Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 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?I don't know Hughes. You seem to have a problem with what the bible teaches. The bible clearly tells us that we are baptised for the remission of sins, you clearly have an issue with that. IOW it is the door that allows for that remission not that the act is self remisses sins, but it needs to be done for those sins to be remitted.
Anakin7 Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Which web page posts are your arguments located? The web site links I have been posting. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 The web site links I have been posting. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHTWhich ones did you write?
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 I don't know Hughes. You seem to have a problem with what the bible teaches. The bible clearly tells us that we are baptised for the remission of sins, you clearly have an issue with that. IOW it is the door that allows for that remission not that the act is self remisses sins, but it needs to be done for those sins to be remitted.So it's not the act itself that remisses sins, but it needs to be done for those sins to be remitted. Can you explain that bit of logic to me?
Anakin7 Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 I have never said or stated that I produced/wrote any of those works . In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
Vance Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 You seem to have a problem with what the bible teaches.That is rather obvious. The bible clearly tells us that we are baptized for the remission of sins, you clearly have an issue with that.It is perplexing. It doesn't matter HOW baptism remits sins. All we need know is that it DOES. IOW it is the door that allows for that remission not that the act is self remisses sins, but it needs to be done for those sins to be remitted.The Bible teaches that baptism is required for the remission of sins. It doesn't explain HOW or WHY. Do those things really matter?I think NOT!!!!
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 So it's not the act itself that remisses sins, but it needs to be done for those sins to be remitted. Can you explain that bit of logic to me?Boom! Winning!Lets try this Hughes, can you explain your logic that per the bible baptism is for the remission of sins, and yet you have an issue with that. Why? I do not know all of the in's and out's of why baptism is for the remission of sins, I only know that it does just that, and per the bible we are baptised for the remission of sins.BTW I don't need to explain "that bit of logic" as it is quit simple and very clear.
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Hughes, on 01 March 2011 - 11:34 AM, said:Which web page posts are your arguments located?The web site links I have been posting. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHTI have never said or stated that I produced/wrote any of those works . In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHTNotice the bold. Where are *your* arguments?That's what I asked, then you state that you didn't produce them.
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 That is rather obvious.It is perplexing. It doesn't matter HOW baptism remits sins. All we need know is that it DOES.The Bible teaches that baptism is required for the remission of sins. It doesn't explain HOW or WHY. Do those things really matter?I think NOT!!!!Sorry, the Bible doesn't teach that baptism is required for the remission of sins. It's an article of the LDS faith however. Boom! Winning!Lets try this Hughes, can you explain your logic that per the bible baptism is for the remission of sins, and yet you have an issue with that. Why? I do not know all of the in's and out's of why baptism is for the remission of sins, I only know that it does just that, and per the bible we are baptised for the remission of sins.BTW I don't need to explain "that bit of logic" as it is quit simple and very clear.If your logic was quite simple and very clear then it would be easy for you to explain, now wouldn't it? Why wouldn't you help me then? I don't think it's logical at all, that's why I asked. I don't believe that the bible says that we must be baptized (ie physical symbol) for the remission of sins. Take for example, the paralytic. Jesus said to him "your sins are forgiven you..." Jesus didn't say, "you first need to be baptized to have your sins removed..." Nope. He simply knew his heart and soul and said, "your sins are forgiven you."
Nathair/|\ Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Sorry, the Bible doesn't teach that baptism is required for the remission of sins. It's an article of the LDS faith however. If your logic was quite simple and very clear then it would be easy for you to explain, now wouldn't it? Why wouldn't you help me then? I don't think it's logical at all, that's why I asked. I don't believe that the bible says that we must be baptized (ie physical symbol) for the remission of sins. Take for example, the paralytic. Jesus said to him "your sins are forgiven you..." Jesus didn't say, "you first need to be baptized to have your sins removed..." Nope. He simply knew his heart and soul and said, "your sins are forgiven you."Will you accept YHWH's logic?53And our father Adam spake unto the Lord, and said: Why is it that men must repent and be baptized in water? And the Lord said unto Adam: Behold I have forgiven thee thy transgression in the Garden of Eden. 54Hence came the saying abroad among the people, that theSon of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world...53And our father Adam spake unto the Lord, and said: Why is it that men must repent and be baptized in water? And the Lord said unto Adam: Behold I have forgiven thee thy transgression in the Garden of Eden. 54Hence came the saying abroad among the people, that theSon of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world.57Wherefore teach it unto your children, that all men, everywhere, must repent, or they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God, for no unclean thing can dwell there, or dwellin his presence; for, in the language of Adam, Man of Holiness is his name, and the name of his Only Begotten is the Son of Man, even Jesus Christ, a righteous Judge, who shall come in the meridian of time. 58Therefore I give unto you a commandment, to teach these things freely unto your children, saying: 59That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words ofeternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory; 60For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified;Moses 6
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Will you accept YHWH's logic?I'm sorry, the God I know wouldn't write something so incoherent. Can I see it in the original language in which it was written?
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Sorry, the Bible doesn't teach that baptism is required for the remission of sins. It's an article of the LDS faith however. No one argued that it was required for the remission of sins. What the bible does tell us is that baptism is for the remission of sins. That tells me that if I am baptised then my sins are remitted. Do you deny this?If your logic was quite simple and very clear then it would be easy for you to explain, now wouldn't it? Why wouldn't you help me then? I don't think it's logical at all, that's why I asked. My logic is simple, the problem is your theology. You believe "saved by grace through faith alone". WE challange that with the bible were it says that we are baptised for the remission of sins. You have an issue with that because "we don't need to do anything for salvation". I don't believe that the bible says that we must be baptized (ie physical symbol) for the remission of sins. The bible never says "And a person must be baptised physically to be saved". You are correct. However the bible also never uses the word "Trinity" or "of onee substance or they share the same essence and nature" That does not stop you from taking hold of such a doctrine.Take for example, the paralytic. Jesus said to him "your sins are forgiven you..." Jesus didn't say, "you first need to be baptized to have your sins removed..." Nope. He simply knew his heart and soul and said, "your sins are forgiven you."Lets see, no one argued that the only way for sins to be forgiven was through baptism. That is a straw man that you are constructing.What we have argued is that baptism doth now save us, and that baptism is for the remission of sins, which is taught in the bible. Only your dogma stands in the way of your understanding.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 I'm sorry, the God I know wouldn't write something so incoherent. Can I see it in the original language in which it was written?Not this canard again. Lets see, Hughes accepts the bible even though he has "never seen it in the original language in which it was written" but rejects the BoM for the same reason.BTW this is from the Book of Moses not the BoM. Stop being so lamely ignorant. And before you type something else equally ignorant I suggest you study up on what the Book of Moses is and how it came to be.BTW again, the doctrine taught in the Book of Moses is very clear and understandable.
LDSGuy Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 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.Were the Christians that lived during the first three centuries (or up to the 17th and 18th centuries for that matter) heretics? According to you they were, because they preached the doctrine of baptism being for the remission of sins and for entry into the Kingdom of God. They did not think it merely symbolic. Do you deny then the doctrine believed by Christians up to the third century, and beyond? Were they in error? Perhaps your understanding of the New Testament doctrine of baptism is better? They believed in the Gospel that included baptism as part of the salvation experience. They did not believe that baptism alone can save, neither do we for that matter. Christ alone saves, and he has given us the the conditions upon which He will provide that salvation. Meeting those conditions is not our works but His, because we do theme in His name and by his authority. In fact all things done from Baptism to death should be done in His name so that they are never really our works, but his. We are not adding to what Christ already did, we are following what Christ already did. Christ was baptized as an example to show us how to start on the path, and to show us how important baptism is and what it means to him. Baptism is not a payment for anything. It is an act of submission to the will of God the Father and Jesus Christ. God does not give us ordinance to be merely symbolic. Along with the symbolism, there is covenant making (which is always part of ordinances). I could go on and on, but I think my point has been made. Maybe I'll write and essay on it.
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 No one argued that it was required for the remission of sins. What the bible does tell us is that baptism is for the remission of sins. That tells me that if I am baptised then my sins are remitted. Do you deny this? My logic is simple, the problem is your theology. You believe "saved by grace through faith alone". WE challange that with the bible were it says that we are baptised for the remission of sins. You have an issue with that because "we don't need to do anything for salvation". The bible never says "And a person must be baptised physically to be saved". You are correct. However the bible also never uses the word "Trinity" or "of onee substance or they share the same essence and nature" That does not stop you from taking hold of such a doctrine.Lets see, no one argued that the only way for sins to be forgiven was through baptism. That is a straw man that you are attem constructing.What we have argued is that baptism doth now save us, and that baptism is for the remission of sins. Only your dogma stands in the way of your understanding.Sorry, I don't believe as you've stated, "we don't need to do anything for salvation" rather, as I've stated it's a change of heart and mind and soul that brings us salvation through Christ alone. I'm simply using the article of faith as stated, and now you're denying that? Calling it a straw man? Not this canard again. Lets see, Hughes accpets the bible even though he has "never seen it in the original language in which it was written".BTW this is from the Book of Moses not the BoM. Stop being so lamely ignorant. And before you type something else equally ignorant I suggest you study up on what the Book of Moses is and how it came to be.BTW again, the doctrine taught in the Book of Moses is very clear and understandable.The Book of Moses isn't from God anymore than the BoM is, and the quote above is proof. And you don't think we can read the original hebrew and greek and Aramaic?
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Were the Christians that lived during the first three centuries (or up to the 17th and 18th centuries for that matter) heretics? According to you they were, because they preached the doctrine of baptism being for the remission of sins and for entry into the Kingdom of God. They did not think it merely symbolic. Do you deny then the doctrine believed by Christians up to the third century, and beyond? Were they in error? Perhaps your understanding of the New Testament doctrine of baptism is better? They believed in the Gospel that included baptism as part of the salvation experience. They did not believe that baptism alone can save, neither do we for that matter. Christ alone saves, and he has given us the the conditions upon which He will provide that salvation. Meeting those conditions is not our works but His, because we do theme in His name and by his authority. In fact all things done from Baptism to death should be done in His name so that they are never really our works, but his. We are not adding to what Christ already did, we are following what Christ already did. Christ was baptized as an example to show us how to start on the path, and to show us how important baptism is and what it means to him. Baptism is not a payment for anything. It is an act of submission to the will of God the Father and Jesus Christ. God does not give us ordinance to be merely symbolic. Along with the symbolism, there is covenant making (which is always part of ordinances). I could go on and on, but I think my point has been made. Maybe I'll write and essay on it.You know we can't argue with the early christians, and I don't think that if they thought it was more than symbolic that I'd agree with them. No more than the Catholics that believe in Transubstantiation. You believe that it's more than symbolic, and that's fine. Why not just say that?My only point is that it's not supported by the Bible.
Vance Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.Luke 3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.Can any provide Bible scripture showing that Baptism isn't required for the remission of sins?
Hughes Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.Luke 3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.Can any provide Bible scripture showing that Baptism isn't required for the remission of sins?If you wish to use the Bible to show that Baptism is more than a symbolic action, you'll have to find a scripture that states that.All of these verses you quoted state that "repentance" is necessarily tied to remission of sin. And Repentance isn't a physical action. I have throughout this thread made reference to scriptures that demonstrate that sins were forgiven, without any reference to the symbolic act of baptism.
Anakin7 Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Notice the bold. Where are *your* arguments?That's what I asked, then you state that you didn't produce them. My arguments for Baptism as essential are the same as those that are contained in the Links I provided. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
LDSGuy Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 You know we can't argue with the early christians, and I don't think that if they thought it was more than symbolic that I'd agree with them. No more than the Catholics that believe in Transubstantiation. You believe that it's more than symbolic, and that's fine. Why not just say that?My only point is that it's not supported by the Bible.I have been saying that! I thought that was very clear. It is supported by the "Bible." I would be more specific and say that it's supported by Jesus, His Apostles, including: Peter, Paul, John, and Matthew. The reason why I include Matthew and John is because they are quoting Christ on the subject of baptism, and obviously agree with the doctrine. So if you would disagree with them (the early Christians) that baptism is necessary, then would you call them heretics or just misguided? Maybe living closer to or during the time of the beginning of the Christian movement didn't help them understand the doctrine more clearly or any better? I know you don't believe that baptism is for the remission of sin or necessary, and that you "believe" it to be unscriptural, but I think that early Christians would disagree with you. And not only them, but many today would disagree, and I don't just mean Mormons. Catholics, Church of Christ, Greek Orthodox, and others would disagree that baptism is not for the remission of sins and entrance into the kingdom of God, and that it is just merely symbolic. Are they heretics or misguided? I have read the New Testament a couple of times all the way through, and then I have studied many of the books and passages individually for years. I have not come across one scripture that says baptism in not necessary and not for the remission of sins. No one can point out a scripture that says that. They simply take other scriptures, that don't mention baptism, and interpret them in such a way as to exclude baptism as part of the necessary Christian experience. People seem to forget that the letters that Paul wrote were to Churches in Rome, Corinth, Phillipia, etc. Being establsihed churches, they were full of Christians who had already been baptized for membership in the Church. In acts we learn that 3000 souls were added to the Church by baptism (Acts 2:41). Hence, being thus already baptized, Paul had no reason to dwell upon the necessity of baptism, although he does teach its necessity. Paul in Hebrews 6:1-2 says "Therefore aleaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto bperfection; not laying again the foundation of crepentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the adoctrine of bbaptisms, and of claying on of dhands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment." Verse one could also be rendered, "Therefore having left behind the beginning of the doctrine of Christ..." The word "principle" also means beginning or first. Thus Paul teaches that baptism is one fo the beginning doctrines of Christ. He then goes on to say that he does not want to lay that foundation again, but wants to move beyond these doctrines, and go on to perfection. Thus Paul thought repentance, faith, baptism, laying on of hands, resurrection, and eternal judgement were basic foundational doctrines for Christians to understand and live. Basic/Foundational doctrines are by their nature necessary.The primitive Christians would have accepted and agreed that these doctrines were essential to the Christian faith, and were the first principles and ordinances of the gospel. Any other such teaching would have been foreign to them, and would have been considered another gospel, which Paul said to reject, and that if any taught another gospel then let them be accursed.
Hughes Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 My arguments for Baptism as essential are the same as those that are contained in the Links I provided. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHTAnd yet when I made rebuttal arguments to a previous link you posted, there wasn't any counter argument from you. So, unless you articulate or copy the point you are making, I'm not going to argue with a web page that doesn't respond.
Anakin7 Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 From my LDS JEDI KNIGHT Temple Archive on the Early Church Authorities/Leaders on Baptism as Essential to Full Salvation : #1- http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num2.htm #2- http://www.bebaptize...niableFacts.htm #3- http://www.bible.ca/H-baptism.htm In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
Anakin7 Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 And yet when I made rebuttal arguments to a previous link you posted, there wasn't any counter argument from you. So, unless you articulate or copy the point you are making, I'm not going to argue with a web page that doesn't respond. Sorry you See but you See Not. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
Nathair/|\ Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 I'm sorry, the God I know wouldn't write something so incoherent. If it helps, I left out verses 55-6 to save space since they aren't really relevant to the discussion.Only verses 57-60 are YHWH speaking except where it is explicitly marked in the other verses. Can I see it in the original language in which it was written?Sure, when you learn the pure Adamic tongue. That's Enoch telling the story, quoting Adam and YHWH.Sorry, I don't believe as you've stated, "we don't need to do anything for salvation" rather, as I've stated it's a change of heart and mind and soul that brings us salvation through Christ alone. I'm simply using the article of faith as stated, and now you're denying that? Calling it a straw man? The Book of Moses isn't from God anymore than the BoM is, and the quote above is proof. And you don't think we can read the original hebrew and greek and Aramaic?Finally, you have said something true. The Book of Moses is exactly as much the word of God as the Book of Mormon and precisely as much as the Bible was when it came from the pens of the original prophetic authors. Yours under the obedient oaks,Nathair /|\
Anakin7 Posted March 3, 2011 Posted March 3, 2011 Hughes probably also believes that all our rightiousness are as filthy rags. In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.