He is the way
Well-Known Member
- Apr 17, 2018
- 8,103
- 359
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
The commandments were changed in the sermon on the mount given by Jesus Christ.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The commandments were changed in the sermon on the mount given by Jesus Christ.There are other commandments too. Neither you, nor any other member of the LDS, keeps the most essential of the other commandments, which relates intimately with these two greatest commandments.
And you found this out because the Bible states He did not do it? Where is that verse?Proxy baptisms for the dead are not any of the many other things which Jesus did.
Peter and Paul were baptized and did not need to be re-baptized.Paul is talking about Christians being baptized in the name of Christian saints who have died. The Orthodox Church still keeps this practice to this day. Everyone who is baptized takes the name of a Christian saint who has come before. The reason for your confusion is due to the obscurity that is produced when the ancient Greek text is translated into English.
This passage of Biblical text does not say that people are baptized in behalf of the unbaptized. What it really means is that new Christian converts, when they are baptized, take the name of a Christian saint who came before and died. My friend Wulfgar was given the name Peter, and his brother Baren was given the name Paul when they were baptized. Thus, Wulfgar and Baren, originally named after non-Christians, were "baptized for the dead" saints, or another way to say it: they were baptized for the benefit of the name of the saint whose name they took.
This is just an opinion, there is nothing to back up that claim.
You said: "the duties of the priests were and the fact that they did not even start those duties until they were 30."What backs it up is what the Jewish laws dictated and what the bible says the duties of the priests were and the fact that they did not even start those duties until they were 30. Jesus did not start His ministry until He was 30, you could not be a Rabbi until then also. JS didn't look up any of that info, obviously. It is you that has no backing for your claim. I gave you quite a lengthy post on what immersion to the Jews meant---it's called a mikvah mikveh)---and you can look it up, though I doubt you will. It is still in practice today, it means immersion and was used for ritual cleansing----as stated in Leviticus 15. This did not require the presence of a priest. It was by self immersion. The priest themselves used the lavers in the temple for ritual cleansing and could not enter the temple without it or they would die. Baptism is not practiced in the OT for the cleansing of sins! It was for ritual cleansing of the body and was done morning, evenings, sometimes daily and more often. It was not a once in a lifetime occurrence, but daily and even more frequently, if needed. It was used for cleansing of the proselyte into the Jewish religion. John was not baptizing for the cleansing of sins either---that was done by the blood of animals still until after the death of Jesus, then it became a symbol for cleansing from sins. But it is still the blood of Jesus that cleanses from sin not baptism. Immersion then became a symbol to represent the death to sin and life unto Jesus. Water does not wash away our sins---only blood can do that.
Heb_9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Luk 1:15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.
Luk 1:16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
Luk 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.
Just a few of the sites:
What Is A Mikveh? | My Jewish Learning
Mikveh - Wikipedia
Mikveh
Where is the verse that states that He did?And you found this out because the Bible states He did not do it? Where is that verse?
Paul did not say that those who were baptized in the name of the dead had been baptized for unbaptized people. He was referring to the phenomena of patronage. That verse you keep quoting from Paul's Epistle in support of proxy baptisms does not mean, in the original Greek in which it was written, that these were baptized "instead" of the dead. It means that they were baptized "in the name of" the dead saints, who were considered patrons of the newly baptized, who took their names. I was baptized in the name of the prophet King David, and so that is my name.Peter and Paul were baptized and did not need to be re-baptized.
Christ gave us things that we are to do. You do not do all of these things, because Mormon theology prevents the keeping of certain of His commandments as He has given them, and the most essential of all besides.The commandments were changed in the sermon on the mount given by Jesus Christ.
You said: "the duties of the priests were and the fact that they did not even start those duties until they were 30."
How old was John when he started baptizing? From the Bible we learn that John was 6 months older than Jesus. Therefore John was about 30 when he started his ministry.
You said: "John was not baptizing for the cleansing of sins either"
(New Testament | Mark 1:4)
4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
Twisting Scriptures? The case against baptism for the dead is also made by the Mormon scriptures themselves. The current Mormon doctrine on baptism for the dead is quite unlike what Joseph Smith first taught. As in other cases, the Book of Mormon becomes an important tool for the Christian apologist. It contradicts much Mormon theology, and baptism for the dead is no exception.You said: "He made reference to newly baptized Christians who are newly named after dead Christian saints, in arguing for the resurrection."
Wow, that is called twisting the scriptures.
There isn't one because:Where is the verse that states that He did?
That verse does not mention the word "saints". Neither is it about renaming anyone:Paul did not say that those who were baptized in the name of the dead had been baptized for unbaptized people. He was referring to the phenomena of patronage. That verse you keep quoting from Paul's Epistle in support of proxy baptisms does not mean, in the original Greek in which it was written, that these were baptized "instead" of the dead. It means that they were baptized "in the name of" the dead saints, who were considered patrons of the newly baptized, who took their names. I was baptized in the name of the prophet King David, and so that is my name.
Perhaps you should read the article about this that I posted a link to earlier, so as not to remain entirely ignorant about what that verse really means.
Name one.Christ gave us things that we are to do. You do not do all of these things, because Mormon theology prevents the keeping of certain of His commandments as He has given them, and the most essential of all besides.
We can agree that it is the blood of Jesus Christ that cleanses us from sin. However baptism is symbolic of becoming a new person willing to keep the commandments and sin no more. Without that willingness to give up sins one can not see the kingdom of God. Baptism is a saving ordinance:Repentance for the remission of sins---REPENTENCE---THEN THE BLOOD OF JESUS CLEANSES FROM SIN. BAPTISM IS A SYMBOOL OF DEATH TO SIN. BUT IT'S THE BLOOD THAT CLEANSES, ELSE THERE WAS NO NEED FOR CHRIST TO DIE---JUST GET BAPTIZED TO CLEANSE FROM SINS.
That is not to say there were no righteous people that needed baptism. We also know that those in spirit prison are also taught the gospel and will be judged according to men in the flesh. They need baptism also:Twisting Scriptures? The case against baptism for the dead is also made by the Mormon scriptures themselves. The current Mormon doctrine on baptism for the dead is quite unlike what Joseph Smith first taught. As in other cases, the Book of Mormon becomes an important tool for the Christian apologist. It contradicts much Mormon theology, and baptism for the dead is no exception.
In Alma 34:35-36 we read: “For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he does seal you his. Therefore, the spirit of the Lord has withdrawn from you and hath no place in you; the power of the devil is over you, and this is the final state of the wicked.”
In other words, those who die as non-Mormons go to hell, period. There’s no suggestion of a later, vicarious admission into the Mormon church.
We also see present-day Mormon doctrine contradicted in 2 Nephi 9:15: “And it shall come to pass that when all men shall have passed from this first death unto life, insomuch as they have become immortal, they must appear before the judgment seat of the Holy One of Israel, and then cometh the judgment and then must they be judged according to the holy judgment of God. For the Lord God hath spoken it, and it is his eternal word, which cannot pass away, that they who are righteous shall be righteous still, and they who are filthy shall be filthy still; wherefore, they who are filthy . . . shall go away into everlasting fire, prepared for them; and their torment is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end.”
It is unfortunate that Smith abandoned his own, earlier doctrine. It would not have made the Mormon scriptures any more authentic, but it would have prevented millions of futile Mormon proxy baptisms from being performed.
That is not to say there were no righteous people that needed baptism. We also know that those in spirit prison are also taught the gospel and will be judged according to men in the flesh. They need baptism also:
(New Testament | 1 Peter 3:19)
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
(New Testament | 1 Peter 4:6)
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.
My own religious convictions prevent me from discoursing with you about the one thing that you do not do, yet are commanded to do. We aren't allowed to speak of this to certain others.Name one.
God is not bound by the sacred rites that He himself has instituted (refer to the lesson learned in Matthew 12:1-8). God can let anyone He wants into His Kingdom. God Himself baptizes those who desire to be baptized, by the Living water of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit Himself. For "“Can anyone withhold the water to baptize these people? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have!” (Acts 10:47). Therefore, it is not permissible to hold the opinion that God Himself would withhold the Living Water to Baptize anyone who has died without receiving it from the hands of men.That is not to say there were no righteous people that needed baptism. We also know that those in spirit prison are also taught the gospel and will be judged according to men in the flesh. They need baptism also:
(New Testament | 1 Peter 3:19)
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
(New Testament | 1 Peter 4:6)
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.
"ὑπὲρ", roughly translated to "for" (as in "for the dead") is a preposition that can have any of several different meanings, including "in the name of". If the dead are not raised, why would anyone be baptized in the name of them? For the dead cannot act effectively as patrons for those who carry their names. They need to be alive in Christ to be able to provide intercessory prayers in support of the living who have taken their names in baptism. So why would anyone be baptized in the name of a patron saint if the dead are not raised. Why would anyone give honor to a dead saint if the dead saint is not alive with Christ? Truth is, the saints are not dead, for our God is the "God of the living, not of the dead".That verse does not mention the word "saints". Neither is it about renaming anyone:
1 Corinthians 15:29 Greek Text Analysis
Besides saints are defined as:
.[1] Orthodox Christians and Catholics teach that all Christians in Heaven are saints, but some are worthy of more honor than others.[2][3]
From: Saint - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This verse from 1 Peter does not mean that those trusting in God who have died are in need of baptism. What it really means is that these people who suffered on account of their faith in God, are judged by those "men of the flesh" (as opposed to spiritual men) to be foolish, but are alive in God as spiritual men, having heard the preaching of Christ's Gospel from Christ Himself, Whose Gospel is the ultimate fulfillment of all that had been hoped for by them in their faith.That is not to say there were no righteous people that needed baptism. We also know that those in spirit prison are also taught the gospel and will be judged according to men in the flesh. They need baptism also:
(New Testament | 1 Peter 3:19)
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
(New Testament | 1 Peter 4:6)
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?