He recognizes that there's more than one way to interpret the verse, which is obvious enough to us, isn't it? I don't know why that's supposed to mean anything in itself.
He recognizes that there's more than one way to interpret the verse, which is obvious enough to us, isn't it? I don't know why that's supposed to mean anything in itself.
When you say "dead people", do you think we dig up a dead body and baptize it?He recognizes that there's more than one way to interpret the verse, which is obvious enough to us, isn't it? I don't know why that's supposed to mean anything in itself.
The early Church itself is right. It not only does not include the Mormon interpretation, it explicitly condemns it insofar as you understand it to be baptizing dead people. Read St. John Chrysostom sometime. He laughs at the notion that baptism should involve the dead.
Why did the fathers reject it? Paul mentions it, but does not denounce it, he only says that the people that were doing it, did it for the wrong reasons.Because the fathers reject it, and we are not to accept novelties into our faith just because they may be practiced somewhere by someone. It's not a Christian practice.
What an absolutely abhorrent practice to call out a persons name that has passed away and baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Wow, I can't think of anything more abhorrent that this.It's met with disgust because it's an abhorrent practice
They held councils, giving him and his party a chance to explain themselves, and when that explanation was found to be severely lacking and he and his party refused to recant from it, he and they were condemned as heretics.
Then why do you pick it out only from a handful of verses at random? Why is it not found over and over throughout the Biblical text, the fathers, and so on? Did the same God Who loves the world so much that He sent His only begotten Son to save it also hate it so much that He would hide the 'meat', only to be revealed beginning in 1830 AD? That's not the God I recognize, and I suspect all Christians could say the same.
Maybe that's why you hide it away from everyone. Does it make you feel ashamed?
Are you saying, following Elijah (somehow), that if you didn't perform baptisms for dead people, God would curse the earth?
How do you explain how they earth remained uncursed for the 1,000+ years between our earliest written patristic references to this practice (e.g., among the Gnostics of St. John Chrysostom's day, in the late 4th-early 5th century) and when JS supposedly 'restored' the Church in 1830? Because we know from the references we have that this was never an accepted practice in the Church.
If this is the father that you think is rejected the idea of baptizing people for the dead, it is laughable too.True. You can also understand claims about baptizing dead people being justified by this verse like HH St. John Chrysostom did back in the late 4th/early 5th century, and laugh at those who read the scriptures that way because they're so detached from reality and from faith in Christ. That's fine too.
And I know indeed that I shall excite much laughter; nevertheless, even on this account most of all I will mention it that you may the more completely avoid this disease: viz., when any Catechumen departs among them, having concealed the living man under the couch of the dead,like men jesting upon the stage. So great power hath the devil over the souls of careless sinners. Then being called to account, they allege this expression, saying that even the Apostle hath said, “They who are baptized for the dead.” Seest thou their extreme ridiculousness? Is it meet then to answer these things? I trow not; unless it were necessary to discourse with madmen of what they in their frenzy utter. But that none of the more exceedingly simple folk may be led captive, one must needs submit to answer even these men. As thus, if this was Paul’s meaning wherefore did God threaten him that is not baptized? For it is impossible that any should not be baptized henceforth, this being once devised: and besides, the fault no longer lies with the dead, but with the living. But to whom spake he, “Unless ye eat My flesh, and drink My blood, ye have no life in yourselves?” (John vi. 53.) To the living, or to the dead, tell me? And again, “Unless a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cable annot see the kingdom of God.” (John iii. 5.) For if this be permitted, and there be no need of the mind of the receiver nor of his assent while he lives, what hinders both Greeks and Jews thus to become believers, other men after their decease doing these things in their stead?they approach the corpse and talk with him, and ask him if he wishes to receive baptism; then when he makes no answer, he that is concealed underneath saith in his stead that of course he should wish to be baptized; and so they baptize him instead of the departed,
We know the real truth of the election.
You should want to face reality that spirits are angels and angels are spirits. The Bible states:Why does it not surprise me that you guys are Trumpers! Reality stinks at times, but reality is where God lives, not in the fantasies of men. Some people can not face reality. Trumpers and Mormons -- how fitting that both believe in a vile, demented, lecherous man who lives in a fantasy world!
Yes God is a resurrected spiritual being:I know what the bible says about angels. I'm 70 years old and have studied the BIBLE. I do not go by what man thinks about them, certainly not what JS and others think about them. And I know what the bible says about God---Jesus said He is spirit, and you guys say He is not. I know you have never been able to prove your believes with the bible so I find anything you guys have to say about any subject, mostly wrong. I am, once again, needing to get away from all the false baloney your group and others spew. I have to take a break every once in a while as it is too frustrating to listen to all the false doctrines all the time, and how the scriptures get twisted to fit your theories. I will probably be gone for a while---we've gone over this stuff several times over the years and I will not change my mind and start believing in all the junk you guys teach!
Yes God is a resurrected spiritual being:
(New Testament | 1 Corinthians 15:43 - 46)
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
God has a spiritual body.
You don't know that God the Father did not become human at some point, Jesus did and He is a God. Jesus is also from everlasting to everlasting. Jesus is the only Son begotten in the flesh as He has NO earthly father. That being said we all have one Father:Your Father God is a resurrected being---Our Father God never died, therefore, was never resurrected! He was never created, He was never born, He was never a man who became God, He is from everlasting to everlasting. The Father God has no wife, and has only One True Son, we are adopted Children of the Father. Natural children need no adoption. Jesus was God with the Father from always. He is the creator of all things, from nothing=--He became human and came to die for our sins. He was resurrected, and has a glorified human body as we will have. God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost=ONE GOD.
Joh_4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Your father god can be anything you want---ours is ONLY uncreated, never human, never resurrected--only Jesus, His Only Son, was born of woman as a man, yet fully God and died for our sins and wasx resurrected. We do not serve the same God.
You don't know that God the Father did not become human at some point, Jesus did and He is a God.
I believe that Jesus could not have completed the atonement if He had an earthly father. He would have died in the garden of Gethsemane.This is specious reasoning. Not only do we not know that God the Father did not do lots of stuff (since proving a negative is impossible and all), but if we were to assume that God the Father did at some point become incarnate, then why would His Son have to have done so at any point later on? Why not just have your Mormon God the Father do everything?
This is why I've been saying for basically as long as I've been interacting with Mormons here that you guys completely miss the point of the incarnation -- indeed, it can be fairly argued that you don't even really have an event you can call "the incarnation", since the incarnation of your Jesus figure is in no way unique, since, as has been explained to me here by Mormons, it was nothing more than a depthless imitation of what he had seen his father do before him, which is...well, it's not Christianity, I'll just put it that way.
Jesus is the only begotten Son of the Father born to a virgin named Mary.But my question is certainly not "What if Jesus had an earthly father?", but rather "What is so special or unique about the incarnation of the Word of God if God Himself is already incarnate?" You can't really have an incarnation in that context. If one is already incarnate, their continuing to be incarnate is no great feat, or even any kind of event.
Jesus is the only begotten Son of the Father born to a virgin named Mary.
You don't know that God the Father did not become human at some point, Jesus did and He is a God. Jesus is also from everlasting to everlasting. Jesus is the only Son begotten in the flesh as He has NO earthly father. That being said we all have one Father:
(New Testament | Matthew 23:8 - 10)
8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
(Old Testament | Psalms 82:6)
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in unity, glory, and perfection:
(New Testament | Ephesians 4:13 - 14)
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
(New Testament | John 17:21 - 23)
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
Not that Joseph Smith was a scientist, but there is a book https://www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-Scientist-Widtsoe-John/dp/1594628122 which shows that Joseph Smith did know much about the universe.
Continuing on with those verses:LOL! So, there may be one born to a virgin Esther?!! Your foolishness makes my head hurt!
Wrong---we know our God was never human! Your god was human, ours never was. Ours never had a father, He is from everlasting to everlasting and never died for the sins of others--Your god can not create from nothing ours can. Your Jesus is only one of his father's children---Ours is the ONLY TRUE SON OF GOD, we are His children through adoption. Our Father God has no wife--Your father god has at least one, probably many. We are not a product of the father god and one of his wives, We are the children of Adam created by God and Eve, created by God, who was given the gift of procreation to bring children forth as the creator commanded.
We are brothers to Jesus only through His humanity from Mary, we do not share His divinity from His Father. Jesus was God before becoming human, as such He is the creator of Lucifer and in no way His brother. So, NO!--we do not worship the same Father God, nor His Only Son, Jesus. This has been said countless times and y0u reject it. There is only so many times one can reject the truth before the Holy Spirit is driven away---that is the sin that can not be forgiven--for without the Holy Spirit, we have no way to get back to the Father, and end up:
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.