeing in Jesus Christ, but that is just a few. The vast majority of unbelievers will not be baptized, which was so understood by Jesus that he didn't even mention it. But I believe he knows that if you are not baptized, you will be damned.

In John 3:5, Jesus tells us that if you are not born again of the water and of the spirit, you will not enter the kingdom of God. IOW you will be damned.

We all know the religious debates about being born again of the water and of the spirit, but the Mormon POV is that being born again of the water means to be baptized, and being born again of the spirit is receiving the gift of the HS.

So at least 2 scriptues tell you, you are damned if you do not get baptized.

 

[Peter1000]

Not all Calvinists believe in double predestination. I've seen Calvinists argue both sides. But if it is God's will that all be saved, why doesn't He save all? I heard a Wesleyan preacher say He can't. I don't believe that.

Thanks for the follow-up. I agree that all Calvinists do not believe in double predestination, but a lot do. It presents another alternative to how one is saved, and damned.

The reason He does not save all, is because all are not worthy to be saved.
Being saved just because God wills it, is a false doctrine. It absolves men of any responsibility, even to believe.

 

[Rescued One]

I want your personal beliefs, not some random dodge.

I believe the Bible. And why should I answer your questions, if you can't be polite?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Not all Calvinists believe in double predestination. I've seen Calvinists argue both sides. But if it is God's will that all be saved, why doesn't He save all? I heard a Wesleyan preacher say He can't. I don't believe that.

It's something that in Lutheran circles is called the Crux Theologorum, the Theologian's Cross. It refers to the frustrating and largely unanswerable question that arises from the paradox found in Scripture between where Scripture says God has chosen the elect from before the foundation of the world and predestined them to salvation; where Scripture says that God wills and desires that all be saved; and that Scripture indicates that there will be those who by their own choice will be damned.

Basically, "Why are some saved and not others?" The answer that die-hard adherents to TULIP have is basically answered in TULIP; some are saved because God has predestined them to salvation and others are not saved because they are not part of the elect and God has passed over them or else chosen them as vessels of destruction. Lutherans can't give that answer because we don't believe that answer is biblical, Scripture doesn't say that, rather Scripture says that God desires that all to be saved, and all really does mean all. Lutherans reject TULIP's Limited Atonement instead believing in Universal Atonement, Christ died for the whole world, for everybody, without exception. So how does a Lutheran answer the question, "Why are some saved and not others?" And the only valid answer (from a Lutheran position) is because some choose their own destruction; other than that the question is unanswerable, and even the answer given isn't necessarily the most satisfying to reason.

Those that are saved are saved because God chose them in Christ, their election in Christ by the merciful goodness of God who gives Himself for the world. They are not saved because they made a free will decision to be saved, because that is impossible for fallen man to do as he is a slave to sin, for we were dead in our trespasses until God, graciously, made us alive in Christ.

Those that are damned damn themselves by refusing and rejecting the God who graciously offers Himself and gives Himself to them in Christ.

If it seems like there's a possible conflict, even a contradiction, in thinking here then you're probably not wrong. It's important to understand that a perhaps significant distinction between Lutheranism and Calvinism is that Calvinism is a Systematic Theology, whereas Lutheranism is probably better described as a Confessional Theology. For example Calvin wrote his Institutes as a system of cohesive theology, Lutheranism doesn't really have something similar, instead we have the Augsburg Confession, the Small and Large Catechisms, etc. Lutheranism isn't about being systematic in its theology, but in being confessional in its theology. And so rather than trying to reconcile conflicts, paradoxes, Lutheran thought is largely to just accept that some things can't be reconciled. Sometimes Scripture says two different things and it is better to confess both even if we can't reconcile it in a reasonable or cohesive way.

That's what the Crux Theologorum is about. Scripture several things, Calvinists and Arminians attempt to reconcile them in their own way; Lutherans don't try to reconcile them at all.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Peter1000]

Scripture says that baptism is salvific, yes. What Scripture doesn't say is that the un-baptized are, by virtue of not being baptized, not saved.

The traditional, sacramental understanding of Baptism held by Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox and others is that Baptism is the normative means by which one is joined together with Christ and the saving work of Christ--His death and resurrection--applied to us by God. However, from the beginning Christians have understood that simply not being baptized doesn't amount to damnation. The early Church spoke of a "baptism of blood" and a "baptism of desire". In the ancient Church when one desired to become a Christian they became catechumens, a process of learning (catechesis) that lasted about a year, at the end of which catechumens and children would receive Baptism (usually on or around Pascha/Easter). If a catechumen was martyred before she or he could be baptized, the Church spoke of this as a "baptism of blood" that their martyrdom was itself a kind of baptism. Similarly if one died or was otherwise unable to be baptized and died before being able to do so, it was said they had a "baptism of desire". The point of this was to speak of the fact that though unable to receive Christian Baptism it was by no fault of their own, and so the Church believed God would look upon them as though they had been baptized.

Personally, I like how Luther speaks of it,

"We must keep the ordered power in mind and form our opinion on the basis of it. God is able to save without Baptism, just as we believe that infants who, as sometimes happens through the neglect of their parents or through some other mishap, do not receive Baptism are not damned on this account. But in the church we must judge and teach, in accordance with God’s ordered power, that without the outward Baptism no one is saved. Thus it is due to God’s ordered power that water makes wet, that fire burns, etc. But in Babylon Daniel’s companions continued to live unharmed in the midst of the fire (Dan. 3:25). This took place through God’s absolute power, in accordance with which He acted at that time; but He does not command us to act in accordance with this absolute power, for He wants us to act in accordance with the ordered power."

Luther makes a distinction between God's ordered power and God's absolute power. The example of fire is a good one, but God's ordered power fire burns--it's what fire does, naturally, it's how God has ordered the universe that fire burns and we should expect that it will burn--yet in the case of Daniel's companions thrown into the furnace the fire did not burn them, because God's absolute power was such that they were preserved, the fire did not burn. God has so ordered that the Church baptize because of what Baptism is and what Baptism does, and we are right to believe in what God has said about it; but it does not follow that God cannot save apart from Baptism, Luther here gives the example of the unbaptized infant who the Church will not call damned for not having received Baptism.

This is why you will frequently see those who adhere to the traditional, sacramental view speaking of Baptism as the "normative means". It's what is normal, what is standard, ordinary, how God has said things happen. That "baptism now saves you" (as St. Peter says) does not mean the opposite, that "without baptism damns you". We should affirm what is said, not what is not said.

This, by the way, is why Lutheran affirm single predestination as opposed to double predestination as the Calvinists teach. That God has predestined His elect to salvation from before the foundation of the world does not mean that He has chosen or predestined anyone to damnation, on the contrary, it is the will of God that all be saved.

-CryptoLutheran

I didn't know that Lutherans believed in predestination?

It is interesting that Luther would go from one end of the religious spectrum (tremendous guilt and agony for not living the commandments perfectly) to the other end of the religous spectrum (God chooses who will be saved). I was unaware of that tremendous shift on his part. Am I off my rocker?

 

[Peter1000]

Where is the verse that says the unbaptized are condemned?

See post #511.

 

[Peter1000]

Give me the verse.

Mark 16:16

 

[mmksparbud]

No--He clearly says is you do not believe you will be damned---if He meant baptism, He would have mentioned it also---He could have just said if you do not do both you will be damned. And He didn't tell the thief on the cross he was damned---and you can't in any way say He was baptized though you keep saying he was. If he had been baptized, he would not have been stealing for John preached repentance. And John also said---
Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

In fact, Jesus commanded no one to go and be baptized when He healed them, He didn't tell the adulterous woman, the Samaritan woman at the well, Jesus, in fact, baptized no one.
Joh_4:2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
Wherever possible, you should be baptized--the sick can not always do that, the ones that have deathbed conversions, the ones that die on the way to be baptized (it has happened--got into wrecks or are the product of crimes), those converted in the midst of battle and have no chance of it---all sorts of reasons they couldn't. Those are baptized with the Holy Ghost as it says. God judges the heart. I'm sure the ones that hear Jesus say this were all baptized:
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The reason He does not save all, is because all are not worthy to be saved.

The whole point of the Gospel is that God saves the unworthy. If that is not so, then there is no Gospel.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Rescued One]

Thanks for the follow-up. I agree that all Calvinists do not believe in double predestination, but a lot do. It presents another alternative to how one is saved, and damned.

The reason He does not save all, is because all are not worthy to be saved.
Being saved just because God wills it, is a false doctrine. It absolves men of any responsibility, even to believe.

You're a Mormon who embraces Mormon beliefs. Joseph Smith was vehemently anti-Calvinist:

7 I was at this time in my fifteenth year. My father’s family was proselyted to the Presbyterian faith, and four of them joined that church, namely, my mother, Lucy; my brothers Hyrum and Samuel Harrison; and my sister Sophronia...

20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.” It seems as though the adversary was aware, at a very early period of my life, that I was destined to prove a disturber and an annoyer of his kingdom; else why should the powers of darkness combine against me? Why the opposition and persecution that arose against me, almost in my infancy?

Joseph Smith claimed that sinners could become worthy of salvation through obedience to laws and ordinances and that some Mormons could become more worthy than others. Only a select few would spend eternity with Heavenly Father and Jesus. I haven't read where your "Heavenly Spirit" resides.