Unchanging Ordinances Or Was Moses Baptized By Immersion?

[emarkp]

God is not interested in the ordinance, he is interested in the commitment being kept after making it through the ordinance.

...

The manner of the ordinance is not important. The commitments and keeping them are.

Uh, He's kinda made a lot of effort if He is not interested in the form, but only on the function. It seems that both matter.

[CV75]

All -

Thanks for the comments! The lesson went fine.

A few specific responses:

CV75, I took my cue about how to present symbolism from 2 Ne 25:23-27 and Mosiah 13:27-31. The BOM being a template for our day, I felt it wise to acknowledge that we can, if we aren't careful either become so enamored of outward ordinances that we miss the inward principle (Jews failing to recognize Christ as an admittedly oversimplified example) or we can take outward ordinances so lightly that we forget the truths they point to.

My intent was to help the class members see that the ordinances have the specific purpose (among others) of directing our minds and hearts toward God and His higher law, the celestial law or law of Christ. We talked about the importance of remembering and the briefly touched on the danger of hardening our hearts (see the 2 Ne, reference) when there are changes in practices, policies, and even ordinances.

We discussed what the words "law" and "ordinance" mean - prescribed code of conduct and enactment - and how ordinances and laws both help us to get to know God's nature and character.

We discussed D&C 84 where is says that the powers of godliness are made manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood and we talked about what the word "manifest" means - to make clear and obvious to the mind or eye, to reveal to the senses - and how when we participate in ordinances, we can come to know God, which is life eternal (John 17:3).

We discussed the sacrament, as an example, and talked about the Last Supper and what happened there, including the washing of feet and the call to discipleship or to "have part of [Jesus]" through this act of communion and through the acts of service we perform for one another.

All in all, it went well.

I've got some service to perform myself at the moment but when I get back, sometime late this evening, I'll explain why I felt inspired to go in the direction that I did and I'll respond to some of the other comments.

Thank you -- I missed Church today and this was a nice substitute!

[Thinking]

Many of us are old enough to remember the changes in the presentation of the endowment. The specifics will not be discussed. The changes are defended because they aren't the endowment, just a way to present it. The covenant, according to believers, has not changed, so how it's presented is irrelevant. Why can't baptism be the same? Can the same covenant be made without full immersion? The renewal of the covenant doesn't include full immersion every Sunday. In fact the presentation of that renewal (the sacrament) has changed from wine to water.

[CV75]

Many of us are old enough to remember the changes in the presentation of the endowment. The specifics will not be discussed. The changes are defended because they aren't the endowment, just a way to present it. The covenant, according to believers, has not changed, so how it's presented is irrelevant. Why can't baptism be the same? Can the same covenant be made without full immersion? The renewal of the covenant doesn't include full immersion every Sunday. In fact the presentation of that renewal (the sacrament) has changed from wine to water.

If baptism can be changed, it can only be changed when the Lord instructs His annointed to do so, consistent with the requiremetns of the fulness of the Gospel and the Doctrine of Christ.

It is interesting to me that "little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world" and need no baptism, and that baptism for the dead “was instituted from before the foundation of the world,” and that there are other ordinances that “have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to the dispensation of the fulness of times.”

As for the ordinance of baptism itself, it is interesting to me that, according to D&C 124128:12-13, baptism for the living was "was instituted to form a relationship with the ordinance of baptism for the dead," which was “was instituted from before the foundation of the world.” Baptism for the living and baptism for the dead accord with one another, and so if one “was instituted from before the foundation of the world,” then so was the other.

One indicator that I can find that baptism was instituted from the foundation of the world is Moses 6:66-67, where after Adam was baptized in water and by fire the Lord said, “Thou art baptized with fire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father, and the Son, from henceforth and forever; And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity. Behold, thou art one in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my sons. Amen.” To be like God and one with Him who is without beginning of days or end of years, even if that means the priesthood without beginning of days or end of years requires baptism, then it too is an eternal principle.

From the earlier verses, I gather that it is part of His “decree, which I have sent forth in the beginning of the world, from my own mouth, from the foundation thereof, and by the mouths of my servants, thy fathers, have I decreed it, even as it shall be sent forth in the world, unto the ends thereof."

Edited July 7, 2013 by CV75

[Palerider]

Many of us are old enough to remember the changes in the presentation of the endowment. The specifics will not be discussed. The changes are defended because they aren't the endowment, just a way to present it. The covenant, according to believers, has not changed, so how it's presented is irrelevant. Why can't baptism be the same? Can the same covenant be made without full immersion? The renewal of the covenant doesn't include full immersion every Sunday. In fact the presentation of that renewal (the sacrament) has changed from wine to water.

In reality all of this sort of thing goes back to the question of Joseph Smith's validity as a prophet of God. If he was, then all past canon whether ancient or modern is open to revision and interpretation by the current prophet. All ordinances, doctrine, etc. are what the current prophet says they are and no member should recoil at the idea that sacred cows are being slaughtered whenever necessary.

Some attempt (or lip service) is made to reconcile ancient Biblical scripture with modern, but in the end, contemporary modern always trumps and members should just get over it and get in line with the brethren.

[Robert F. Smith]

.....................................................

All of the covenants are a promise to serve God by serving others. In this service we develop charity and become more Christlike. He is not offering us the option to walk the 4 or 5 gates carrying some "celestial hall-pass" (to quote Givens²).

If you look at all of the key ordinances, they are promises to serve God by serving other people.

Baptism

Sacrament

Priesthood

Endowment

Marriage

God is not interested in the ordinance, he is interested in the commitment being kept after making it through the ordinance.

.....................................................

The ordinance is a formal ritual procedure which can be used as a sign of the taking of covenantal (contractual) obligations.

It isn't that God is not interested in the ordinances which He instituted, but that He values obedience more (I Sam 15:22).

Tithes, and offerings (sacrfices) are essential, but are worthless in the absence of clean hands and a pure heart. And so it is with all the ordinances.

[mercyngrace]

Obviously the "ordinances" are given to point us towards God, but I believe in God's eyes, it is the life we lead that is of import while the ordinances per se almost become meaningless.

I'm not convinced that the ordinances are meaningless. I believe they are effective schoolmasters.

I do agree that the life we lead is the binding power of our covenant/discipleship.

D&C 84 indicates that the mysteries of godliness are manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood. Is it coincidence that Paul subordinates "mysteries" to how we treat others?

And though I have the gift of prophecy and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.~ 1 Cor. 13:2

Also, according to D&C 137, Alvin Smith entered into the Celestial Kingdom without being baptized and the section seems to indicate that entrance is based, for some souls, on what they would have done with the gospel if they'd had the opportunity. No mention of ordinances only judgment based on the condition of the heart.

I find that fascinating.

[mercyngrace]

The ordinance is a formal ritual procedure which can be used as a sign of the taking of covenantal (contractual) obligations.

It isn't that God is not interested in the ordinances which He instituted, but that He values obedience more (I Sam 15:22).

Tithes, and offerings (sacrfices) are essential, but are worthless in the absence of clean hands and a pure heart. And so it is with all the ordinances.

I think another scriptural reference which might indicate how God feels on the matter can be found in Matthew 21:28-31.

28 But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard.

29 He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went.

30 And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not.

31 Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

Covenants matter little if we don't honor them by acting as His hands in the world.

[Palerider]

I'm not convinced that the ordinances are meaningless. I believe they are effective schoolmasters.

I do agree that the life we lead is the binding power of our covenant/discipleship.

D&C 84 indicates that the mysteries of godliness are manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood. Is it coincidence that Paul subordinates "mysteries" to how we treat others?

Also, according to D&C 137, Alvin Smith entered into the Celestial Kingdom without being baptized and the section seems to indicate that entrance is based, for some souls, on what they would have done with the gospel if they'd had the opportunity. No mention of ordinances only judgment based on the condition of the heart.

I find that fascinating.

I have used the issue of Alvin entering into the Celestial Kingdom sans ordinances as an indication of God's justice,

since many have been taught that unbaptized spirits go to "spirit prison" regardless of their righteousness here on earth until their proxy baptizms are performed.

It seems unjust to me that because of the lack of an ordinance (something that in most cases they wouldn't have had any control over), God would relegate someone to a place of restriction rather than paradise when they had actually lived an acceptable life.

As they begin to draw the connection between Alvin's placement and his lack of a proxy baptizm, they either look confused or come to the conclusion that Joseph's vision was not time based and was an "eternal perspective" ........which I don't buy

[canard78]

Delete duplicate

Edited July 8, 2013 by canard78

[canard78]

And last I heard it's supposed to be a body of flesh and blood, i.e. a mortal body.

Is that scriptural? I'm not saying it isn't... I'm just trying to think of an example that says what you said.

[mfbukowski]

I was taught that a body is necessary to complete the ordinance of baptism. If that is true, a person who accepts Jesus Christ as the savior could be baptized after the resurrection.

As I said earlier, not according to 1 Cor 35 plus church doctrine. See post above, post 14 Edited July 8, 2013 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

IIRC, also seen in the vision with Alvin were his parents, both of whom were alive at the time. If so, it was a vision of the future which makes sense given the timetable of when people from this earth will be placed in the CK (after Judgment). Thus there would be plenty of time for Alvin to receive proxy work.

[Calm]

As they begin to draw the connection between Alvin's placement and his lack of a proxy baptizm, they either look confused or come to the conclusion that Joseph's vision was not time based and was an "eternal perspective" ........which I don't buy

then how do you explain the presence of his---at the time---living parents and reconcile the teaching that no one is placed within a kingdom until the Final judgment, which takes place iirc either at the end of the millennium when the earth itself becomes celestialized or at the time of the first and second ressurection, which again iirc for those righteous born after Christ's death and preMillennium occurs at the beginning of the Millennium. (this is one timetable that I can never keep straight and if I wasn't on my iPad would check the Gospel Principle manual to be sure which one, but since both point to a future occurrence they support my point that you are wrong in your conclusion that Alvin was most likely in the CK and not either Spirit Prison or Paradise (due to Christ telling the thief he would be with him in paradise I don't believe baptism is required to get out of SP but it is possible that Alvin was still in the process of learning whatever is needed to make his acceptance of the Atonement...though I don't think it's likely that complicated and paradise itself is a 'school' for the multitude of things JS taught that we had to comprehend before finally reaching the 'top of the ladder').

[Calm]

This makes the 'time table' pretty clear for Alvin and how his family understood what was needed and why.

http://www.lds.org/Static%20Files/PDF/Manuals/English/TchPresChurch-JSmith/CU_TchPresChurch_JSmith_39___36481_000_039.pdf

• After the last great battle, the final judgment will occur.

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=34cd12ca67c20110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=32c41b08f338c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-46-the-final-judgment?lang=eng

This cite specifies inheritance of a kingdom takes place at the Final Judgment.

Edited July 8, 2013 by calmoriah

[Palerider]

then how do you explain the presence of his---at the time---living parents and reconcile the teaching that no one is placed within a kingdom until the Final judgment, which takes place iirc either at the end of the millennium when the earth itself becomes celestialized or at the time of the first and second ressurection, which again iirc for those righteous born after Christ's death and preMillennium occurs at the beginning of the Millennium. (this is one timetable that I can never keep straight and if I wasn't on my iPad would check the Gospel Principle manual to be sure which one, but since both point to a future occurrence they support my point that you are wrong in your conclusion that Alvin was most likely in the CK and not either Spirit Prison or Paradise (due to Christ telling the thief he would be with him in paradise I don't believe baptism is required to get out of SP but it is possible that Alvin was still in the process of learning whatever is needed to make his acceptance of the Atonement...though I don't think it's likely that complicated and paradise itself is a 'school' for the multitude of things JS taught that we had to comprehend before finally reaching the 'top of the ladder').

I'm not drawing the conclusion that Alvin was in the CK. As a matter of fact I think he was (is) probably in Paradise since his death. I think we are actually in agreement that baptism is un-necessary for placement in Paradise. What I'm not buying is that baptism is absolutely necessary (and must be done by proxy) for entrance into the "CK" regardless of whether the vision is futuristic or not.

I've received the same resistance when using the Savior's statement to the thief on the cross, as an example of someone entering Paradise without any of the ordinances or having heard the Gospel as taught by Him.

I've heard and been taught a number of times that there are righteous people (who lived righteously but just never had the oppportunity to hear the LDS gospel) waiting for their proxy baptisms in order to be released from SP. I'll have to see if there are any actual references for that teaching.

[canard78]

I'm not drawing the conclusion that Alvin was in the CK. As a matter of fact I think he was (is) probably in Paradise since his death. I think we are actually in agreement that baptism is un-necessary for placement in Paradise. What I'm not buying is that baptism is absolutely necessary (and must be done by proxy) for entrance into the "CK" regardless of whether the vision is futuristic or not.

I've received the same resistance when using the Savior's statement to the thief on the cross, as an example of someone entering Paradise without any of the ordinances or having heard the Gospel as taught by Him.

I've heard and been taught a number of times that there are righteous people (who lived righteously but just never had the oppportunity to hear the LDS gospel) waiting for their proxy baptisms in order to be released from SP. I'll have to see if there are any actual references for that teaching.

I've had that conversation before too. I've pointed out Christ's promise to the thief, to which the answer tends to be "he'll still his proxy work done."

Which makes me wonder... Does anyone know his name?

There have been (and will be) millions of people who live and die with no record of their existence. I suppose there could be a big 'unrecorded lost sheep' book handed over at the start of the millennium. But I do have to keep wondering, why the need for an earthly ordinance for someone who may have died 1000s years earlier and who has already accepted the next steps needed on their eternal journey.

[Storm Rider]

I've had that conversation before too. I've pointed out Christ's promise to the thief, to which the answer tends to be "he'll still his proxy work done."

Which makes me wonder... Does anyone know his name?

There have been (and will be) millions of people who live and die with no record of their existence. I suppose there could be a big 'unrecorded lost sheep' book handed over at the start of the millennium. But I do have to keep wondering, why the need for an earthly ordinance for someone who may have died 1000s years earlier and who has already accepted the next steps needed on their eternal journey.

I am not sure what the complexity is. I was always taught that during the Millennium all things will be accomplished; all ordinances will be completed. There will not be any "unknown" people and each and every person will have all their ordinances completed. The belief that someone will not have their ordinance work done is erroneous; thus the concept of anyone being denied the CK because of a lack of ordinance work is also erroneous. I don't know how Jesus could have been more clear; he is the only gate to heaven. Does that mean that there is another gate to enter heaven i.e. the CK? For those that are terrified that there is an absolute truth in the universe I really don't know what to offer except to get over it. God is God; he is absolute truth and when he speaks, that is the guy to listen to regardless of how much we think God is wrong and needs to listen to a mortal man expound on the unfairness of straight is the gate and narrow is the way.

[Palerider]

I've had that conversation before too. I've pointed out Christ's promise to the thief, to which the answer tends to be "he'll still his proxy work done."

Which makes me wonder... Does anyone know his name?

There have been (and will be) millions of people who live and die with no record of their existence. I suppose there could be a big 'unrecorded lost sheep' book handed over at the start of the millennium. But I do have to keep wondering, why the need for an earthly ordinance for someone who may have died 1000s years earlier and who has already accepted the next steps needed on their eternal journey.

Interesting teaching by Joseph Smith that I just encountered which would negate most of what Calmoriah and I were just discussing regarding what was said to the thief on the cross:

"there is nothing in the original word in Greek from which this was taken that signifies paradise; but it was--"This day shalt thou be with me in the world of spirits: then I will teach you all about it and answer your inquiries."

Teachings, p. 309

This just sounds a little slippery to me and besides according to Mormon teachings, Christ didn't go personally among those in spirit prison and wouldn't have taught him personally as the "corrected" version indicates.

curiouser and curiouser........

Note: Just did a quick check of greek texts and numerous translations all of which render this as "Paradise". (Not that I read greek by any means, just taking their word for it.......)

Edited July 8, 2013 by Palerider

[Calm]

I've heard and been taught a number of times that there are righteous people (who lived righteously but just never had the oppportunity to hear the LDS gospel) waiting for their proxy baptisms in order to be released from SP. I'll have to see if there are any actual references for that teaching.

on this you and I probably agree. My issue is first the assumption that time works the same way for immortals as mortals and then some stuff that my mind is too hazy to remember right now due to a new drug I am trying out (hopefully this will not be a permanent state as it seems to be effective otherwise). I also remember many times being taught that there are those out there urging us for their work to be done and the connection is made to being in SP rather than Paradise, but my belief is there is something else going on.

For one thing, I am uncertain that SP is a literal place and perhaps the next life is much like this one where one person sees their life as heaven while the person standing next to them experiences it as hell.

Edited July 8, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

I am not sure what the complexity is. I was always taught that during the Millennium all things will be accomplished; all ordinances will be completed. There will not be any "unknown" people and each and every person will have all their ordinances completed.

I think the complexity comes in when it is believed that good people, who are completely prepared and just lack their ordinances are having to wait for thousands of years because their ordinances haven't yet been done and thus are suffering to a certain extent or at the very least are deprived by languishing in prison through no fault of their own. Edited July 8, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-41-the-postmortal-spirit-world?lang=eng

This lesson implies ordinances are required, but the scripture referred to (Alma) speaks only of the righteous.

Also here it is made explicit:

http://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/enrichments/enrichment-o-salvation-for-the-dead?lang=eng

Since we all are waiting for the Final Judgment to move onto the Kingdoms of Glory, I am unsure of what it is that prevents those who have not received ordinances in the next life, but have received a fullness of knowledge from progressing UNLESS those things that JS teaches we must comprehend about the endowment and other things of God must for some reason wait upon receiving such...iow there are no equivalency tests in the next life that allow us to proceed with learning without the official certicate of passing a class even if we have achieved everything required to receive that certificate and are simply waiting on someone else to process it.

Edited July 8, 2013 by calmoriah

[canard78]

Interesting teaching by Joseph Smith that I just encountered which would negate most of what Calmoriah and I were just discussing regarding what was said to the thief on the cross:

"there is nothing in the original word in Greek from which this was taken that signifies paradise; but it was--"This day shalt thou be with me in the world of spirits: then I will teach you all about it and answer your inquiries."

Teachings, p. 309

This just sounds a little slippery to me and besides according to Mormon teachings, Christ didn't go personally among those in spirit prison and wouldn't have taught him personally as the "corrected" version indicates.

curiouser and curiouser........

Note: Just did a quick check of greek texts and numerous translations all of which render this as "Paradise". (Not that I read greek by any means, just taking their word for it.......)

Very interesting. I'd not put too much weight on the JST for anything other than 'food for thought.'

Certainly not the "most correct" rendition of what was originally written down by the original writer.

[mfbukowski]

Interesting teaching by Joseph Smith that I just encountered which would negate most of what Calmoriah and I were just discussing regarding what was said to the thief on the cross:

"there is nothing in the original word in Greek from which this was taken that signifies paradise; but it was--"This day shalt thou be with me in the world of spirits: then I will teach you all about it and answer your inquiries."

Teachings, p. 309

This just sounds a little slippery to me and besides according to Mormon teachings, Christ didn't go personally among those in spirit prison and wouldn't have taught him personally as the "corrected" version indicates.

curiouser and curiouser........

Note: Just did a quick check of greek texts and numerous translations all of which render this as "Paradise". (Not that I read greek by any means, just taking their word for it.......)

Have you ever been to Disneyland? There are several "kingdoms" but all are "Disneyland". Paradise is said to be a division of the spirit world- there is no inconsistency here.

[Robert F. Smith]

Very interesting. I'd not put too much weight on the JST for anything other than 'food for thought.'

Certainly not the "most correct" rendition of what was originally written down by the original writer.

Yes, the JST is not part of the LDS Canon.

To get a sense of perspective, it might be well to understand "Paradise" in biblical context:

We do not know what Aramaic or Hebrew phrasing Jesus used to reassure the repentant thief on the cross next to him that “today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43), but we do know that the Greek term paradeisos used there by Luke is also the LXX Greek term for the Garden of Eden, translating Hebrew gan běʻēden, or simply ʻēden or gan (Genesis 2:8-10,16). The term used by Jesus could have equally well have been the “Bosom of Abraham” (Luke 16:22), which likewise refers to the place to which the righteous go upon death - an account which closely parallels a similar tale about Osiris (Setne II). Paul also refers to Paradise in II Corinthians 12:3, as part of his own vision of being caught up into the Third Heaven (cf. Rev 2:7).

Also important are references from Ethiopic Enoch, once part of the early Judeo-Christian Canon (Jude quotes it as Scripture, and it is part of the Qumran corpus), and still part of the current Judeo-Christian Canon in Ethiopia, Paradise is the intermediate abode of the righteous at death (I Enoch 37 - 70), and in the Slavonic version, Enoch gets taken up to the Third Heaven, looks down and sees Paradise, with the Tree of Life in its midst – the place where the Lord himself goes to rest (II Enoch 8:1-3; cf. 42:3, where Paradise extends from Third Heaven down to the Earth). See also Apocalypse of Abraham 21, and Apocalypse of Moses 38:5, 40:2.

– see the excellent article by James H. Charlesworth, “Paradise,” in D. N. Freedman, ed., Anchor Bible Dictionary, 6 vols. (Dolubleday, 1992), V:154-155.

As for Hell (quite distinct from Paradise), the NT uses a variety of terms to refer to it:

Hades (Mt 11:23, 16:18, Lk 10:15,18, 16:23,26, Acts 2:27,31, Rev 1:18, 6:8, 20:13-14; cf. Lk 23:43, Jn 3:13, 5:29, 14:2, 20:17, Rom 10:6-7, I Cor 15:20,40-42,53-56, II Cor 12:2-4, I Pt 3:18-20, 4:5-6, Heb 10:27, Jude 6, Rev 12:7, 14:10-11, 21:4,8 ),

Tartarus (II Pt 2:4 ),

Gehinnom (Acts 2:27,31, 13:35 [Ps 16:10], Mat 5:22,29, 10:28, 18:9, 23:15,33, Mk 9:43,45,47, Lk 12:5, James 3:6; cf. Pss 31:17, 77:18, 89:37, 112:10, Prov 30:4, Mal 3:10).

Some of this terminology may be based on the multileveled Greek notion of Hades. Tartaros, for example, is considered the deepest part of the Abyss.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Robert F. Smith