The Book of Mormon... have you read it?

[zerinus]

Wow! I’m gone for a half day and all of a sudden four pages of posts behind. After reading and catching up on what has transpired with this mushrooming thread, I found it more than a bit curious that there was no challenge (unless I missed it) to the assertion by one of the LDS contributors that baptism outside the LDS church was not valid. I found that claim to be astounding, unbelievable and preposterous. Unless I misinterpreted what was stated, how can Mormons not only stand on such a notion, but essentially simultaneously nullify all the multitude of baptisms (surely in the billions of people) in the preceding 1850 years (prior to the invention of the Mormon religion) that were performed “in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”? Sounds like the LDS church is painting with a rather broad brush by asserting the only a Mormon baptism is a valid baptism. So, will you Mormons out there clarify this for me? Is this what you truly believe?

Yes, that is indeed what we believe.

And you others out there, non-Mormons (especially Catholics), what say you?

They obviously wouldn’t agree with it. What else did you expect them to say?

Personally, it doesn’t bother me considering the source; i.e. as a four year convert, I know, and am comfortable, where the truth lies. I put all my trust in the Bible, not some other manufactured tome fabricated by an uneducated, inarticulate, illiterate con man who was once sued by the U.S. government for fraud. Oh, by the way, that would be JS.

Jesus was also called “Beelzebub”. His reply to them was, “O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh” (Matthew 12:34).

 

[Christian55]

What, you have a problem with someone actually going to the Mormons to find out what the Mormons believe?

Not if Mormons would teach what they believe “up front.” As I said before, I have been down this road. About 12 years ago, I took the lessons from the Mormon missionaries-the Bishop was a good friend of mine. I eventually was Baptized into the Mormon Church, only to find that the true beliefs were nothing like Christianity. It was really quite astounding. I felt deceived and betrayed. I left the Mormon Church.

By the way, you ARE aware that Zundrah wouldn’t be allowed to go into the Temple, right? She would have a lovely time at the visitor’s center, though.

Of course, I am.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Mormons rebaptize everyone, even dead people. They do not accept the doctrine of the Trinity. Their baptisms lack proper understanding and intent, and so they are not valid. Rebaptizing a Christian, has no effect, as a person only needs one baptism. One faith, one baptism.

As for authority, they are like a teenager in rebellion, who refuse to accept the authority that Christ gave to His Church. JS fired up his own religion, that has no apostolic authority, or belief for that matter. This is no different than thousands of denominations that have done the same.

 

[dianaiad]

When did the great apostacy happen? What year was it dianaiad?

Lessee…I’d say about the year 79 AD. Or not.

Apostasy is a process, not a discrete event. It was beginning in the NT times–certainly many of the letters written by the apostles were to combat erroneous teachings. People were teaching and believing different things from the beginning–else why write the letters?

Nothing too awful, of course, and as long as the apostles were there (and the priesthood was there) to write corrective letters, it was certainly no problem. I would place the final bit at the time everybody agreed that there was no more revelation; that they were on their own.

Others might put it at a different point…but I’ll tell you what, Zundrah…when was the fall of Rome? What exact date did that happen? What is the precise point, and date, when Rome was no longer 'Rome?"

 

[usemelord]

So, Zerinus, you do indeed believe that a Mormon baptism and only a Mormon baptism is valid. Then what of the billions of people, as I noted in my earlier post, who were baptized prior to the emergence of the Mormon religion? Are they somehow magically and retroactively “unbaptized” simply by virtue of your belief, or does it only apply to non-Mormons baptized subsequent to the “birth” of your church? Can anyone else chime in on this, please? And, just for purposes of friendly discussion, what would you do if you were in my shoes? Go running to the nearest LDS church? (By the way, don’t keep the doors open for me.)

 

[dianaiad]

So, Zerinus, you do indeed believe that a Mormon baptism and only a Mormon baptism is valid. Then what of the billions of people, as I noted in my earlier post, who were baptized prior to the emergence of the Mormon religion? Are they somehow magically and retroactively “unbaptized” simply by virtue of your belief, or does it only apply to non-Mormons baptized subsequent to the “birth” of your church? Can anyone else chime in on this, please? And, just for purposes of friendly discussion, what would you do if you were in my shoes? Go running to the nearest LDS church? (By the way, don’t keep the doors open for me.)

We believe that, yes.

As to what happens to everybody else? Well, unlike most Christian sects I have come across who believe that baptism is required, we do NOT think that all unbaptized people are headed for hell.

We do believe that each and every person who has ever lived will have a full and fair chance to learn of Christ and accept or reject Him.

…and if I were you, I would call the missionaries and have a good listen. THEN I would head for the nearest LDS church.

 

[usemelord]

dianaiad, thank you so much for your prompt response. I’ve enjoyed all your previous posts on this and other threads very much because you are obviously well-educated and articulate in expressing your opinions. As for those who have “ever lived” having a full and fair chance to accept or reject Christ, do you mean to say that that even applies after death? That is to say, even if one has lead a very unchristian life (adultery, blasphemy, atheism, and all the rest) that they will have one last shot at accepting Christ even after they’ve died? If that is your belief, then why do I bother going to church at all, not to mention tithing and helping the homeless, etc.? As for your kind invitation to run to the nearest LDS church for baptism, that won’t be happening any time soon, thank you. I’ve had more than my fair share of exposure to Mormons and their beliefs, and, with all due respect, find nothing at all attractive about it.

 

[ParkerD]

So, Zerinus, you do indeed believe that a Mormon baptism and only a Mormon baptism is valid. Then what of the billions of people, as I noted in my earlier post, who were baptized prior to the emergence of the Mormon religion? Are they somehow magically and retroactively “unbaptized” simply by virtue of your belief, or does it only apply to non-Mormons baptized subsequent to the “birth” of your church? Can anyone else chime in on this, please? And, just for purposes of friendly discussion, what would you do if you were in my shoes? Go running to the nearest LDS church? (By the way, don’t keep the doors open for me.)

UsemeLord,
You asked about others chiming in, so I would like to add some perspective.

Baptism is received by a person as an act of faith in Christ and an outward sign of their repentance, and then because they have shown that faith and repentance, they receive the gift of the Holy Ghost and the Holy Ghost gives them the baptism of fire and the process of sanctification so they can be purified.

If those things didn’t happen to a person who was baptized, then even though they may have had totally good intentions and the priest did also, then something fell short of the intent according to the teachings of the New Testament about the purposes of baptism and the covenants of the gospel. Baptism is the beginning of a complete change of being for the person to become a “new creature” or to have a “second birth.”

Baptism also has to do with the books of judgment being opened at the day of judgment, and if it were me I would want to be on a valid list of names under valid authority that I absolutely knew was valid authority directly from God, not assumed authority.

This is not to say that good intentions are invalid in the eyes of God. It is just to say as has been noted, that the validity of baptisms becomes important at judgment day so the good intentions will be backed up by valid and complete “stamps of approval” by God. It is a topic that is deeper than meets the eye at first glance. Have a good evening.

 

[Stephen168]

…when was the fall of Rome? What exact date did that happen?

What is your definition: When the empire spilt? Constantinople fell to the Muslims? Barbarian king?

What is the precise point, and date, when Rome was no longer 'Rome?"

Never

 

[Musician]

Original question was have I read the Book of Mormon…
I tried to, but it is such a jumble of mishmash that it made me laugh. I tossed it in the garbage where it belongs.

 

[zerinus]

So, Zerinus, you do indeed believe that a Mormon baptism and only a Mormon baptism is valid. Then what of the billions of people, as I noted in my earlier post, who were baptized prior to the emergence of the Mormon religion? Are they somehow magically and retroactively “unbaptized” simply by virtue of your belief, or does it only apply to non-Mormons baptized subsequent to the “birth” of your church?

We believe that the original Christian church, early on in its history, went into apostasy, and lost the priesthood authority that it possessed. From that point on none of the sacraments, including baptisms, performed by it were valid in the sight of God. That includes not only baptisms but also ordinations and all the other sacraments of the gospel that are necessary for the salvation of man. So in answer to your question: “what of the billions of people . . . who were baptized prior to the emergence of the Mormon religion? Are they somehow magically and retroactively ‘unbaptized’?” The answer is that they were never baptized in the first place that they should be “unbaptized”! The original baptisms performed were not valid; which means that to all intents and purposes they were not baptized at all! But all is not lost. Through the keys of the priesthood that has been restored vicarious baptisms can be performed for them in our temples by which means they can be redeemed just as if they had been baptized in person during their lifetime here on earth. So, as many of them who lived righteous lives can be saved; and the sacraments can be performed for them by proxy in our temples, which you might have already heard about.

Can anyone else chime in on this, please? And, just for purposes of friendly discussion, what would you do if you were in my shoes? Go running to the nearest LDS church?

Yes—if you want to get a valid baptism that is!

(By the way, don’t keep the doors open for me.)

We keep the door open for everybody. It is up to them whether they choose to enter into it or not.

 

[usemelord]

ParkerD, I basically agree with everything you defined regarding baptism, its effects and so forth, but then you went on to speak of “valid authority” without being specific as to what is valid authority as opposed to invalid authority, or, as you put it, “assumed authority.” Based on the previous posts of LDS contributors I’m surmising that only the LDS church represents “valid authority,” right? If that’s your position, I just can’t buy it. Prior to the existence of the LDS church (and even after for that matter) were all baptisms performed by, according to your definition, those who only had “assumed authority”? If this is what the LDS church purports, again it’s something I can’t swallow. I’m holding fast to the church which has a proven track record so to speak, not to one which is basically a start-up church, especially one that has tacked on the Book of Mormon. The Bible is quite sufficient for me, nothing more–nothing less.

 

[zerinus]

ParkerD, I basically agree with everything you defined regarding baptism, its effects and so forth, but then you went on to speak of “valid authority” without being specific as to what is valid authority as opposed to invalid authority, or, as you put it, “assumed authority.” Based on the previous posts of LDS contributors I’m surmising that only the LDS church represents “valid authority,” right? If that’s your position, I just can’t buy it. Prior to the existence of the LDS church (and even after for that matter) were all baptisms performed by, according to your definition, those who only had “assumed authority”?

See my previous post; it answers your questions as well.

If this is what the LDS church purports, again it’s something I can’t swallow. I’m holding fast to the church which has a proven track record so to speak, not to one which is basically a start-up church, especially one that has tacked on the Book of Mormon. The Bible is quite sufficient for me, nothing more–nothing less.

You are perfectly entitled to hold to that opinion; but it is not one that we agree with.

 

[ricko]

The baptisms by the LDS are not valid even though they claim them to be. They ignore what scripture really says about the Apostasy. Fact is, it hasn’t happened yet. And when it does happen, even though there will be “A great falling away” the Church will still stand.

The bible says that if you and your brother have a problem to “tell it to the Church”. Yet a person living in the 18th century would have trouble doing that because according to the Mormons the Church did not exist. Which puts Jesus in a bad light. But of course when the Mormons are caught with big discrepancies as this one they can ad lib and say, the Church did not loose ALL functions and they could have performed the task. Their religion is something cause you can make it up as you go.

 

[PaulDupre]

[The Book of Mormon] Doesn’t talk about “great cities” …

Really, Parker?? Have you never really read the Book of Mormon?

18 And it came to pass that because of so much contention and so much difficulty in the government, that they had not kept sufficient guards in the land of Zarahemla; for they had supposed that the Lamanites durst not come into the heart of their lands to attack that great city Zarahemla.

• Heleman 1:18

14 And many great and notable cities were sunk, and many were burned, and many were shaken till the buildings thereof had fallen to the earth, and the inhabitants thereof were slain, and the places were left desolate.
15 And there were some cities which remained; but the damage thereof was exceedingly great, and there were many in them who were slain.

• 3 Nephi 8:14-15

25 And in another place they were heard to cry and mourn, saying: O that we had repented before this great and terrible day, and had not killed and stoned the prophets, and cast them out; then would our mothers and our fair daughters, and our children have been spared, and not have been buried up in that great city Moronihah. And thus were the howlings of the people great and terrible.

• 3 Nephi 8:25

3 Behold, **that great city Zarahemla **have I burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof.
4 And behold, **that great city Moroni **have I caused to be sunk in the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof to be drowned.
5 And behold, **that great city Moronihah **have I covered with earth, and the inhabitants thereof, to hide their iniquities and their abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come any more unto me against them.

-3 Nephi 9:3-5

9 And thus ended the eleventh year of the judges, the Lamanites having been driven out of the land, and the people of Ammonihah were destroyed; yea, every living soul of the Ammonihahites was destroyed, and also their great city, which they said God could not destroy, because of its greatness.

• Alma 16:9

20 **And they built a great city **by the anarrow neck of land, by the place where the sea divides the land.

• Ether 10:20

22 And for this cause wo shall come unto you except ye shall repent. For if ye will not repent, behold, this great city, and also all those great cities which are round about, which are in the land of our possession, shall be taken away that ye shall have no place in them; for behold, the Lord will not grant unto you strength, as he has hitherto done, to withstand against your enemies.

-Heleman 7:22

1 And again, I, Alma, having been commanded of God that I should take Amulek and go forth and preach again unto this people, or the people who were in the city of Ammonihah, it came to pass as I began to preach unto them, they began to contend with me, saying:
• • •
4 And they said also: We will not believe thy words if thou shouldst prophesy that this great city should be destroyed in one day.

• Alma 9:1,4

2 Now the Lamanites and the Amalekites and the people of Amulon had built a great city, which was called Jerusalem.

• Alma 21:2

5 Therefore they did cry unto the people, saying: Why do you suffer this man to revile against us? For behold he doth condemn all this people, even unto destruction; yea, and also that these **our great cities **shall be taken from us, that we shall have no place in them.
6 And now we know that this is impossible, for behold, we are powerful, and our cities great, therefore our enemies can have no power over us.

• Heleman 8:5-6

 

[dianaiad]

dianaiad, thank you so much for your prompt response. I’ve enjoyed all your previous posts on this and other threads very much because you are obviously well-educated and articulate in expressing your opinions. As for those who have “ever lived” having a full and fair chance to accept or reject Christ, do you mean to say that that even applies after death? That is to say, even if one has lead a very unchristian life (adultery, blasphemy, atheism, and all the rest) that they will have one last shot at accepting Christ even after they’ve died? If that is your belief, then why do I bother going to church at all, not to mention tithing and helping the homeless, etc.? As for your kind invitation to run to the nearest LDS church for baptism, that won’t be happening any time soon, thank you. I’ve had more than my fair share of exposure to Mormons and their beliefs, and, with all due respect, find nothing at all attractive about it.

We believe that all faiths have some measure of truth in them, and that everyone will be judged according to their faith in the truths that they know; I know very few religions that think it is just ducky to be adulterous, uncharitable or the other sins you mention; it would behoove all people to be the best they can be according to their various faiths.

That said, yes, we do believe it applies to everybody, even after death. It is why we do proxy baptism for the dead. We do not believe that salvation is a free ride; we leave that to the ‘name it and claim it’ bunch. If you know the truth, and what Christ wants of your life, then true faith will prompt you to behave the way He wants you to. Including feeding the hungry, aiding the homeless and yes, paying tithing.

One thing you should know; we believe that everybody has one full and fair chance. Which means, of course, that if you have had that HERE, there is no guarantee that you will be offered it again after you croak.

Diana

 

[dianaiad]

What is your definition: When the empire spilt? Constantinople fell to the Muslims? Barbarian king?

Never

Kinda my point, Stephen. Yet we are supposed to provide you a specific date for the apostasy? Sorry, no can do–it was a gradual process. The only thing that could possibly be identified as to exact date would be the death of the last holder of the priesthood. We don’t know when that was, but it would have been within a hundred years of the death of the last apostle, we believe.

 

[usemelord]

dianaiad, salvation after death? I just don’t get it. Is that biblical?? If so, please cite book, chapter and verse. I’d be very interested in that. And, when I say biblical, I’m requesting a passage from the Bible, not the Book of Mormon to which I give no weight. I may be wrong, but I think this is just another concept dreamed up by the LDS church. After we “croak,” as you so humorously put it, I believe the poor soul is lost forever if he/she failed to accept Christ before the heart beat its last beat.

 

[Stephen168]

Kinda my point, Stephen. Yet we are supposed to provide you a specific date for the apostasy? Sorry, no can do–it was a gradual process. The only thing that could possibly be identified as to exact date would be the death of the last holder of the priesthood. We don’t know when that was, but it would have been within a hundred years of the death of the last apostle, we believe.

yes, if it is a true historical event you should be able to provide a date. But the apostasy isn’t, so you can’t. If you believe Rome fell because of a specific event, the date of the event is known. The Apostasy is nothing but an ahistorical Mormon belief. Trying to use the ‘fall of Rome’ as an analogy is laughable.

 

[dianaiad]

dianaiad, salvation after death? I just don’t get it. Is that biblical?? If so, please cite book, chapter and verse. I’d be very interested in that. And, when I say biblical, I’m requesting a passage from the Bible, not the Book of Mormon to which I give no weight. I may be wrong, but I think this is just another concept dreamed up by the LDS church. After we “croak,” as you so humorously put it, I believe the poor soul is lost forever if he/she failed to accept Christ before the heart beat its last beat.

I believe that it is biblical–it is certainly alluded to when Paul wrote to the Galatians about faith…that Abraham believed in God, and it was “accounted to him for righteousness” (chapter 3 v 6) In other words, Abraham, who most certainly never had the chance to hear about and accept Christ while in life, was nevertheless counted as ‘righteous’ (saved…) because he believed in God and lived his religion the way he was supposed to.

Now here’s the thing, Useme–I don’t do proof text debates.

I’m not out to show you that our beliefs are TRUE. I can only explain what they are and why we believe them. In order to do that, I may have to give you quotes from books that we accept as scripture, even if you don’t. Whether you believe them to be true or not is your choice and option, but to tell me that I can’t quote the Book of Mormon to you in order to explain why we believe something, you are being unreasonable. It’s like asking a Christian to explain why he believes Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah–but oh, by the way, he can’t quote from the New Testament.

Frankly, I don’t really care if you believe the way I do or not. My only purpose in getting into conversations like this is to make certain that if you are going to disagree with our beliefs and doctrines, you disagree with what they actually are, not straw concoctions we don’t recognize as belonging to us.