What do Mormons really believe? Let's discuss Mormonism!!! (Vatican, divine, Article)

[stycotl]

Originally Posted by twin.spin

If I may, I would like to quote parts of an appendix from the New Evangelical Translation Bible concerning 1 Corthinians 15:29

"The phrase [1 Corinthians 15:29] 'they......who are baptised for the dead' has baffled interpreters for centuries. Paul simply mentions this practice without explaining it in detail or indicating whether he endorses it or not, whether it was a proper or improper Christian practice. Since so little is known about it, Christians cannot be dogmatic concerning one view or another. The whole conclusion hinges on how one understands the preposition hyper and its accompaning genitive in the text. (Please, note this point carefully)

Four major views have been put forth:

VIEW 1. "They.....who are baptized for the dead" were new converts who were being baptized in the place of (hyper) Christians who had died.....meaning that newly baptized Christians replaced those who had died and thereby continued to carry on the Christian church.

As stated above, we are unsure if this interpretation catches the meaning of Paul's statement. If so, such a practice would not have been contrary to any truth of Scripture.

VIEW 2. "They...... who are baptized for the dead" were Christians who were being baptized a second time, this time for (hyper: "in behalf of/for the sake of") Christians who had died before being able to be baptized. This would have been for the purpose of permitting departed, unbaptized Christians to share in Christ's baptism, along with other baptized Christians.
(Present-day Mormonism teaches this view in expanded form. They endorse "baptism by proxy," the redeeming of the unbaptized dead.)

We do not know if anyone was practicing this form of baptism in Paul's day or not. If so, it could hardly be endorsed by Paul or the Christian church in view of Acts 2:38, which speaks of people being individually baptized for themselves, not for or in behalf of (hyper) others.

VIEW 3. "They........ect." were converts who were being baptized over (hyper) the graves of other Christians who had died, connecting the faith of believers in the past with the faith of believers present.

We have no historical record of such a practice. Besides, New Testament Greek never uses the preposition hyper with a genitive to indicate "over" in a local sense.

VIEW 4. "They......... ect." were converts who, knowing the reality of their own eventual deaths, were baptized for (hyper: for the benifit of") themselves, they themselves who would be the "dead" of the future. In this way they affirmed their belief that since Christ rose, they also would rise (1 Cor 15:22,23; John 14:19), for baptism permits Christians to be united in Christ's ressurrection, spiritually and physically, and thereby to be assured of their own ressurection (Rom 6:3-11; Mark 16:16). "Otherwise," why be baptized? Recall the wording of 1 Corinthians 15:29: "Otherwise, what will they (the converts to Christianity) do who are baptized for [the benifit of] the dead? Why are they baptized for them if the dead are not raised at all?"

The reference to "them," according to this view, is inclusive,referring both to those who were previously baptized and were now dead as well as to those converts who were now being baptized.

that brings up the basis of why we believe that revelation is continuous. there are so many ways to interpret the scriptures. that does not mean that the scriptures were wrong, false, or meant to confuse, but that we need guidance in our understanding.

as far as baptisms for the dead are concerned, we see that there are many possible interpretations of the text, but that there is only one truth. that truth has been revealed to us by prophets sent by the Lord to teach us truth. He has stated through his prophets of ancient times that people tend to go crazy ('without control' in spanish) without the guidance of prophets. even when they had the scriptures, they still needed one called of God to guide them through the scriptures. it is human nature to bend things to our own likening, to a way that we can be comfortable with, or understand and apply in our own limited experience.

but with a prophet to guide us, called and authorized by God, as in old times, we steer clear of barking up the wrong trees.

aaron out.

[urbanlemur]

but with a prophet to guide us, called and authorized by God, as in old times, we steer clear of barking up the wrong trees

But isn't a prophet human and capable of error also? And didn't Jesus admonish us to put our faith in no man at all but in Him only?

[zimbabwe]

With the Death of the Apostles the keys of the priesthood were lost. The Catholics will claim that the keys of the priesthood continued unbroken from Peter, and they are in a relatively strong postion to make that claim. However, there is no documentation that such took place. Now it either happened or it didn't happen. If it did happen, the protestants are in a weak position because they were excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church. On the other hand, if the Catholic Church did not have the priesthood authority from Peter then neither do the protestants.

Nevertheless, I have heard from a Baptist neighbor that the priesthood was underground and passed from true believer to true believer in spite of the "oppressions and apostasy" of the Catholic Church. I do not know if that theory is generally accepted in protestant churches today; niether do I know if priesthood authority is even felt to be neccessary in other churches. But if I went to my local protestant church and started preaching from the pulpit or started gathering the offerings up from the congregation, the elders of the Church would want to know who I was and if I had permission or authority to do what I was doing, would they not? As I said before, God's house is a house of order. I would think that the act of performing an ordinance in the name of God would require God's permission.

[zimbabwe]

Originally Posted by urbanlemur

But isn't a prophet human and capable of error also? And didn't Jesus admonish us to put our faith in no man at all but in Him only?

Urban, your question does not make sense to me. How did the gentiles--and the majority of the Jews for that matter--learn of Jesus? Through the preaching of the Apostles by the spirit of prophecy. Was Peter capable of error? Yes, but there was no error in the doctrine which he preached. Also, he was not alone but had many other witnesses with him that corroborated his testimony.

"Surely, the Lord God will do nothing but He revealeth his secret to his servants the Prophets" (Amos 3:7)

[urbanlemur]

Urban, your question does not make sense to me. How did the gentiles--and the majority of the Jews for that matter--learn of Jesus? Through the preaching of the Apostles by the spirit of prophecy.

I guess you didn't understand what I was trying to say. It's one thing to preach about Jesus and then let the Holy Spirit convict the person who hears; everyone and anyone can do that. It's another thing though to say that just one person upon the whole face of the earth is selected to lead an entire population/congregation of people with "keys" that are supposed to guide said congregation. One can state that this person is "divinely" inspired but how can you say for sure? I'm certain that they are considered good men who would not want to mislead others but how would you know? I'm saying that I would rather put my complete trust in Jesus and let His Holy Spirit guide me rather than put my trust in the utterances of another human being. But then, that's just me.

You could counter by asking what about pastors and such leaders. They are there simply to preach the Gospel and exhort the members of the body of Christ. Sometimes they are led to guide the congregations when it comes to being involved in services to help others, or to raise money for a good cause. However, most pastors will tell you that when it comes to knowing what God wants for us, that we are to study His Word and pray fervently for answers because we believe that God will and does answer our prayers. Who would you rather have guiding you, another man or Jesus Himself?

[zimbabwe]

Originally Posted by urbanlemur

I guess you didn't understand what I was trying to say. It's one thing to preach about Jesus and then let the Holy Spirit convict the person who hears; everyone and anyone can do that. It's another thing though to say that just one person upon the whole face of the earth is selected to lead an entire population/congregation of people with "keys" that are supposed to guide said congregation. One can state that this person is "divinely" inspired but how can you say for sure? I'm certain that they are considered good men who would not want to mislead others but how would you know? I'm saying that I would rather put my complete trust in Jesus and let His Holy Spirit guide me rather than put my trust in the utterances of another human being. But then, that's just me.

You could counter by asking what about pastors and such leaders. They are there simply to preach the Gospel and exhort the members of the body of Christ. Sometimes they are led to guide the congregations when it comes to being involved in services to help others, or to raise money for a good cause. However, most pastors will tell you that when it comes to knowing what God wants for us, that we are to study His Word and pray fervently for answers because we believe that God will and does answer our prayers. Who would you rather have guiding you, another man or Jesus Himself?

I think that you and I are not that far apart, Urban. There is a good scripture from the Book of Mormon which summarizes what I think you are saying:

Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost. (2 Nephi 28:31)

However, I think we may differ in our perception of the role of prophets. That leads me to the sixth Article of Faith.

[zimbabwe]

Finishing up the 5th Article of Faith, I should say that the Aaronic priesthood and the Melchizedek Priesthood were restored to Joseph Smith and his associate Oliver Cowdery in a miraculous way through the ministration of angels. If you want to know more details I would be happy to provide them. Otherwise, I will proceed to the 6th article of faith.

6 We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

[stycotl]

Originally Posted by urbanlemur

I guess you didn't understand what I was trying to say. It's one thing to preach about Jesus and then let the Holy Spirit convict the person who hears; everyone and anyone can do that. It's another thing though to say that just one person upon the whole face of the earth is selected to lead an entire population/congregation of people with "keys" that are supposed to guide said congregation. One can state that this person is "divinely" inspired but how can you say for sure? I'm certain that they are considered good men who would not want to mislead others but how would you know? I'm saying that I would rather put my complete trust in Jesus and let His Holy Spirit guide me rather than put my trust in the utterances of another human being. But then, that's just me.

You could counter by asking what about pastors and such leaders. They are there simply to preach the Gospel and exhort the members of the body of Christ. Sometimes they are led to guide the congregations when it comes to being involved in services to help others, or to raise money for a good cause. However, most pastors will tell you that when it comes to knowing what God wants for us, that we are to study His Word and pray fervently for answers because we believe that God will and does answer our prayers. Who would you rather have guiding you, another man or Jesus Himself?

weour prophet fills the same role as peter under the direction of Christ. he directs the church, leads the apostles, and steers the direction of influence and ministry.

we believe that these men are called of God, authorized with the priesthood, the power to act in God's name. Just as in moses' day, this priesthood was a calling, a responsibility which was not given to everyone. with Christ's life, death, and resurrection, and the preparation for the second coming, the priesthood and its roles have increased. but it is still the same authority to act in His name, and cannot just be had by anyone.

we do not condemn ministers and pastors, who we see as not holding the priesthood of God, from their labors, but neither do we believe that they have authorization, and therefore eternal weight. an example of this would be our perception on civil marraige versus temple marraige.

the majority of the christian leaders that i have spoken with do not even believe that they hold the priesthood which Peter once wielded. they believe that it has been taken from the earth (along with continued revelation).

the difference has come in that they did not believe that the priesthood which peter held was necessary any longer. most believed that any man could be authorized if he had the spirit to be so authorized, and the knowledge of the scriptures.

granted, my experiences are not all-encompassing (and the majority are from foreign churches), and with the 100,000+ christian churches out there now-adays, there is no way i could survey all of them. but from my limited study, this is what i have found.

[stycotl]

Originally Posted by urbanlemur

But isn't a prophet human and capable of error also? And didn't Jesus admonish us to put our faith in no man at all but in Him only?

as zimbabwe stated, the prophets are still human. that is one of the reasons why God has always used multiple witnesses. even if they are not chronologically coexistent, they still supported each others' testimonies. thus, david's praise to the magnificence and salvation of Jehova becomes a foundation upon which john the baptist spread the word of the coming Savior, and peter's sermons are now preached by the servants of the Lord.

there is even more strength in contemporary (in the coexistent sense) witnesses. Christ organized an actual body of the church, with peter leading the twelve apostles, the bishops, the evangelists, and every one of the church's populations. these prophets and apostles helped keep each other straight. peter was not done with his road in life yet. he still needed the support of his contemporary servants. they taught each other, testified to each other, and helped each other stay on the straight and narrow.

now, having stated that the servants were still human and fallable, most of them were much stronger than i am currently. many of them had walked and talked with the Lord Himself, and the rest were so firm in their testimonies AND their knowledge that it created much less of a chance that any one of them would slip and begin to lead people astray. not only that,but they were authorized by God, and promised that if they would sincerely teach the people the pure word of God, they would be inspired and would know what to say, what to do.

we believe that the same thing happens today, in the same form. God has promised that He is not going to leave us without leadership again, that the restoration was one of the last steps necessary for the building up of the new jerusalem, and the coming of the Lord.

[zimbabwe]

Thank you stycotl.

I have changed my mind about describing the restoration of the priesthood, because I think it is so important.

When Joseph Smith was translating the Book of Mormon, he had a scribe named Oliver Cowdery. As Joseph Smith was translating, he came across a passage of scripture that described the neccessity of baptism. Joseph and Oliver knew they didn't have the authority to baptise and they pondered over this delimma for a considerable time. On May 15th 1829, Joseph and Oliver went into the woods near the banks of the Susquehana River near Harmony Pennsylvania to petition the Lord about this problem.

As they were praying, they were visited by a heavenly messenger who introduced himself as John, the same that was called the Baptist. He said he was acting under the direction of Peter, James, and John and placed his hands on the heads of Joseph and Oliver and said, " Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness." (D & C 13 , emphasis added)

He explained that this priesthood did not have the power to confer the gift of the Holy Ghost but that the priesthood to do so would be restored later. He then instructed Joseph and Oliver to baptise one another according to his directions, which they did and afterwards experienced a glorious outpouring of the spirit.

Each year throughout the church, fathers and sons gather each May to celebrate the restoration of the Aaronic priesthood. This has always been an inspiration to me and brings back sweet memories with my father and children.

A month later, sometime in June--we do not know the exact date--Joseph and Oliver went back to the banks of the Susquehana River and were visited by additonal heavenly messengers, the apostles Peter, James, and John, who placed their hands on the heads of Joseph and Olver and conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood, thus giving Joseph and Oliver the authority to bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost and organize the Lord's church. Thus the preisthood authority was restored after hundreds of years, after the keys of the priesthood were lost with the death of the apostles.

I do not know how others outside my faith look upon these events, perhaps with skepticism, but I have always been inspired and amazed at the simplicity and logic and glory of the restoration of the Lord's priesthood.