The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved!

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I haven't said that it's not important. What I've said is that it doesn't save or remit sins.

So baptism does not remit sins? That is the story you really want to run with?

Christ's submission to baptism was the beginning of his earthly ministry.

This may or may not be true. What we do know is that Christ was baptised to fulfill all righteousness. What that tells me is that if he did not do that he would not have been rightous.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It is odd that a group of people claim that getting wet has spiritual power, while denying the power of authentic relationship with God.

ACtually, what is odd is a person that claims to believe in God would deny the spiritual power of ordinances and obedience to God and claim all one need to do is have an "authentic relationship with God" (What ever that is) that does not include doing what he asks of us.

[Hughes]

True,

1 John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

"Walk, even as he walked"? Hey, did Jesus get baptized?

Well, if we are to "walk, even as he walked" doesn't that INCLUDED baptism?

The Bible disagrees with you. See above.

Who to believe, Hughes or the Bible?

See above.

And let's not forget this,

Acts 5:32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

Notice none of the verses you quoted say that one must be baptized to be saved, unlike the article of faith.

So baptism does not remit sins? That is the story you really want to run with?

This may or may not be true. What we do know is that Christ was baptised to fulfill all righteousness. What that tells me is that if he did not do that he would not have been rightous.

We we do know is that Christ was God. He didn't have to be baptized to be righteous, but did it fulfill the law.

ACtually, what is odd is a person that claims to believe in God would deny the spiritual power of ordinances and obedience to God and claim all one need to do is have an "authentic relationship with God" (What ever that is) that does not include doing what he asks of us.

Where did I say that we aren't to do what he asks of us?

The point is very simple. The symbolic act of baptism (getting wet) doesn't save us.

You disagree, that's fine, that is Smith's articles of faith that you follow and believe in.

I don't see any Biblical support for a symbolic act saving anyone.

What saves us is Christ alone, and the work he did, our reconciling to God through the work that Christ did, restores our relationship with God. And that's salvation in a nut shell. Reconciliation to God.

It's all based on a relationship. Not some ordinances made up by men.

[Nathair/|\]

Does Hughes remind anybody else of the dwarves at the end of C. S. Lewis' The Last Battle?

[Anakin7]

Once again from my LDS JEDI KNIGHT TEMPLE Archive - http://www.angelfire.com/az2/biblesonnyb/Tracts/MustIbebaptized.htm

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

[Hughes]

Once again from my LDS JEDI KNIGHT TEMPLE Archive - http://www.angelfire.com/az2/biblesonnyb/Tracts/MustIbebaptized.htm

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

Your link leads to, I'm guessing, something you wrote?

The crux of your argument on that link is: "Mark 16:16 says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.""

Which leads to the false interpretation of baptism, where you say, "How does one get into Christ so that remission of sins can be his? "Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?"(Rom. 6:3). "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ" ( Galations 3:27 ). We are baptized into Christ where the remission of sins is, THEREFORE, BAPTISM IS FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS."

You make a good argument if your basic understanding of Mark and baptism is correct. Which I believe both are in error.

First Mark. The passage Mark 16:9-20 Is not in the most reliable early manuscripts, which simply means we need to be cautious when relying on that text, exclusively for doctrine. This is also where the snake handlers get their primary doctrine from. So, in light of this information Mark 16:16 can't be relied on alone to say that "we must be baptized to be saved...."

Second, this leads to the twisting of a truth, that somehow a symbol actually saves us. The principle throughout scripture is that the symbol isn't what saves or has an actual effect on our spirits, but the symbol is an allegory of what is actually going on in the heart or the spirit of man. And that is what we have here. Baptism that works to save us is that which is done in our hearts. When we submit our hearts to Christ fully, ie "baptized into his death" that is what saves us. Our submission, our will becoming one with him.

So no. Your webpage argument doesn't demonstrate that a symbolic act saves us. Sorry.

[Anakin7]

Your link leads to, I'm guessing, something you wrote?

The crux of your argument on that link is: "Mark 16:16 says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.""

Which leads to the false interpretation of baptism, where you say, "How does one get into Christ so that remission of sins can be his? "Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?"(Rom. 6:3). "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ" ( Galations 3:27 ). We are baptized into Christ where the remission of sins is, THEREFORE, BAPTISM IS FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS."

You make a good argument if your basic understanding of Mark and baptism is correct. Which I believe both are in error.

First Mark. The passage Mark 16:9-20 Is not in the most reliable early manuscripts, which simply means we need to be cautious when relying on that text, exclusively for doctrine. This is also where the snake handlers get their primary doctrine from. So, in light of this information Mark 16:16 can't be relied on alone to say that "we must be baptized to be saved...."

Second, this leads to the twisting of a truth, that somehow a symbol actually saves us. The principle throughout scripture is that the symbol isn't what saves or has an actual effect on our spirits, but the symbol is an allegory of what is actually going on in the heart or the spirit of man. And that is what we have here. Baptism that works to save us is that which is done in our hearts. When we submit our hearts to Christ fully, ie "baptized into his death" that is what saves us. Our submission, our will becoming one with him.

So no. Your webpage argument doesn't demonstrate that a symbolic act saves us. Sorry.

Your "guess" is incorrect I did not create this work neither is it my webpage. You are incorrect in you assumption. See http://www.godtellsus.com/aboutbaptism.html

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

[Hughes]

Your "guess" is incorrect I did not create this work neither is it my webpage. You are incorrect in you assumption. See http://www.godtellsus.com/aboutbaptism.html

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

Since I didn't assume. I guessed. I'm not interested in debating other peoples web pages... If there's an argument you wish to make, then articulate it here.

[CQUIRK]

Since I didn't assume. I guessed. I'm not interested in debating other peoples web pages... If there's an argument you wish to make, then articulate it here.

Guessing doesn't help your arguments here, FYI. Rather, it puts more egg on your face.

Plus the arrogance isn't a good counter to the detailed arguments against your claims either.

[Hughes]

Guessing doesn't help your arguments here, FYI. Rather, it puts more egg on your face.

Plus the arrogance isn't a good counter to the detailed arguments against your claims either.

Not sure what you think you might be saying. I was only guessing that it was his web page. It was an incorrect guess.

I wasn't guessing that the LDS position was error.

[CQUIRK]

Not sure what you think you might be saying. I was only guessing that it was his web page. It was an incorrect guess.

When I debate others, I don't simply guess what their CFR is, or whats on the website that they link, I actually look at it to see what they're talking about. Simply guessing during a debate makes you look stupid and does hurt your credibility.

However, when you figure out what I'm saying to you, then get back to me when you do.

[Hughes]

When I debate others, I don't simply guess what their CFR is, or whats on the website that they link, I actually look at it to see what they're talking about. Simply guessing during a debate makes you look stupid and does hurt your credibility.

However, when you figure out what I'm saying to you, then get back to me when you do.

I didn't guess what was on there, I refuted it after I read it. At the time, I didn't know who wrote it though.

[Vance]

I didn't guess what was on there, I refuted it after I read it. At the time, I didn't know who wrote it though.

You refuted Jesus, Peter, John, and Paul?

WOW!!!! Bully for you.

[Anakin7]

Since I didn't assume. I guessed. I'm not interested in debating other peoples web pages... If there's an argument you wish to make, then articulate it here.

Okay you assumption guess is wrong. The arguments are articulated in my web page posts .

http://www.bebaptized.org/

IN HIS DEBT/GRACE

ANAKIN 7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

[LDSGuy]

Abide in him is to keep in relationship with him. That's the key. It's not *what* we do, but *who* we know that's important.

It is odd that a group of people claim that getting wet has spiritual power, while denying the power of authentic relationship with God.

Sorry. Went to NM on a three day vacation... catching up now.

Apparently you did not read John 15 where Christ talks about how we can abide in His love. Christ said that it was by keeping his commandments. Following Christ's example and commandments are how we establish a relationship with him. Like King Benjamin says in the Book of Mormon, "For how ^aknoweth a man the master whom he has not served...?" How do we serve Christ? By keeping his commandments (which includes serving others and following in his footsteps, like being baptized). I mean, how much better can you get to know somebody and establish a relationship with them than by following in their footsteps, and doing the things that they ask you to do?

[Hughes]

Hughes, on 26 February 2011 - 01:07 PM, said:

Since I didn't assume. I guessed. I'm not interested in debating other peoples web pages... If there's an argument you wish to make, then articulate it here.

Okay you assumption guess is wrong. The arguments are articulated in my web page posts .

http://www.bebaptized.org/

IN HIS DEBT/GRACE

ANAKIN 7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

Which web page posts are your arguments located?

[Hughes]

Apparently you did not read John 15 where Christ talks about how we can abide in His love. Christ said that it was by keeping his commandments. Following Christ's example and commandments are how we establish a relationship with him. Like King Benjamin says in the Book of Mormon, "For how ^aknoweth a man the master whom he has not served...?" How do we serve Christ? By keeping his commandments (which includes serving others and following in his footsteps, like being baptized). I mean, how much better can you get to know somebody and establish a relationship with them than by following in their footsteps, and doing the things that they ask you to do?

I notice that you all do this a lot. Maybe it's not on purpose, I don't know. You all confuse issues with other issues. It's difficult to keep you guys on topic, and focused.

We are talking about salvation. Following commandments of Christ (of which there are two) do not save, they are done out our love for our savior as he changes our hearts.

Salvation comes from our changing our mind/hearts toward God. It's a relationship connection, a reconciliation.

As paul explained in 2. Cor. 5:16 "So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come:[a] The old has gone, the new is here! 18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people

[LDSGuy]

I notice that you all do this a lot. Maybe it's not on purpose, I don't know. You all confuse issues with other issues. It's difficult to keep you guys on topic, and focused.

We are talking about salvation. Following commandments of Christ (of which there are two) do not save, they are done out our love for our savior as he changes our hearts.

Salvation comes from our changing our mind/hearts toward God. It's a relationship connection, a reconciliation.

As paul explained in 2. Cor. 5:16 "So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come:[a] The old has gone, the new is here! 18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people

[Hughes]

My post was in response to a post you made about having a relationship with Christ, and it was about how that relationship is established and maintained. It was not a direct post about salvation, although what I mention in there would lead to that end by establishing the relationship with Christ.

Right. And you believe, as article 4 states, "Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins"

That one must be baptized to be saved.

[USU78]

Right. And you believe, as article 4 states, "Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins"

That one must be baptized to be saved.

The light just came on. Our Welsh friend thinks the Wentworth Letter summary of beliefs is a creed.

It isn't, you know. It was merely a summary, scripturally based, of Restorationist Mormon beliefs. It was designed to explain superficially Mormon views and practices. The Mad Welshman is so caught up in credalism that he can't compute the fact that what looks to him like a creed ain't one.

Perhaps this will help him, but I doubt it. His paradigm doesn't allow for the absence of creeds.

[LDSGuy]

Right. And you believe, as article 4 states, "Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins"

That one must be baptized to be saved.

Yes! I believe that we are baptized by water and Spirit for a remission of sins. Maybe you'll appreciate more the meaning and purpose of baptism from non-Mormons.

"The things proceeding from the waters were blessed by God, that this also could be a sign of men being destined to receive repentance and remission of sins, through the water and bath of regeneration-- as many as come to the truth and are born again." Theophilus c. 180 A.D.

"In order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe... And in the name of Jesus Christ... and in the name of the Holy Spirit." Justin Martyr c.160 A.D.

"'Unless a man has been born again of water and Spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of the heavens.' These words have tied faith to the necessity of baptism. Accordingly, all thereafter who became believers were baptized. So it was, too, that Paul, when he believed, was baptized." Tertullian, c. 198 A.D.

"In the baptism of water, there is received a remission of sins." Cyprian, c. 250 A.D.

"In this we also have the instruction delivered by Peter... and the faith of those present and their salvation by baptism." Pamphilus, c. 309 A.D.

"If he was not baptized, neither are any of us baptized. Yet, if there is not baptism, neither will there be any remission of sins. Rather, every man will die in his own sins." Disputation of Archelaus and Manes, c. 320 A.D.

"Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the cross, have gone down into the water.... We indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement. However, we came up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear of God and the trust in Jesus in our spirit." Barnabas c. 70-130 A.D.

"John prophesied up until the baptism of salvation." Clement of Alexandria, c. 195 A.D.

Over and over again the early Church fathers talked about baptism being an ordinance of salvation. It was a necessity to them. They lived closer to the time when the Christian movement first started. Most of them only 200 years removed, rather than 1800 to 2000 years removed. Meaning that the closer the source to the time and event of the movement, the more trustworthy the source. That is why there is such an emphasis on how close to the events that the Gospels were written. If we apply the same logic to the doctrine of baptism then we must conclude that the teaching closest to the beginning of the movement is the more trustworthy, and most like likely the correct one.

The reason I chose to use the early church fathers to illustrate this is that we could go back and forth sharing New Testament passages and still be in the same situation. What needs to be known is how early Christians would have interpreted the doctrine in the New Testament. The ideal that baptism is not needed as part of salvation would have been completely foreign to them. Barnabas for example would have lived in the times of the Apostles and when the gospels were still being written. His insight, then on Christian doctrine of the time, is very useful in understanding early Christian thought, and for this topic.

[Hughes]

Yes! I believe that we are baptized by water and Spirit for a remission of sins. Maybe you'll appreciate more the meaning and purpose of baptism from non-Mormons.

"The things proceeding from the waters were blessed by God, that this also could be a sign of men being destined to receive repentance and remission of sins, through the water and bath of regeneration-- as many as come to the truth and are born again." Theophilus c. 180 A.D.

"In order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe... And in the name of Jesus Christ... and in the name of the Holy Spirit." Justin Martyr c.160 A.D.

"'Unless a man has been born again of water and Spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of the heavens.' These words have tied faith to the necessity of baptism. Accordingly, all thereafter who became believers were baptized. So it was, too, that Paul, when he believed, was baptized." Tertullian, c. 198 A.D.

"In the baptism of water, there is received a remission of sins." Cyprian, c. 250 A.D.

"In this we also have the instruction delivered by Peter... and the faith of those present and their salvation by baptism." Pamphilus, c. 309 A.D.

"If he was not baptized, neither are any of us baptized. Yet, if there is not baptism, neither will there be any remission of sins. Rather, every man will die in his own sins." Disputation of Archelaus and Manes, c. 320 A.D.

"Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the cross, have gone down into the water.... We indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement. However, we came up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear of God and the trust in Jesus in our spirit." Barnabas c. 70-130 A.D.

"John prophesied up until the baptism of salvation." Clement of Alexandria, c. 195 A.D.

Over and over again the early Church fathers talked about baptism being an ordinance of salvation. It was a necessity to them. They lived closer to the time when the Christian movement first started. Most of them only 200 years removed, rather than 1800 to 2000 years removed. Meaning that the closer the source to the time and event of the movement, the more trustworthy the source. That is why there is such an emphasis on how close to the events that the Gospels were written. If we apply the same logic to the doctrine of baptism then we must conclude that the teaching closest to the beginning of the movement is the more trustworthy, and most like likely the correct one.

The reason I chose to use the early church fathers to illustrate this is that we could go back and forth sharing New Testament passages and still be in the same situation. What needs to be known is how early Christians would have interpreted the doctrine in the New Testament. The ideal that baptism is not needed as part of salvation would have been completely foreign to them. Barnabas for example would have lived in the times of the Apostles and when the gospels were still being written. His insight, then on Christian doctrine of the time, is very useful in understanding early Christian thought, and for this topic.

Since I'm not arguing with the early church, or what they taught. It's rather pointless to debate what they believed or not.

The point is that you believe that a symbolic act removes sin.

And the reason you would believe and defend such an absurd idea is based solely on your prior commitment to the theology of the LDS Church. I say absurd, because nothing we do in the physical realm removes sin, I'll say it even stronger. Nothing we do adds to what Christ already did. He paid it all. We can't and don't pay anything. Only submission to Christ brings that salvation to our hearts. We die and are raised with Christ, and baptism symbolizes this.

[Vance]

"The things proceeding from the waters were blessed by God, that this also could be a sign of men being destined to receive repentance and remission of sins, through the water and bath of regeneration-- as many as come to the truth and are born again." Theophilus c. 180 A.D.

"In order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe... And in the name of Jesus Christ... and in the name of the Holy Spirit." Justin Martyr c.160 A.D.

"'Unless a man has been born again of water and Spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of the heavens.' These words have tied faith to the necessity of baptism. Accordingly, all thereafter who became believers were baptized. So it was, too, that Paul, when he believed, was baptized." Tertullian, c. 198 A.D.

"In the baptism of water, there is received a remission of sins." Cyprian, c. 250 A.D.

"In this we also have the instruction delivered by Peter... and the faith of those present and their salvation by baptism." Pamphilus, c. 309 A.D.

"If he was not baptized, neither are any of us baptized. Yet, if there is not baptism, neither will there be any remission of sins. Rather, every man will die in his own sins." Disputation of Archelaus and Manes, c. 320 A.D.

"Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the cross, have gone down into the water.... We indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement. However, we came up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear of God and the trust in Jesus in our spirit." Barnabas c. 70-130 A.D.

"John prophesied up until the baptism of salvation." Clement of Alexandria, c. 195 A.D.

WOW!!!

Those, by definition, are ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN quotes.

[USU78]

The point is that you believe that a symbolic act removes sin.

No we don't and it's extraordinary bad manners for you to tell us what we believe.

G-d remits sin, and baptism is the threshold to that remission. The Master asks so little of us, why anybody would quibble over that little is beyond me.

[Hughes]

No we don't and it's extraordinary bad manners for you to tell us what we believe.

G-d remits sin, and baptism is the threshold to that remission. The Master asks so little of us, why anybody would quibble over that little is beyond me.

So baptism is the "threshold" to that remission? What exactly do you mean by that?

Are you saying that until a person is baptized, the remission hasn't taken place yet? And at that very moment is when sins are remissed?

IS that what you're saying?

If that's the case, maybe you could explain how this works. How does getting wet cause the remission to take place?