LDS Joseph Smith and the Astronomers

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
I believe Paul was clear about being a preacher.

What does that have to do with the context of 1 Cor 15:29? This is why I can't take your postings seriously. You post either random responses or random scriptures without context.

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
Yes and some were called to do baptism for the dead:

(New Testament | 1 Corinthians 15:29)

29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Who are the "they" in this passage?

He is the way · Dec 18, 2020

BigDaddy4 said:
What does that have to do with the context of 1 Cor 15:29? This is why I can't take your postings seriously. You post either random responses or random scriptures without context.

You said: "Notice Paul uses THEM, not a 'we' or 'us'. It was never a Biblical belief or practice (OT or NT). Outside of this one obscure and out of context line, there is absolutely no evidence of Jews, Christians, or the early Christian church believing in or practicing baptisms for the dead."

The reason Paul said "them" is because he was call to preach, not baptize. Baptism for the dead was for those who were called to baptize. They were the priests in the temple. They were baptized in the molten sea. Baptism is sometimes called washing of regeneration:

(New Testament | Titus 3:5)

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

The temple had lavers for other washing.

He is the way · Dec 18, 2020

BigDaddy4 said:
Who are the "they" in this passage?

(Old Testament | 1 Kings 7:23 - 25)

23 ¶ And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.
24 And under the brim of it round about there were knops compassing it, ten in a cubit, compassing the sea round about: the knops were cast in two rows, when it was cast.
25 It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward.
(Old Testament | 1 Kings 7:38 - 44)

38 ¶ Then made he ten lavers of brass: one laver contained forty baths: and every laver was four cubits: and upon every one of the ten bases one laver.
39 And he put five bases on the right side of the house, and five on the left side of the house: and he set the sea on the right side of the house eastward over against the south.
40 ¶ And Hiram made the lavers, and the shovels, and the basons. So Hiram made an end of doing all the work that he made king Solomon for the house of the LORD:
41 The two pillars, and the two bowls of the chapiters that were on the top of the two pillars; and the two networks, to cover the two bowls of the chapiters which were upon the top of the pillars;
42 And four hundred pomegranates for the two networks, even two rows of pomegranates for one network, to cover the two bowls of the chapiters that were upon the pillars;
43 And the ten bases, and ten lavers on the bases;
44 And one sea, and twelve oxen under the sea;
(Old Testament | 2 Chronicles 4:4 - 6)

4 It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward.
5 And the thickness of it was an handbreadth, and the brim of it like the work of the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies; and it received and held three thousand baths.
6 ¶ He made also ten lavers, and put five on the right hand, and five on the left, to wash in them: such things as they offered for the burnt offering they washed in them; but the sea was for the priests to wash in.

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
The reason Paul said "them" is because he was call to preach, not baptize. Baptism for the dead was for those who were called to baptize. They were the priests in the temple. They were baptized in the molten sea. Baptism is sometimes called washing of regeneration:

Your logic makes no sense. Paul used "them" because it wasn't something Christians were doing, but other groups who weren't Christians. As usual, you are grasping at straws to legitimize your religion's doctrines and practices.

He is the way said:
The temple had lavers for other washing.

Big deal. They were NOT used for baptisms for the dead.

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
(Old Testament | 1 Kings 7:23 - 25)

23 ¶ And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.
24 And under the brim of it round about there were knops compassing it, ten in a cubit, compassing the sea round about: the knops were cast in two rows, when it was cast.
25 It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward.
(Old Testament | 1 Kings 7:38 - 44)

38 ¶ Then made he ten lavers of brass: one laver contained forty baths: and every laver was four cubits: and upon every one of the ten bases one laver.
39 And he put five bases on the right side of the house, and five on the left side of the house: and he set the sea on the right side of the house eastward over against the south.
40 ¶ And Hiram made the lavers, and the shovels, and the basons. So Hiram made an end of doing all the work that he made king Solomon for the house of the LORD:
41 The two pillars, and the two bowls of the chapiters that were on the top of the two pillars; and the two networks, to cover the two bowls of the chapiters which were upon the top of the pillars;
42 And four hundred pomegranates for the two networks, even two rows of pomegranates for one network, to cover the two bowls of the chapiters that were upon the pillars;
43 And the ten bases, and ten lavers on the bases;
44 And one sea, and twelve oxen under the sea;
(Old Testament | 2 Chronicles 4:4 - 6)

4 It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward.
5 And the thickness of it was an handbreadth, and the brim of it like the work of the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies; and it received and held three thousand baths.
6 ¶ He made also ten lavers, and put five on the right hand, and five on the left, to wash in them: such things as they offered for the burnt offering they washed in them; but the sea was for the priests to wash in.

Oh gee, more spaghetti on the wall scriptures to see what sticks. These have nothing to do with baptisms for the dead.

He is the way · Dec 18, 2020

BigDaddy4 said:
Your logic makes no sense. Paul used "them" because it wasn't something Christians were doing, but other groups who weren't Christians. As usual, you are grasping at straws to legitimize your religion's doctrines and practices.

Big deal. They were NOT used for baptisms for the dead.

Paul used baptism for the dead as evidence for the resurrection. Not evidence against the resurrection. If baptism for the dead was being done by non-Christians it would not have been evidence for the resurrection. Common sense.

He is the way · Dec 18, 2020

BigDaddy4 said:
Oh gee, more spaghetti on the wall scriptures to see what sticks. These have nothing to do with baptisms for the dead.

Yes they do because baptism for the dead was done by Christians as evidenced by Paul.

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
Paul used baptism for the dead as evidence for the resurrection. Not evidence against the resurrection. If baptism for the dead was being done by non-Christians it would not have been evidence for the resurrection. Common sense.

Common sense eludes you because you ignore the context.

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
Yes they do because baptism for the dead was done by Christians as evidenced by Paul.

Paul did no such thing. You are creating false doctrine. You have absolutely no evidence of it being practiced. Taking Paul's statement out of context is not evidence.

In context, Paul is addressing the question posed in verse 12 - (bold is mine for emphasis)
"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?"
Note: there are some of you say there is no resurrection... Not Paul, not "us" believers...

Now for verse 29 - "Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?"

These resurrection deniers, or at least some of them, are apparently trying to baptize their dead. So Paul is questioning why they are even doing this if they don't even believe in a resurrection.

What does Paul/we believe about this? In context, his reply is in Verses 30-32:

"And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day—yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”

Notice, he transitions to "us" in verse 30 - this is what "we" Christians believe. Then, he closes out his argument on the topic of being raised from the dead. This has nothing, absolutely NOTHING, about Christians baptizing dead people, or even endorsing such a belief.

Perhaps you should take verse 34 to heart...

Peter1000 · Dec 18, 2020

BigDaddy4 said:
Which means you disagree with mormonism. That is, if you actually understood what the Biblical position is on it. Which it appears you don't. Paul was asking a question to those who didn't believe in the resurrection. If these people didn't believe in a resurrection, then what is the purpose of them baptizing there dead if the dead will not be resurrected (according to their belief)? His point was it was a useless practice for them.

Notice Paul uses THEM, not a 'we' or 'us'. It was never a Biblical belief or practice (OT or NT). Outside of this one obscure and out of context line, there is absolutely no evidence of Jews, Christians, or the early Christian church believing in or practicing baptisms for the dead.

That is the point of Pauls teaching. It was useless to them, who did not believe in the resurrection, because they did not believe in the resurrection.
1 Corinthians 15:29 King James Version (KJV)
29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

What would have Paul said if they had believed in the resurrection? I know that is a hard question for you, but for me, Paul would have said something like this: Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, since they know the resurrection to be true? It is good that they baptize for the dead, so the dead can accept this baptism as the gospel is preached unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

You made a perfect point of Paul's words.

He is the way · Dec 18, 2020

BigDaddy4 said:
Paul did no such thing. You are creating false doctrine. You have absolutely no evidence of it being practiced. Taking Paul's statement out of context is not evidence.

In context, Paul is addressing the question posed in verse 12 - (bold is mine for emphasis)
"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?"
Note: there are some of you say there is no resurrection... Not Paul, not "us" believers...

Now for verse 29 - "Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?"

These resurrection deniers, or at least some of them, are apparently trying to baptize their dead. So Paul is questioning why they are even doing this if they don't even believe in a resurrection.

What does Paul/we believe about this? In context, his reply is in Verses 30-32:

"And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day—yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”

Notice, he transitions to "us" in verse 30 - this is what "we" Christians believe. Then, he closes out his argument on the topic of being raised from the dead. This has nothing, absolutely NOTHING, about Christians baptizing dead people, or even endorsing such a belief.

Perhaps you should take verse 34 to heart...

Why would non-Christians be baptizing for the dead if they did not believe in the resurrection? The only reason to baptize for the dead is because there is a resurrection. Paul is saying Christians are being baptized for the dead because there is a resurrection. After the temple was destroyed the most baptisms for the dead stopped and everyone forgot about the ordinance of baptism for the dead that Paul wrote about. As far as I know here is no record of any baptisms for the dead by non-Christians. I believe that another of the lost ordinances was the power to bind on earth and in heaven which was given to Peter and restored in these latter days.

mmksparbud · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
Why would non-Christians be baptizing for the dead if they did not believe in the resurrection? The only reason to baptize for the dead is because there is a resurrection. Paul is saying Christians are being baptized for the dead because there is a resurrection. After the temple was destroyed the most baptisms for the dead stopped and everyone forgot about the ordinance of baptism for the dead that Paul wrote about. As far as I know here is no record of any baptisms for the dead by non-Christians. I believe that another of the lost ordinances was the power to bind on earth and in heaven which was given to Peter and restored in these latter days.

Mormons always ignore facts. It has been shown to them that, for one thing, baptism means immersion---just that. When Jews washed anything--from dishes to themselves, they baptized. They baptized dead bodies---TO WASH THEM!! It was a must do for the dead!! They've been shown this over and over and choose to ignore it. They still baptize the dead! Meaning they wash the dead bodies in water and the water has to be moving water they had special tubs for this. It did not mean Baptizing unto salvation! It means a ceremonial washing of the bodies before wrapping them for burial. Every dead body had to be bathed--baptized--for cleansing, not for salvation as we believe it.

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

Peter1000 said:
That is the point of Pauls teaching. It was useless to them, who did not believe in the resurrection, because they did not believe in the resurrection.
1 Corinthians 15:29 King James Version (KJV)
29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

What would have Paul said if they had believed in the resurrection? I know that is a hard question for you, but for me, Paul would have said something like this: Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, since they know the resurrection to be true? It is good that they baptize for the dead, so the dead can accept this baptism as the gospel is preached unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

You made a perfect point of Paul's words.

Which you obviously missed. It's about whether or not we will be resurrected, not an endorsement of baptizing dead people as an instrument of salvation.

BigDaddy4 · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
Why would non-Christians be baptizing for the dead if they did not believe in the resurrection?

Who knows, who cares? It's not a Christian practice, then or now.

He is the way said:
The only reason to baptize for the dead is because there is a resurrection.

There is no reason to baptize for the dead. It's a worthless, non-Christian practice.

He is the way said:
Paul is saying Christians are being baptized for the dead because there is a resurrection.

Paul say no such thing. That's your poor doctrine reading into something that's not there.

He is the way said:
After the temple was destroyed the most baptisms for the dead stopped and everyone forgot about the ordinance of baptism for the dead that Paul wrote about.

There were no baptisms for the dead for salvational purposes in the temple.

He is the way said:
As far as I know here is no record of any baptisms for the dead by non-Christians.

Nor by Christians. It's not a thing.

He is the way said:
I believe that another of the lost ordinances was the power to bind on earth and in heaven which was given to Peter and restored in these latter days.

Of course, you can believe whatever your false prophets and false doctrine tell you to believe. That doesn't make it true. It wasn't a Christian practice, so nothing to restore.

He is the way · Dec 18, 2020

BigDaddy4 said:
Who knows, who cares? It's not a Christian practice, then or now.

There is no reason to baptize for the dead. It's a worthless, non-Christian practice.

Paul say no such thing. That's your poor doctrine reading into something that's not there.

There were no baptisms for the dead for salvational purposes in the temple.

Nor by Christians. It's not a thing.

Of course, you can believe whatever your false prophets and false doctrine tell you to believe. That doesn't make it true. It wasn't a Christian practice, so nothing to restore.

It is definitely there in the Bible, and it was a real thing. You can deny it, but it won't change anything.

mmksparbud · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
It is definitely there in the Bible, and it was a real thing. You can deny it, but it won't change anything.

It is not there in the bible. You guys just refuse to admit the truth. The only baptism of the dead was and still is the washing of dead bodies in preparation for wrapping for burial. Had nothing to do with baptism unto salvation. That is the truth, but then you guys must share the same name as another denier of truth, Trump

Dale · Dec 18, 2020

He is the way said:
Why then is the gospel preached to the dead?:

(New Testament | 1 Peter 4:5 - 8)

5 Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.
6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.
7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

The NIV renders 1 Peter 4:6 as follows.

For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those
who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to
men in regard to the body, but live according to God in
regard to the spirit.
1 Peter 4:6: NIV

Peter is talking about those who heard the Gospel and then passed away.

This could be another case where you are relying on a clumsy translation.

natitude · Dec 19, 2020

Christian Scholar Krister Stendahl made the following observation regarding baptism for the Dead:

In his first epistle to the Corinthians Paul wrote: "Otherwise, what shall they do who are being baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are they being baptized for them" (Conzelmann, 1 Cor 15:19).

This verse is part of Paul's argumentation against those who denied a future resurrection (cf. 2 Tim 2:18, Justin, Dial. 80). He refers to a practice of vicarious baptism, a practice for which we have no other evidence in the Pauline or other New Testament or early Christian writings. Interpreters have puzzled over the fact that Paul seems to accept this practice. At least he does not see fit to condemn it as heretical, but Paul clearly refers to a distinct group within the Church, a group that he accuses of inconsistency between ritual and doctrine.

A practice of vicarious baptism for the dead (for example among the Marcionites, A.D. 150) was known and seen as heretical by the ancient commentators. Thus they interpreted Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 15:29 so as not to lend support to such practices or to any theology implicit in it. Through the ages their interpretations have persisted and multiplied (B. M. Foschini reports and evaluates forty distinct explanations of this verse). Most of the Greek fathers understood "the dead" to refer to one's own body; others have interpreted the verse as referring to pagans seeking baptism "for the sake of joining" lost Christian relatives. Still others have suggested different sentence structures: "Otherwise what will they achieve who are being baptized? Something merely for their dead bodies?"

Once the theological pressures from later possible developments of practice and doctrine are felt less constricting, the text seems to speak plainly enough about a practice within the Church of vicarious baptism for the dead. This is the view of most contemporary critical exegetes. Such a practice can be understood in partial analogy with Paul's reference to how the pagan spouses and joint children in mixed marriages are sanctified and cleansed by the Christian partners (1 Cor 7:14). Reference has often been made to 2 Maccabees 12:39-46, where Judas Maccabeaus, "taking account of the resurrection," makes Atonement for his dead comrades. (This was the very passage which Dr. Eck used in favor of purgatory in his 1519 Leipzig debate with Martin Luther. So it became part of the reason why Protestant Bibles excluded the Apocrypha or relegated them to an Appendix.)

To this could be added that the next link in Paul's argument for a future resurrection is his own exposure to martyrdom (1 Cor 15:30-32), a martyrdom that Paul certainly thinks of as having a vicarious effect (Phil 2:17, Rom 15:16, cf. Col 1:24).

Such a connection may be conscious or unconscious. In either case it makes it quite reasonable that Paul's remark refers to a practice of a vicarious baptism for the dead.

I hope this helps...

He is the way · Dec 19, 2020

mmksparbud said:
It is not there in the bible. You guys just refuse to admit the truth. The only baptism of the dead was and still is the washing of dead bodies in preparation for wrapping for burial. Had nothing to do with baptism unto salvation. That is the truth, but then you guys must share the same name as another denier of truth, Trump

(New Testament | 1 Corinthians 15:29)

29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

LDS Joseph Smith and the Astronomers

It's a new season...

It's a new season...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

It's a new season...

It's a new season...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

It's a new season...

It's a new season...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

It's a new season...

It's a new season...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads