LDS LDS Baptism

[Jane_Doe]

Let me ask it this way...According to LDS theology, what must one do to obtain salvation?

Believe in Christ with your whole self.

How would you answer the same question?

 

[withwonderingawe]

Let me ask it this way...According to LDS theology, what must one do to obtain salvation?

acts2
37 ¶Now when they heard this, they were pricked in theirheart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptizedevery one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for theremission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

[-57]

Believe in Christ with your whole self.

How would you answer the same question?

Then the LDS believe there is no water baptism required.

 

[Ironhold]

Then the LDS believe there is no water baptism required.

You've already been told several times over what the requirements are, and that water baptism is a critical part.

Why do you keep doing this?

 

[-57]

acts2
37 ¶Now when they heard this, they were pricked in theirheart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptizedevery one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for theremission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

It is recognized as improper hermenuitics when one uses a single verse or passage to uphold supposed doctrine. Verses and passages from the bible should be filtered through the other verses and passages that give us information about a topic.

The bible has many verses that speak of salvation and water baptism isn't mentioned. John 3:16 is one of them.
If water baptism was required for salvation then it would have definitely been included in that verse.
it would then read something like this.....“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him and is baptized should not perish but have eternal life.

Romans 10:13 would have to be changed to say the following: For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord and is baptized will be saved.”

This indicates the improper interpretation of Acts 2:38 on the LGS part. The word "for" is the dispute.
One might say....“Take two aspirin for your headache,” it should be obvious to everybody that this doesn't mean “take two aspirin in order to get your headache,” but rather means “take two aspirin because you already have a headache.”

The meaning of the verse is more like this....."and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ because you already have remission of sins.

As mentioned above, if the other verses containing salvation also linked belief and baptism together you would have a sound biblical point....but the lack of the link on such an very, very important topic such as salvation is missing from all the other verses clearly indicated a misinterpretation on the LDS part.

 

[-57]

You've already been told several times over what the requirements are, and that water baptism is a critical part.

Why do you keep doing this?

Jane_Doe...a mormon... in post 81 seems to think water baptism isn't a requirement. It seems as if I've been told several answers by mormons that are different from each one.

My post 85 shows that water baptism isn't a "critical" part of salvation.

 

[Jane_Doe]

Jane_Doe...a mormon... in post 81 seems to think water baptism isn't a requirement.

Incorrect.

It seems as if I've been told several answers by mormons that are different from each one.

There is no discrepancy between what the different LDS posters on here have been saying. Part of giving your entire self to God is giving your deeds: "If you love me, keep my commandments". That includes the commandment to be baptized.

The idea that we can be hearers of the word, but refuse to also be doers is contradicts the Bible and mocks God.

 

[-57]

Incorrect.

There is no discrepancy between what the different LDS posters on here have been saying. Part of giving your entire self to God is giving your deeds: "If you love me, keep my commandments". That includes the commandment to be baptized.

The idea that we can be hearers of the word, but refuse to also be doers is contradicts the Bible and mocks God.

Baptism isn't a requirement.
In fact LDS followers can't keep Christ commandments....which in my opinion sends them in a direction away from heaven.

 

[Jane_Doe]

Baptism isn't a requirement.
In fact LDS followers can't keep Christ commandments....which in my opinion sends them in a direction away from heaven.

Your comment here appears to be overlooking much of the atonement in regards to repentance and and forgiveness.

But you of course are entitled to your opinion.

I am actually curious of another one of your opinions. The idea that "baptism isn't a requirement for salvation" is a relatively recent development in Christianity, originating with the Reformers and post-reformers. It is currently confined to less than 20% of Christianity (Baptist, SDA, JW, Quakers, Christ-Scientists, some Evangelicals, etc). What is your opinion on this? Is the first 1600 years of Christianity and current >80% of Christianity sent in a direction away from Heaven?

 

[-57]

Your comment here appears to be overlooking much of the atonement in regards to repentance and and forgiveness.

My comment was in regards to you....and me...not being able to keep Christ commandments. It appears that the LDS theology as well as the other faith + works based theology have a problem when they can't keep all the commandments.

My opinion is the bible has always taught baptism isn't a requirement for salvation. My post 85 presents one of the reasons.

 

[Peter1000]

It is recognized as improper hermenuitics when one uses a single verse or passage to uphold supposed doctrine. Verses and passages from the bible should be filtered through the other verses and passages that give us information about a topic.

The bible has many verses that speak of salvation and water baptism isn't mentioned. John 3:16 is one of them.
If water baptism was required for salvation then it would have definitely been included in that verse.
it would then read something like this.....“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him and is baptized should not perish but have eternal life.

Romans 10:13 would have to be changed to say the following: For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord and is baptized will be saved.”

This indicates the improper interpretation of Acts 2:38 on the LGS part. The word "for" is the dispute.
One might say....“Take two aspirin for your headache,” it should be obvious to everybody that this doesn't mean “take two aspirin in order to get your headache,” but rather means “take two aspirin because you already have a headache.”

The meaning of the verse is more like this....."and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ because you already have remission of sins.

As mentioned above, if the other verses containing salvation also linked belief and baptism together you would have a sound biblical point....but the lack of the link on such an very, very important topic such as salvation is missing from all the other verses clearly indicated a misinterpretation on the LDS part.

How many years have you worked on this response to Acts 2:38? Your analogy is flawed, because everyone knows what it means when you say 'take 2 aspirin for your headache. There is no need to explain it.

The same thing goes for Acts 2:38, everyone knows what, 'for the remission of sins' means except for a small minority of Christians that don't believe that water baptism is essential to salvation. So your analogy didn't work.

To say because several scripture do not say you have to be baptized for salvation, and that obliterates all the scriptures that do tell us that baptism is necessary, is like ripping out 1/2 of the bible and putting your head in a hole. Good luck with getting into heaven.

BTW, how do you interpret Mark 16:16?

Mormons, OTOH, believe in all the scriptures, so we believe you have to first believe in Jesus, you have to do the ordinaces (baptism is one) that he commands you to do, and because we love Jesus, we keep the commandments he gave us to keep, and with faith we are full of good works to help build the kingdom of God here on earth, and we look forward to the gift of grace from Jesus Christ that is finally given to us, that allows us to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.

When you take all the scriptures into account, it does become quite simple to figure the whole thing out.

 

[Jane_Doe]

My comment was in regards to you....and me...not being able to keep Christ commandments.

There's a difference between the following ideas:
1) I have to keep all of the commandments perfectly, by myself, never screwing up. If I screw up I'm doomed.
2) I will honestly try to keep all the commandments, powered by Christ. When I screw up, I will repent and be made clean again, through Christ.
3) Commandments? Bah humbug! Not important, blow them off.

No one is advocating idea #1. In fact, idea #1 is impossible. LDS advocate idea #2. I have meant some "faith only" practitioners who seem to favor idea #3.

My opinion is the bible has always taught baptism isn't a requirement for salvation. My post 85 presents one of the reasons.

Ok, so you disagree with majority of Christendom through time and now. Ok. Christendom is very diverse place.

 

[-57]

How many years have you worked on this response to Acts 2:38? Your analogy is flawed, because everyone knows what it means when you say 'take 2 aspirin for your headache. There is no need to explain it.

The same thing goes for Acts 2:38, everyone knows what, 'for the remission of sins' means except for a small minority of Christians that don't believe that water baptism is essential to salvation. So your analogy didn't work.

To say because several scripture do not say you have to be baptized for salvation, and that obliterates all the scriptures that do tell us that baptism is necessary, is like ripping out 1/2 of the bible and putting your head in a hole. Good luck with getting into heaven.

BTW, how do you interpret Mark 16:16?

Mormons, OTOH, believe in all the scriptures, so we believe you have to first believe in Jesus, you have to do the ordinaces (baptism is one) that he commands you to do, and because we love Jesus, we keep the commandments he gave us to keep, and with faith we are full of good works to help build the kingdom of God here on earth, and we look forward to the gift of grace from Jesus Christ that is finally given to us, that allows us to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.

When you take all the scriptures into account, it does become quite simple to figure the whole thing out.

You have only 1 controversial scripture supporting your position. The bible has several verses that don't include baptism concerning salvation. That has been presented in post 85. This is a clear indication that you are interpreting the verse incorrectly.
Here's another from Acts 3:19 where baptism isn't mentioned.....Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,

More points to consider about baptism. The thief on the cross wasn't baptized and was saved.
Acts 10:43-48 shows people saved prior to being baptized.
Acts 10:47 “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?”
Paul was saved prior to being baptized. Acts 9:17 (filled with Holy Spirit....Acts 9:18 (baptized). Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus.

This presents you with 3 problem.
1) The word "for" can be translated because of.
2) Other verses in the bible don't associate baptism as a requirement for salvation.
3) People in the bible were saved prior to being baptized.

 

[-57]

2) I will honestly try to keep all the commandments, powered by Christ. When I screw up, I will repent and be made clean again, through Christ.

Once again your theolgy opens the door to eternal damnation.
If you're not "clean"...such as a person is prior to salvation the go to hell when they die. So, when you screw up you are no longer clean. You need to repent and become saved again. What happens if you die prior to repenting again? What if you don't repent?
There is no assurance in your LDS theology. In fact I doubt that a person can repent of all of their sins. Your LDS theology would then doom them forever.

 

[Jane_Doe]

Once again your theolgy opens the door to eternal damnation.

Again, this is not just "my" theology, but the theology held for the first 1600 years of Christendom and currently held by +80% of Christendom.

If you're not "clean"...such as a person is prior to salvation the go to hell when they die. So, when you screw up you are no longer clean. You need to repent and become saved again. What happens if you die prior to repenting again? What if you don't repent?

Does a person desire such repentance? Is there the pattern? Or does a person say "bah humbug" to the very idea of repentance at all?

There is no assurance in your LDS theology. In fact I doubt that a person can repent of all of their sins. Your LDS theology would then doom them forever.

Do you view all Christians prior to 1600 as doomed forever?
Do you view +80% of current Christians as doomed forever?

 

[Peter1000]

You have only 1 controversial scripture supporting your position. The bible has several verses that don't include baptism concerning salvation. That has been presented in post 85. This is a clear indication that you are interpreting the verse incorrectly.
Here's another from Acts 3:19 where baptism isn't mentioned.....Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,

More points to consider about baptism. The thief on the cross wasn't baptized and was saved.
Acts 10:43-48 shows people saved prior to being baptized.
Acts 10:47 “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?”
Paul was saved prior to being baptized. Acts 9:17 (filled with Holy Spirit....Acts 9:18 (baptized). Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus.

This presents you with 3 problem.
1) The word "for" can be translated because of.
2) Other verses in the bible don't associate baptism as a requirement for salvation.
3) People in the bible were saved prior to being baptized.

The thief on the cross was baptized.

The HS fell on these people and they believed. Peter then baptized them in the name of the Lord. So apparently baptism is essential even though the HS fell on them first.

Paul was baptized too, so again it confirms that baptism is essential even though he had recieved the HS before.

Mormons believe that you have to have the HS witness to your spirit that Jesus is the Christ, otherwise you will not know for sure. This witness of the HS is just a temporary event until we repent and with faith in Christ we go to the waters of baptism, and then as Acts 2:38 informs us, we can recieve the gift of the HS as a permanent companion.

But I can tell that we could go round and round over this subject and not get any where

So I ask just 2 questions:
1) Are there any scriptures in the bible that says baptism is essential?

2) Was there an event in the bible that would lead one to believe that baptism is essential?

 

[-57]

Do you view all Christians prior to 1600 as doomed forever?

Why would I believe that?
That would be like me asking you if you believe that all christians prior to Joseph Smith were doomed. Although I kinda think you might.....considering you think only baptism by a LDS guy has the power to save.

 

[-57]

The thief on the cross was baptized.

And you know this how?

The HS fell on these people and they believed. Peter then baptized them in the name of the Lord. So apparently baptism is essential even though the HS fell on them first.

I see you agree...you can be saved prior to baptism.

Paul was baptized too, so again it confirms that baptism is essential even though he had recieved the HS before.

Once again, I see you agree you can be saved prior to being baptized.

Mormons believe that you have to have the HS witness to your spirit that Jesus is the Christ, otherwise you will not know for sure. This witness of the HS is just a temporary event until we repent and with faith in Christ we go to the waters of baptism, and then as Acts 2:38 informs us, we can recieve the gift of the HS as a permanent companion.

Where does the bible teach this temporary event...water make it permanent doctrine?

But I can tell that we could go round and round over this subject and not get any where

I supose we can..but you so far have refuted what I posted. You say these things and don't support your doctrine.

So I ask just 2 questions:
1) Are there any scriptures in the bible that says baptism is essential?

No. Christians are saved by faith alone.

2) Was there an event in the bible that would lead one to believe that baptism is essential?

The answer is still no.

 

[-57]

BTW, how do you interpret Mark 16:16?

While this verse tells us something about believers who have been baptized (they are saved), it does not say anything about believers who have not been baptized. In order for this verse to teach that baptism is necessary for salvation, a third statement would be necessary, viz., “He who believes and is not baptized will be condemned” or “He who is not baptized will be condemned.” But, of course, neither of these statements is found in the verse.

Consider this example: "Whoever believes and lives in Kansas will be saved, but those that do not believe are condemned." This statement is strictly true; Kansans who believe in Jesus will be saved. However, to say that only those believers who live in Kansas are saved is an illogical and false assumption. The statement does not say a believer must live in Kansas in order to go to heaven. Similarly, Mark 16:16 does not say a believer mustbe baptized. The verse states a fact about baptized believers (they will be saved), but it says exactly nothing about believers who have not been baptized. There may be believers who do not dwell in Kansas, yet they are still saved; and there may be believers who have not been baptized, yet they, too, are still saved. For more on this check out this reference.

AS another approach how do we know the baptism Jesus is referring to isn't this baptism:
1 Cor 12:13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

 

[Jane_Doe]

Why would I believe that?

Because they believed that a person who follows Christ should follow Him and be baptized. In post 94 you described such theology as dooming that person forever.

So, do you believe that all Christians prior to 1600 and +80% now are doomed?