LDS Question - How did the first church fail?

[evanfaust]

Well, it was more of trying to get clarification. I was under the impression that the History was not a doctrine setting document, so I wasn’t sure if the LDS embraced this idea or whether it was just looked upon as quaint thought.

This seems to be one of the gray areas of Mormonism, because you can disclaim BY (like the previous post) and say, JS’s statements about John are correct.

I find this system to be a bowl full of mix nuts. You can pick out what you want and leave the rest for someone else.

Xavier,
Joseph Smith statements about John is in a cannonical book “Doctrine & Covenants”, which is considered scriptures for us. Brigham Young statement about Mary is not in D & C and it is not shared by the main body of the church not it is preached to members.

 

[Xavierlives]

Xavier,
Joseph Smith statements about John is in a cannonical book “Doctrine & Covenants”, which is considered scriptures for us. Brigham Young statement about Mary is not in D & C and it is not shared by the main body of the church not it is preached to members.

Ahh… Maybe need to learn your abbreviations. I thought it said HC.

EDIT: err… post #1200 does say HC. What is HC?

 

[paul_c]

Paul,
I don’t know where you got the date for the book of Daniel, but according to this site Daniel was written around 640 BC.

mediahistory.umn.edu/archive/biblicalDates.html

The book of Syrach and Maccabees are considered apocrypha by many groups. These two books were not written by prophets.

The Book of Sirach, or the Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, is a book in the Apocrypha. It is also known as Ecclesiasticus (“church book”) because of its wide use among Greek and Latin Christians in moral instruction. Classified among the wisdom writings, the book was written in Hebrew at Jerusalem c. 180 BC by a learned teacher, Jesus ben Sirach, and was translated into Greek in Egypt with a preface by his grandson not long after 132 BC.

The first book of Maccabees is a book written by a Jewish author after the restoration of an independent Jewish kingdom, probably about 100 BC. It is held as Deuterocanonical scripture by both the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Protestantism and modern-day Judaism holds it an apocryphal book.

Evan, I got the date for Daniel from the intro to that book in the NAB: usccb.org/nab/bible/daniel/intro.htm

The deuterocanonical books were always part of the Catholic Canon. Martin Luther, removed them from the Protestant Canon because he didnt agree with their theology. So, to say there are no scriptures for 500 years is not true from the Catholic Point of view. And it is clear that there are many new testament references the Deuterocanonical books as well, emonstrating that they were known and followed by the Apostles.
scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

Paul,
Even if we consider your numbers, they are still very small compared to the population of the world. So, my argument still holds…Catholics still cannot penetrate in every home…in reality you still need to catch up with 80% of the population using your most optimistic figures. We still have to explain what is going to happen to those billions who never heard of Catholicism that already died. Will they go to hell? Are they lost forever? The LDS explanation is a lot more comfortable and makes more sense, which is the redemption of the dead, something that even the early fathers believed.

The Catholic church does teach that Jesus preached to the dead so that all men and all times heard the message.: scborromeo.org/ccc/p122a5p1.htm#p1

This is how judgement works and what we know about heaven, hell, and purgatory:
scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm#I

Paul,
The gospel is being preached in the spirit world to the dead and they need the ordinances like baptism. Many billions died without baptism! The Catholic church does not perform any ordinances to the dead!

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. 1 Peter 3:18-20

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. 1 Peter 4:6

Partial judgement…we will continue to live after death and will be responsible for our actions before the resurrection,

Evan,
Why would we need to be baptized for the dead? What about the dead in your theology would not allow them to be baptized for themselves. After all, if they can be preached to, why would they be reliant on someone on earth being baptized for them. Wouldn’t that be unfair to the forgotten souls whose families had died out for whatever reason?

And why is it that you allow baptism for the dead but not for infants? Neither apparently can make a choice for themselves but are reliant on the faith of their relatives.

 

[evanfaust]

Ahh… Maybe need to learn your abbreviations. I thought it said HC.

EDIT: err… post #1200 does say HC. What is HC?

Xavier,
The HC means History of the Church, but that is only listed as reference. In other words, the D & C 7 that I pasted on post 1200 contains the details and refers to HC. What I pasted is the content of D & C 7.

 

[sablouwho]

Wouldn’t that be unfair to the forgotten souls whose families had died out for whatever reason?

Paul, I am obviously not Evan, nor am I even LDS, but I will pass on to you what I remember being taught when I was an investigator. Basically, I was told that in the Millenium, Christ himself will be in charge, and he will make sure that any “forgotten” person will get a proxy baptism.

Now, at the time I was taught this, I was an a-millenialist. And a “generic Christian”. (I *still *AM an a-millentialist, though I’m Catholic at heart now, if not yet officially). So the concept of a literal Millenium didn’t make sense to me.

But that is, I believe, what the LDS teaches. If I am wrong, I hope a current LDS member will correct me.

 

[paul_c]

Paul, I am obviously not Evan, nor am I even LDS, but I will pass on to you what I remember being taught when I was an investigator. Basically, I was told that in the Millenium, Christ himself will be in charge, and he will make sure that any “forgotten” person will get a proxy baptism.

Now, at the time I was taught this, I was an a-millenialist. And a “generic Christian”. (I *still *AM an a-millentialist, though I’m Catholic at heart now, if not yet officially). So the concept of a literal Millenium didn’t make sense to me.

But that is, I believe, what the LDS teaches. If I am wrong, I hope a current LDS member will correct me.

If they can be preached to after death, and if they can be saved after death, why do they need to have someone baptized for them. I don’t get the linkage.

 

[sablouwho]

If they can be preached to after death, and if they can be saved after death, why do they need to have someone baptized for them. I don’t get the linkage.

As I understand the LDS view, the actual baptism itself is STILL a *necessary *ordinance (LDS ordinances are like Catholic sacraments) in order to get out of spirit prison. The view appears to be that baptism is necessary for everyone. This is in contrast to what I understand of the Catholic position–which is that while baptism is the norm, that baptism of desire (or baptism by blood, for that matter) is sufficient.

I think the reasoning behind the baptism being by proxy is because since the dead person is a spirit, and lacks a body and therefore the baptism must happen here on earth and not in the spirit world.

 

[ricko]

Ricko,

Then you have some explaining to do, because that is in the Bible!

Not I my friend, I did not make the conflicting statements as I pointed out earlier.

 

[Art321]

Hmmm…

Why in the world hasn’t the thread been closed??? I thought the limit of a number of posts was 1000.

 

[evanfaust]

Evan, I got the date for Daniel from the intro to that book in the NAB: usccb.org/nab/bible/daniel/intro.htm.

Paul,
Daniel lived around 600 BC and many scholars think that he is the author of the book.
To believe that the book was written 300 years after his life and experiences does not make sense. Besdes, the revelations really happened during the times of Daniel and he must have kept some record of his revelations.

Conservative Christians generally believe that the book was written by Daniel himself in the 6th century. This is confirmed in a number of verses. e.g.

Daniel 7:1: “Then he wrote down the dream. and here his account begins.”

Daniel 7:28: “…as for me, Daniel, my thoughts dismayed me greatly…”

Daniel 8:1: “…a vision appeared to me, Daniel, following my earlier vision.”

Daniel 9:2: “I, Daniel, was reading the scriptures…”

Daniel 10:2: “At that time I, Daniel, mourned for thee whole weeks…”

Daniel 12:5: “I, Daniel, looked and saw two others standing…”

Jesus verified that the book was written by Daniel. In Matthew 24:15, he states “So, when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ of which the prophet Daniel spoke, standing in the holy place…then those who are in Judea must take to the hills.”

The early Christian church generally accepted the authorship of Daniel in the 6th century without question. Essentially all Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christians believe the same today

religioustolerance.org/daniel.htm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel

 

[evanfaust]

The deuterocanonical books were always part of the Catholic Canon. Martin Luther, removed them from the Protestant Canon because he didnt agree with their theology. So, to say there are no scriptures for 500 years is not true from the Catholic Point of view. And it is clear that there are many new testament references the Deuterocanonical books as well, emonstrating that they were known and followed by the Apostles.
scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

.

Paul,
Ecclesiasticus and Maccabee are considered apocripha by Jewish, Protestants and Mormons. Having similar phrases or expressions does not make a book cannonical, you can find the same on many apocripha. I don’t see evidence that the these books were preached by the apostles. Again, I don’t see evidence of revelation or prophets during the 500 years.

 

[Xavierlives]

Paul,
Daniel lived around 600 BC and many scholars think that he is the author of the book.
To believe that the book was written 300 years after his life and experiences does not make sense. Besdes, the revelations really happened during the times of Daniel and he must have kept some record of his revelations.

Conservative Christians generally believe that the book was written by Daniel himself in the 6th century. This is confirmed in a number of verses. e.g.

Daniel 7:1: “Then he wrote down the dream. and here his account begins.”

Daniel 7:28: “…as for me, Daniel, my thoughts dismayed me greatly…”

Daniel 8:1: “…a vision appeared to me, Daniel, following my earlier vision.”

Daniel 9:2: “I, Daniel, was reading the scriptures…”

Daniel 10:2: “At that time I, Daniel, mourned for thee whole weeks…”

Daniel 12:5: “I, Daniel, looked and saw two others standing…”

Jesus verified that the book was written by Daniel. In Matthew 24:15, he states “So, when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ of which the prophet Daniel spoke, standing in the holy place…then those who are in Judea must take to the hills.”

The early Christian church generally accepted the authorship of Daniel in the 6th century without question. Essentially all Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christians believe the same today

religioustolerance.org/daniel.htm

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel

Well, I think I’ve heard around 540 BC.

 

[evanfaust]

Why would we need to be baptized for the dead? What about the dead in your theology would not allow them to be baptized for themselves. After all, if they can be preached to, why would they be reliant on someone on earth being baptized for them. Wouldn’t that be unfair to the forgotten souls whose families had died out for whatever reason?

And why is it that you allow baptism for the dead but not for infants? Neither apparently can make a choice for themselves but are reliant on the faith of their relatives.

Paul,

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. John 3:5

When we reach an age of accountability we need to enter into a covenant with the Lord throgh baptism and become clean again. We also need to be born of the spirit, which you are entitled when you are baptized. The baptism in the LDS church is done the same way as the early church: by immersion for someone with authority from God, and the gift of the Holly Ghost is also given by laying on of hands by a priesthood holder.

What are the pre-requisites for baptism?

1 - Belief "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Mark 16:16

2 - Repentance for remission of sins"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Act 2:37

Can an infant: believe, commit sin or repent? NO. The original sin from Adam is washed away with the atonement of Christ. So, baptism is for people that are accountable for their actions, who is able to commit sin and repent. We should not be responsible for Adam’s transgression, Christ took care of that! We are responsible for our own sins and not for the sins of someone else.

A spirit cannot perfom the ordinances on their own. These ordinances have to be done by someone in the physical world. Elijah had the keys of the sealing power and he appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1836 in the Kirtland Temple to pass on these keys.

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse." Mal 4:5-6

When we baptize our ancestors in the Temple, we are turning our hearts to our fathers. When they accept the baptism, our ancestors will be turning their hearts to us, the children.

This is a vicarious or proxy ordinance. The atonement of Chris is a proxy ordinance for mankind. He interceded for our salvation. We, in an smaller scale, are responsible to perform some ordinances for our ancestors, participating this way in their salvation.

 

[paul_c]

Paul,

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. John 3:5

When we reach an age of accountability we need to enter into a covenant with the Lord throgh baptism and become clean again. We also need to be born of the spirit, which you are entitled when you are baptized. The baptism in the LDS church is done the same way as the early church: by immersion for someone with authority from God, and the gift of the Holly Ghost is also given by laying on of hands by a priesthood holder.

What are the pre-requisites for baptism?

1 - Belief "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Mark 16:16

2 - Repentance for remission of sins"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Act 2:37

Can an infant: believe, commit sin or repent? NO. The original sin from Adam is washed away with the atonement of Christ. So, baptism is for people that are accountable for their actions, who is able to commit sin and repent.

A spirit cannot perfom the ordinances on their own. These ordinances have to be done by someone in the physical world. Elijah had the keys of the sealing power and he appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in 1836 in the Kirtland Temple to pass on these keys.

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse." Mal 4:5-6

When we baptize our ancestors in the Temple, we are turning our hearts to our fathers. When they accept the baptism, our ancestors will be turning their hearts to us, the children.

This is a vicarious or proxy ordinance. The atonement of Chris is a proxy ordinance for mankind. He interceded for our salvation. We, in an smaller scale, are responsible to perform some ordinances for our ancestors, participating this way in their salvation.

Can a dead person beleive, commit sin or repent?

 

[Xavierlives]

Can a dead person beleive, commit sin or repent?

The part that is harder for me to digest than that is, someone can be responsible for millions of deaths in WWII and wammo! Baptized and he is good to go.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[TheosisM]

The part that is harder for me to digest than that is, someone can be responsible for millions of deaths in WWII and wammo! Baptized and he is good to go.

What do you mean by “good to go”?

 

[evanfaust]

Not I my friend, I did not make the conflicting statements as I pointed out earlier.

Ricko,
I can find many conflicting statements from the Bible using your system. We need to consider the context in which is statament is being made. In addition, I quoted a scripture to back up my statement. Now, it is a matter of believing if Paul statement is true. You will have to find another interpretation for it or deny the Bible. It is not going to be easy, since the statement is quite clear.

 

[evanfaust]

Can a dead person beleive, commit sin or repent?

Paul,
Yes!

 

[evanfaust]

The part that is harder for me to digest than that is, someone can be responsible for millions of deaths in WWII and wammo! Baptized and he is good to go.

Xavier,
One thing is to perform the baptism ordinance for someone, but it is up to that person to accept or reject the baptism. In addition, the dead person will have the same spirit when it leaves the physical world.

 

[evanfaust]

Paul, I am obviously not Evan, nor am I even LDS, but I will pass on to you what I remember being taught when I was an investigator. Basically, I was told that in the Millenium, Christ himself will be in charge, and he will make sure that any “forgotten” person will get a proxy baptism.

Now, at the time I was taught this, I was an a-millenialist. And a “generic Christian”. (I *still *AM an a-millentialist, though I’m Catholic at heart now, if not yet officially). So the concept of a literal Millenium didn’t make sense to me.

But that is, I believe, what the LDS teaches. If I am wrong, I hope a current LDS member will correct me.

Sablouwho,
That is correct! They will be many resurrected beings assisting in providing names for the ordinances of every single person that lived on this earth. The milenium will be a period of intense labor for our ancestors that are on the other side and that will have not received their ordinances. But we are busy right now perfoming these ordinances in over 140 temples throughout the world. Many hundred of millions have received their ordinances to this point.