PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 If someone has already been baptised within theur own church and than they switch to a LDS church are they required to do baptism again?
thesometimesaint Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 If someone has already been baptised within theur own church and than they switch to a LDS church are they required to do baptism again? Yes. We believe that one must have the proper authority from God to act in his name. No other church has that authority. 1
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) PG, you may be interested in our investigator/new member Sunday School manual. Covers basic doctrine in easily digestible amounts, quick read with links to scriptures included. Reading this provides a great overall view and structure to explore the faith more in depth...less major gaps in knowledge for misunderstanding, less repetition, less confusion between speculation and actual doctrine, etc. (the last one...a lot of members have different interpretations on what doctrine is, I like the mormonnewsroom explanation for ease and conciseness...I'll try and find the link.http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles?lang=engMormon.org also has a basic faqs list that may cover a lot of your questions if you haven't tried them already. It is specifically for the nonmember's viewpoint as opposed to lds.org which is primarily a resource for members.This can be very helpful on many topics including some of the more controversial ones (they have been working on expanding those, at least five noteworthy additions so far I believe: http://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng. they don't have one on doctrine yet....would be nice as so much easier to locate.Here is the doctrine statement:http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine Edited January 25, 2014 by calmoriah
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) PG, you may be interested in our investigator/new member Sunday School manual. Covers basic doctrine in easily digestible amounts, quick read with links to scriptures included. Reading this provides a great overall view and structure to explore the faith more in depth...less major gaps in knowledge for misunderstanding, less repetition, less confusion between speculation and actual doctrine, etc. (the last one...a lot of members have different interpretations on what doctrine is, I like the mormonnewsroom explanation for ease and conciseness...I'll try and find the link.http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles?lang=engMormon.org also has a basic faqs list that may cover a lot of your questions if you haven't tried them already. It is specifically for the nonmember's viewpoint as opposed to lds.org which is primarily a resource for members.This can be very helpful on many topics including some of the more controversial ones (they have been working on expanding those, at least five noteworthy additions so far I believe: http://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng. they don't have one on doctrine yet....would be nice as so much easier to locate.Here is the doctrine statement:http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrineThanks for that. The link finally openedI actually jumped on mormon.org. and got chatting to a missionary which I am chatting to. But instead of badgering him I also like doing my own reading.I actually jumped on this firum for further comms with people. Especially after I copped attitude from a female missionary when I returned to mormon.org with a question. Edited January 25, 2014 by PtolemyGlenn
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 Yes. We believe that one must have the proper authority from God to act in his name. No other church has that authority.Do I have the right to refuse? I was baptised by a minister from the ICOC.If you are aware of that church you will find tgey are on fire for God and the baptism classes are first class.
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) You of course have the right to refuse, but you won't be consider a member if you don't. The baptismal covenant involves more than just accepting Christ as one's saviour. Reading the section on baptism and the one on priesthood authority in the GP manual should help explain why we think it's important enough we make it the gateway to membership.PS: I apologise if you have already provided it but a link to an iocc website explaining their POV would be nice, I came across the international orthodox Christian charities, the Irish orthodox Christian community and maybe some others so don't want to go to the wrong one. Edited January 25, 2014 by calmoriah
thesometimesaint Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Do I have the right to refuse? I was baptised by a minister from the ICOC.If you are aware of that church you will find tgey are on fire for God and the baptism classes are first class. Of course you can refuse. You just won't be a member of the Church. The original Apostles rebaptised onto Christ. We must have the authority from God to baptize. we believe we are the only ones with that authority. It isn't Calvinball. http://www.bartel.org/calvinball/%C2'>
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 You of course have the right to refuse, but you won't be consider a member if you don't. The baptismal covenant involves more than just accepting Christ as one's saviour. Reading the section on baptism and the one on priesthood authority in the GP manual should help explain why we think it's important enough we make it the gateway to membership.PS: I apologise if you have already provided it but a link to an iocc website explaining their POV would be nice, I came across the international orthodox Christian charities, the Irish orthodox Christian community and maybe some others so don't want to go to the wrong one.I'm not sure if they go into depth on their website. While it is the International Church of Christ. Each of their church has fheir own website. I will have to see if their is a link to a universal site for them.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 Of course you can refuse. You just won't be a member of the Church. The original Apostles rebaptised onto Christ. We must have the authority from God to baptize. we believe we are the only ones with that authority. It isn't Calvinball. Whenever someone makes a statement like this warning signs go off in my head."we are the only ones"My church said the same thing thing and because of that we got labelled a cult.
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 I think warning signs should go off. It is an extreme claim and should be investigated as such. It shouldn't be dismissed IMO just because it is seen as improbable or arrogant. If it is true, it will be important to accept it as true even if it is difficult.Do you see the Chosen People of the Bible, Israel, as a "cult" (I am assuming you mean the pejorative sense and not the academic one)? 3
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) I'm not sure if they go into depth on their website. While it is the International Church of Christ. Each of their church has fheir own website. I will have to see if their is a link to a universal site for them.It didn't help that I was looking at iocc and not icoc...not a lot of sleep last night...was doing great this morning, then the power went out and knocked out my noisemaker...hoping to mellow out enough to get a few more hours....Starting place for our doctrine on this is a revelation as recorded in our modern day scripture, the Doctrine and Covenants (modern day starting back in the 1830s or so):http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/22.1?lang=eng#0 Edited January 25, 2014 by calmoriah
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 Well in that regard it was God telling us they were the choosen race. Not some poster in a forum.Yes it is a very big claim. And of course I am looking into it. More so than I did in the past. If I get fooled again I will be the laughing stocm of my family. No one will take me seriously again.Ahh the problms you face when you let your heart lead you to truths.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 It didn't help that I was looking at iocc and not icoc...not a lot of sleep last night...was doing great this morning, then the power went out and knocked out my noisemaker...hoping to mellow out enough to get a few more hours....Starting place for our doctrine on this is a revelation as recorded in our modern day scripture, the Doctrine and Covenants (modern day starting back in the 1830s or so):http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/22.1?lang=eng#0In the D &C you linked. Would you say the meaning of dead works = salvation by works?
thatjimguy Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Joseph Smith went to a minister back in the day. We said he wanted to get baptizsed, but not join the church because he felt they were doctrinally wrong or something similar. Reluctantly, the pastor agreed to. Later however, Joseph was baptizsed again once the church started up. It's a mixture of formality, making a public statement, and order. When you get baptizsed in other congregations, although their doctrine may be somewhat different, they are generally the same. In the LDS faith, even though we are Christians, we are still different in a lot of ways that I think a baptisim would be nessasary since it is vastly different than other churches.
thatjimguy Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Whenever someone makes a statement like this warning signs go off in my head."we are the only ones"My church said the same thing thing and because of that we got labelled a cult. I see what you are saying here, because it can sound like that sometimes out of some mouths. You cannot say "we are the true church" wih too much pride before you losee all sense of humility. (A rather ironic condition) But really, every religion thinks they are the true one and the way. What concerns me is when they say "we are the only ones and the rest have no value" or somthing similar.
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 In the D &C you linked. Would you say the meaning of dead works = salvation by works?No, I believe it is saying works/ordinances/sacrifices without authority. I would also describe works done without proper intent are dead works....but intent is not enough if we have been commanded to seek out those who have priesthood authority in certain cases to perform an ordinance.Somethings need authority and others don't. Jesus went to John to be baptised, he did just ask a good friend or other relative to do it for him. LDS believe he was demonstrating the proper form of baptism for us. We believe that John had the priesthood.
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Joseph Smith went to a minister back in the day. We said he wanted to get baptizsed, but not join the church because he felt they were doctrinally wrong or something similar. Reluctantly, the pastor agreed to. Later however, Joseph was baptizsed again once the church started up. It's a mixture of formality, making a public statement, and order. When you get baptizsed in other congregations, although their doctrine may be somewhat different, they are generally the same. In the LDS faith, even though we are Christians, we are still different in a lot of ways that I think a baptisim would be nessasary since it is vastly different than other churches.Even if doctrine is identical, one must have the proper authority. An LDS woman can't baptise even though her belief is identical. A priesthood holder (priest in the Aaronic or any Melchizedek) may be able to baptise one person with the proper authority, but if he were to go out and baptise someone without getting permission from the individual who held the keys (authority) for that area (the mission president iirc), that baptism would invalid.
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Well in that regard it was God telling us they were the choosen race. Not some poster in a forum.Well, we believe it is God who told us and gave us through the administration of angels (John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John the beloved) the restored priesthood.What we refer to as the apostasy (often the great apostasy) was a loss of authority where the apostles died without passing on the keys of authority to new apostles (we don't believe the apostolic keys were given to bishops). Why this happened involves both outer persecution (apostles being killed) but also mainly inner apostasy that is recorded as already happening in the New Tesatment (as seen by the number of correction of doctrine letters sent out among other things). 1
Calm Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Joseph Smith went to a minister back in the day. We said he wanted to get baptizsed, but not join the church because he felt they were doctrinally wrong or something similar. Reluctantly, the pastor agreed to.not sure what you are referring to here, could you clarify please?
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 Even if doctrine is identical, one must have the proper authority. An LDS woman can't baptise even though her belief is identical. A priesthood holder (priest in the Aaronic or any Melchizedek) may be able to baptise one person with the proper authority, but if he were to go out and baptise someone without getting permission from the individual who held the keys (authority) for that area (the mission president iirc), that baptism would invalid.Thats very legalistic.He comes across someone who wants to be baptised. I'm sorry im not responsible for this area. Jesus didnt come to make it ven more difficult and legalistic.
bluebell Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Thats very legalistic.He comes across someone who wants to be baptised. I'm sorry im not responsible for this area. Jesus didnt come to make it ven more difficult and legalistic. It's not difficult, nor legalistic, to believe that Jesus expects us to be obedient to His commandments. 1
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 Well, we believe it is God who told us and gave us through the administration of angels (John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John the beloved) the restored priesthood.What we refer to as the apostasy (often the great apostasy) was a loss of authority where the apostles died without passing on the keys of authority to new apostles (we don't believe the apostolic keys were given to bishops). Why this happened involves both outer persecution (apostles being killed) but also mainly inner apostasy that is recorded as already happening in the New Tesatment (as seen by the number of correction of doctrine letters sent out among other things).John the Baptist, Peter, James and John were not angels. The Bible does not state they were. As for the apostles not passing on the keys to new apostles that is pure specualtion that cannot be substantiated. Granted a few hundred years after Christ wS crucified the church became immoral for a long time. But by what you wrote the church had lost all authority within a generation.For all we know there were those apostles who did pass on the key. Granted by fhe 3rd and 4th time I can than agree thingsxwould habe massively changed. All of this is just my opinion as what you wrote. Im not atracking what you wrote just giving another plausible theory.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 It's not difficult, nor legalistic, to believe that Jesus expects us to be obedient to His commandments.Its not his teaching or commandmenta I find difficult or legalistic.
bluebell Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Its not his teaching or commandmenta I find difficult or legalistic. From my perspective, that's exactly what you are finding difficult. Neither of us get to just declare that they are right and the other person is wrong though, do we. Religious discussions really go down hill in a hurry when that starts to happen. Have you considered actually studying and trying to understand why LDS don't see this as legalistic instead of just assuming that if you don't agree with it, it has to be wrong? 2
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 25, 2014 Author Posted January 25, 2014 Neither am I aay that I am right and you are wrong. Or I am wrong and you are right.I dont play those games.What it is is a matter of difference of opinions due to you attending one church and I another.And using a doesnt take away the fact that I feel belittled by another poster on here. Who think all they know is correct and dump on the other poster.And suggest when I say I follow the teachings of Christ found in the Bible insinuate I do not.I wouldn't be on ths forum if I wasnt studying and alwaya attmpting to gain more knowledge and understanding from the world around me.I try to look at things from a variety of angles. And at this point in time I am attempting to look at it from a LDS point of view. But dont belittle me because I am just a Christian and somehow I dont have the full knowledge thaat you do.
Recommended Posts