Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The Vision of the Redemption of the Dead


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
On 1/19/2026 at 1:44 PM, The Nehor said:

The doesn’t describe anything that would have been noticeable to mortals like in the Gospel of Matthew’s account or the Book of Mormon’s account.

Ok. So a prophecy of Samuel was given that could not be verified by the Nephites.

Moses 7 used the phrase "and the earth groaned; and the rocks were rent". Enoch, a
mortal, saw it. He also saw the saints being resurrected but doesn't limit this to only
two people groups.

Using your form of interpretation, the event of 3 Nephi 8:18 was not verified by the 
Nephites either.  "And the rocks were rent in twain; they were broken up upon the 
face of the whole earth
".

Edited by telnetd
Posted
On 1/19/2026 at 7:30 PM, InCognitus said:

Can you explain how your understanding as explained above fits with what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:29 and the context of his argument in favor of believing in the resurrection?  Can you please put those verses in your own words so I can understand what you believe it means, and why it would be a persuasive argument to believe in the resurrection for his readers?

Paul is saying that the living being baptized for faith in Christ is not worth the danger
they are placing themselves in if Christ is not risen. For some, he used the term "else 
what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all?"

Focus on "what shall they do". 

What shall we do if Christ is not risen?  We shall remain in the grave. We shall have no
hope.

He is not arguing their baptism for their faith in Christ proves the resurrection really 
occurred.

Posted
46 minutes ago, telnetd said:

Ok. So a prophecy of Samuel was given that could not be verified by the Nephites.

Moses 7 used the phrase "and the earth groaned; and the rocks were rent". Enoch, a
mortal, saw it. He also saw the saints being resurrected but doesn't limit this to only
two people groups.

Using your form of interpretation, the event of 3 Nephi 8:18 was not verified by the 
Nephites either.  "And the rocks were rent in twain; they were broken up upon the 
face of the whole earth
".

I was talking about the resurrected beings visiting people personally. Enoch gave a prophecy about a resurrection but didn’t specify that many mortals in the vicinity would be visited by those beings. If I prophesied that a thousand people will be resurrected on Sunday it wouldn’t be verifiable. If I said they would also visit people and be seen by many it would be much more verifiable. If no one says they saw anyone I am probably a false prophet and need to be stoned. 

Posted
51 minutes ago, telnetd said:

Paul is saying that the living being baptized for faith in Christ is not worth the danger
they are placing themselves in if Christ is not risen. For some, he used the term "else 
what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all?"

Focus on "what shall they do". 

What shall we do if Christ is not risen?  We shall remain in the grave. We shall have no
hope.

He is not arguing their baptism for their faith in Christ proves the resurrection really 
occurred.

Playing parsing games with a (bad) English translation won’t show anything. You would have to establish that this is a viable reading of the Greek original.

Posted
9 hours ago, telnetd said:

Paul is saying that the living being baptized for faith in Christ is not worth the danger
they are placing themselves in if Christ is not risen. For some, he used the term "else 
what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all?"

Focus on "what shall they do". 

What shall we do if Christ is not risen?  We shall remain in the grave. We shall have no
hope.

He is not arguing their baptism for their faith in Christ proves the resurrection really 
occurred.

That's a rather creative way of trying to get around what the verse says, but I'll say the same thing as what was posted above, the Greek text doesn't support what you are saying.  See above for my discussion on the meaning of the Greek word hü-pe'r in that verse.

Just to make sure I'm understanding your meaning, let me reword the verse based on what I understand you to be saying just to see if it makes any sense:

"Else what shall they do [by being baptized] for the [purpose of being] dead, if the dead rise not at all?  Why are then then baptized [for the purpose of being] dead?".  

Does that capture what you are trying to say it means?

Posted
On 1/22/2026 at 1:53 PM, The Nehor said:

I was talking about the resurrected beings visiting people personally. Enoch gave a prophecy about a resurrection but didn’t specify that many mortals in the vicinity would be visited by those beings. If I prophesied that a thousand people will be resurrected on Sunday it wouldn’t be verifiable. If I said they would also visit people and be seen by many it would be much more verifiable. If no one says they saw anyone I am probably a false prophet and need to be stoned. 

The account says they were resurrected and appeared to beings in the highest division
of the celestial kingdom. Unless they saw Jesus and no one else while there.

"And the Lord said unto Enoch: Look, and he looked and beheld the Son of Man lifted up 
on the cross, after the manner of men; And he heard a loud voice; and the heavens were 
veiled; and all the creations of God mourned; and the earth groaned; and the rocks were 
rent; and the saints arose, and were crowned at the right hand of the Son of Man, with 
crowns of glory; And as many of the spirits as were in prison came forth, and stood on 
the right hand of God; and the remainder were reserved in chains of darkness until the 
judgment of the great day
".

That didn't happen as is described in Matthew 27:52-53. They were not caught up to the 
Son's right hand.

Was Enoch's prophecy about one resurrection in one geographical place or multiple 
resurrections across the world?

Posted
On 1/22/2026 at 10:56 PM, InCognitus said:

Just to make sure I'm understanding your meaning, let me reword the verse based on what I understand you to be saying just to see if it makes any sense:

"Else what shall they do [by being baptized] for the [purpose of being] dead, if the dead rise not at all?  Why are then then baptized [for the purpose of being] dead?".  

Does that capture what you are trying to say it means?

No.

What shall we do if Christ is not risen?  We shall remain in the grave. We shall have no
hope.

He is not arguing their baptism for their faith in Christ proves the resurrection really 
occurred.

Posted
1 hour ago, telnetd said:

No.

What shall we do if Christ is not risen?  We shall remain in the grave. We shall have no
hope.

He is not arguing their baptism for their faith in Christ proves the resurrection really 
occurred.

But we are talking about 1 Corinthians 15:29, not 1 Corinthians 15 verses 14 and 17 where Paul made the point you are reiterating above.  

How does what you are saying above fit into 1 Corinthians 15:29?  What did Paul mean by "baptism FOR (in behalf of) the dead"?  <-  "In behalf of" or in proxy for is the meaning of the Greek word "for" in that verse.

Reword the verse to explain how what you are saying above fits into what Paul actually wrote:

"Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?"  (1 Corinthians 15:29)

Posted
On 1/24/2026 at 2:27 PM, InCognitus said:

But we are talking about 1 Corinthians 15:29, not 1 Corinthians 15 verses 14 and 17 where Paul made the point you are reiterating above.  

How does what you are saying above fit into 1 Corinthians 15:29?  What did Paul mean by "baptism FOR (in behalf of) the dead"?  <-  "In behalf of" or in proxy for is the meaning of the Greek word "for" in that verse.

Reword the verse to explain how what you are saying above fits into what Paul actually wrote:

"Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?"  (1 Corinthians 15:29)

Some Corinthians reportedly underwent baptism (perhaps a second time) intending benefit
for unbaptized dead, assuming resurrection would apply it retroactively. He responds by 
pointing out inconsistencies in their beliefs.

He neither commands nor endorses this "baptism on behalf of the dead". He simply 
references it as evidence that even contemporaries act as if resurrection is real.

Paul's question is rhetorical, and the implied answer is: "there would have no reason 
to do it at all". In other words, if the dead do not rise, then being baptized for the 
dead is pointless and meaningless.

According to Catholic tradition, suffrages like Mass, alms, and prayers benefit the 
dead (especially in purgatory), but not sacraments like baptism.

Another way to see it is: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead 
[for Christ], if the dead rise not at all?

Latter-day Saints, in this ordinance, don't really know if that person being proxied 
for accepted or rejected it in the spirit world. 

Here's another rhetorical question: "why trust in baptizing the dead when you don't 
know if that baptism was accepted?"  The implied answer: you pretend or hope it was.

Posted
On 1/29/2026 at 10:58 AM, telnetd said:

Another way to see it is: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead 
[for Christ], if the dead rise not at all?

You seemed to be getting closer to accepting what the verse actually says, but then you say what you said above.  This is what you said previously, and I simply can't make any sense of it in the context.

Please EXPLAIN why you put Christ in place of "the dead" in this verse above.  Christ is not dead, and this goes counter to Paul's entire argument.  How do you view Christ as "the dead" making any sense in this verse?

On 1/29/2026 at 10:58 AM, telnetd said:

Latter-day Saints, in this ordinance, don't really know if that person being proxied 
for accepted or rejected it in the spirit world. 

Here's another rhetorical question: "why trust in baptizing the dead when you don't 
know if that baptism was accepted?"  The implied answer: you pretend or hope it was.

You could ask the same question about Christ offering salvation to everyone:  "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)

Why did Jesus do that even though he knows that some won't accept his offering?  Does Jesus pretend or hope they will accept it?

Imagine this discussion. Jesus says, "I didn't atone for you because I knew you wouldn't accept it".  Person responds, "How could I accept something that wasn't offered to me?"

The atonement is offered to all, and likewise the ordinance of baptism is offered to all, whether the person accepts it or not.  Those who participate in baptism for the dead are simply doing for others that which they can't do for themselves, which is what proxy ordinances are all about.

The primary purpose of the New Testament is to testify of the greatest "proxy" of all, the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the sins of the world.  Peter speaks of the "proxy" nature of Christ's suffering just before he makes his comments on the visit of Jesus to the spirits in prison:  "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God..." (1 Peter 3:18).  The whole nature of salvation is by "proxy" through Christ.  (Incidentally, the Greek word "for" in the phrase, "the just for the unjust" is the exact same Greek word translated as "for" in 1 Corinthians 15:29, baptism "for" the dead).

And baptism for the dead is a way that all of us can participate with Christ in the work of salvation.

Posted (edited)
On 1/29/2026 at 12:58 PM, telnetd said:

Some Corinthians reportedly underwent baptism (perhaps a second time) intending benefit
for unbaptized dead, assuming resurrection would apply it retroactively. He responds by 
pointing out inconsistencies in their beliefs.

He neither commands nor endorses this "baptism on behalf of the dead". He simply 
references it as evidence that even contemporaries act as if resurrection is real.

Paul's question is rhetorical, and the implied answer is: "there would have no reason 
to do it at all". In other words, if the dead do not rise, then being baptized for the 
dead is pointless and meaningless.

According to Catholic tradition, suffrages like Mass, alms, and prayers benefit the 
dead (especially in purgatory), but not sacraments like baptism.

Another way to see it is: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead 
[for Christ], if the dead rise not at all?

Latter-day Saints, in this ordinance, don't really know if that person being proxied 
for accepted or rejected it in the spirit world. 

Here's another rhetorical question: "why trust in baptizing the dead when you don't 
know if that baptism was accepted?"  The implied answer: you pretend or hope it was.

Jump through any illogical hoop and circumvent all reason pertaining to the God of infinite love for each member of the race of man, that he created in his own holy image, just to be able escape the revealed glorious latter-day revelation that God has done, is now doing, and will forever do all he possibly can do, without violating the eternal principle of agency, to bring to pass the cleansing, healing and redemption of his most beloved creation.

Edited by teddyaware
Posted
12 hours ago, InCognitus said:

Please EXPLAIN why you put Christ in place of "the dead" in this verse above.  Christ is not dead, and this goes counter to Paul's entire argument.  How do you view Christ as "the dead" making any sense in this verse?

It was just a thought - "Else what shall they do which are baptized for Christ if 
Christ did not rise at all?"

I had Romans 6:4 in mind.

12 hours ago, InCognitus said:

And baptism for the dead is a way that all of us can participate with Christ in the work of salvation.

Catholic tradition teaches people can assist the deceased with their purification
in purgatory so they can leave temporal punishment and enter heaven.

Do souls exit spirit prison when your church performs all the ordinances for them?  

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, telnetd said:

Do souls exit spirit prison when your church performs all the ordinances for them?  

How long have you been posting on the board on this?  Sometimes it feels like you should know this stuff better than the typical member, but you keep asking the same questions over and over again.

Once souls have repented, if the ordinances of baptism and confirmation have been done they may leave spirit prison, whatever that means, whether that’s a location or a state of being.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/spirit-world?lang=eng

Quote

These spirits have agency and may be influenced by both good and evil. They may progress as they learn gospel principles and follow them. If they accept the gospel and the ordinances performed for them in temples, they may leave spirit prison and dwell in paradise

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/spirit-world-study-guide?lang=eng

For those who do not accept the gospel and Christ’s atonement, they get to leave after judgment and resurrection.

Edited by Calm
Posted
2 hours ago, telnetd said:

It was just a thought - "Else what shall they do which are baptized for Christ if 
Christ did not rise at all?"

I had Romans 6:4 in mind.

But Christ is not "the dead", and nowhere is he referred to as "the dead", not even in Romans 6:4.  Baptism symbolizes death, burial, and resurrection.  

And in 1 Corinthians 15:29, the Greek word translated as "the dead" is plural, it refers to the collective "dead", not the singular "Christ":

Inflected: νεκροὶ
Root: νεκρός
Code: A-NPM
Long: Adjective - Nominative Plural Masculine
Speech: Adjective
Case: Nominative
Number: Plural
Gender:

Masculine

 

2 hours ago, telnetd said:

Catholic tradition teaches people can assist the deceased with their purification
in purgatory so they can leave temporal punishment and enter heaven.

Do souls exit spirit prison when your church performs all the ordinances for them?  

See the answer from Calm, above.

Posted
5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Jump through any illogical hoop and circumvent all reason pertaining to the God of infinite love for each member of the race of man, that he created in his own holy image, just to be able escape the revealed glorious latter-day revelation that God has done, is now doing, and will forever do all he possibly can do, without violating the eternal principle of agency, to bring to pass the cleansing, healing and redemption of his most beloved creation.

So you are arguing that we should accept that interpretation of the text because it would be nice to believe that? Even if it is historically unlikely to be accurate?

Posted
On 2/2/2026 at 2:59 PM, Calm said:

Once souls have repented, if the ordinances of baptism and confirmation have been done they may leave spirit prison, whatever that means, whether that’s a location or a state of being.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/spirit-world?lang=eng

I checked that article.

Quote

President Joseph F. Smith taught that faithful, righteous women will also be "authorized
and empowered to preach the gospel and minister" in the spirit world. [6 - See Joseph F. 
Smith, Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. (1939), 461; see also Doctrine and Covenants 138:30–32, 
36–52.

Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37 says "Our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn
in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets 
who had testified of him in the flesh. That they might carry the message of redemption 
unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, because of their rebellion and 
transgression, that they through the ministration of his servants might also hear his 
words
".

Are Eve and her faithful daughters considered to be these "spirits of the prophets"?
 

Quote

"These individuals will be brought to a state of repentance through their own suffering. 
Then, they will acknowledge the Savior as their Redeemer and through His power will be 
resurrected and then inherit the telestial kingdom of glory" [10 - See Doctrine and 
Covenants 76:81–88].

Are terrestrials also brought to a state of repentance through their suffering?

Verses 58-59 says "The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the ordinances 
of the house of God. And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and 
are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs 
of salvation
".

Does this apply to residents of all kingdoms of glory?

Posted
51 minutes ago, telnetd said:

Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37 says "Our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn
in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets 
who had testified of him in the flesh. That they might carry the message of redemption 
unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, because of their rebellion and 
transgression, that they through the ministration of his servants might also hear his 
words
".

Are Eve and her faithful daughters considered to be these "spirits of the prophets"?

I've already seen this episode, several times now.  Reruns get old (unless it is Gilligan's Island).  I'm changing the channel.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Calm said:
1 hour ago, telnetd said:

checked that article.

And?

And....we interrupt this program to bring you an old rerun.  Your regular program has been preempted by this deflection to an OLD topic.

Edited by InCognitus
Posted
19 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

And....we interrupt this program to bring you an old rerun.  Your regular program has been preempted by this deflection to an OLD topic.

Give him a moment. Maybe he is like my dad who needed follow-up questions to stay on topic once it’s been resolved enough in his own head because he was never one to waste time or effort. 

Posted (edited)
On 2/2/2026 at 11:59 AM, Calm said:

Sometimes it feels like you should know this stuff better than the typical member, but you keep asking the same questions over and over again.

That's what happens when someone is not asking questions to actually learn- the answers just breeze on past them.

Edited by ZealouslyStriving
Posted
On 2/4/2026 at 3:23 PM, Calm said:

And?

From the article:

Quote

President Joseph F. Smith taught that faithful, righteous women will also be "authorized
and empowered to preach the gospel and minister" in the spirit world. [6 - See Joseph F. 
Smith, Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. (1939), 461; see also Doctrine and Covenants 138:30–32, 
36–52.

Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37 says "Our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn
in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets 
who had testified of him in the flesh. That they might carry the message of redemption 
unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, because of their rebellion and 
transgression, that they through the ministration of his servants might also hear his 
words
".

Are Eve and her faithful daughters considered to be these "spirits of the prophets"?

Quote

"These individuals will be brought to a state of repentance through their own suffering. 
Then, they will acknowledge the Savior as their Redeemer and through His power will be 
resurrected and then inherit the telestial kingdom of glory" [10 - See Doctrine and 
Covenants 76:81–88].

Are terrestrials also brought to a state of repentance through their suffering?

Verses 58-59 says "The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the
ordinances of the house of God. And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions,
and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs 
of salvation
".

Does this apply to residents of all kingdoms of glory?

Posted (edited)

When I ask “And?”, typically I am asking for your explanation, conclusions, opinions.

Answering with a quote and another question tells me nothing about what something means in your view.

It is not having a discussion.

Can you at least explain why you always shift to another question rather than finish or at least engage with something you yourself has started?  This is not a criticism, but trying to understand how you think, what your purpose is here to better address your posts.

Because at this point it feels like you start a one on one basket ball game, pass off the ball and instead of joining in running down the court, passing back and forth until there’s a basket, you go off to start another game, leaving the person you invited to play alone on the court.

Edited by Calm
Posted
26 minutes ago, Calm said:

When I ask “and”, typically I am asking for your explanation, conclusions, opinions.

Answering with a quote and another question tells me nothing about what something means in your view.

It is not having a discussion.

Can you at least explain why you always shift to another question rather than finish or at least engage with something you yourself has started?

Because at this point it feels like you start a one on one basket ball game, pass off the ball and instead of joining in running down the court, passing back and forth until there’s a basket, you go off to start another game, leaving the person you invited to play alone on the court.

This is the primary reason I haven't posted some responses I have prepared to some of the discussions I was having with theplains (aka telnetd, GoCeltics, marineland).  There's really no point if there is no real discussion.  It gets old fast.

Posted
On 2/6/2026 at 2:35 PM, Calm said:

When I ask “And?”, typically I am asking for your explanation, conclusions, opinions.

Answering with a quote and another question tells me nothing about what something means in your view.

From the Spirit World article, it shows a future tense, about women being authorized
to preach the gospel in the spirit world.  This is after the advent of Joseph Smith.  
I assume this authorization is coming from the men who are already there.

Doctrine and Covenants 138:36-37 says that it was Jesus who authorized the spirits of
the prophets to preach to those in the darkness part of the spirit world during those
3 days.

So I was wondering if you believe these "spirits of the prophets" were also women?

I would say no since I don't believe that part.  But if I did, I would have to say the spirits
of the prophets would only be men if Eve and her faithful daughters were not also prophets
in the Old Testament.

Another teaching in the Spirit World article said "These individuals will be brought 
to a state of repentance through their own suffering. Then, they will acknowledge the 
Savior as their Redeemer and through His power will be resurrected and then inherit 
the telestial kingdom of glory"
10 [See Doctrine and Covenants 76:81–88].

To me it seems that that condition is only applied to the telestial inhabitants but
not the terrestrials ones.

Verses 58-59 says "The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the 
ordinances of the house of God. And after they have paid the penalty of their 
transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, 
for they are heirs of salvation
".

To me it seems to apply to residents of all kingdoms of glory. Maybe paying the penalty
of transgressions is some type of suffering in a state of purgatory.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...