• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

God in mormonism

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
The Gospel is all of Jesus teachings not just his suffering on the cross.

Try reading 1 Peter 3:18 to 4:6

Thank you, I just read the passage. The salvation remains the same where it says in that passage you suggested, "baptism... through the resurrection of Jesus". Matthew 28 says to baptize (immerse) everyone in my teachings. We are to be immersed in the resurrection, not water, to become saved.
 

Thanda

Well-Known Member
Thank you, I just read the passage. The salvation remains the same where it says in that passage you suggested, "baptism... through the resurrection of Jesus". Matthew 28 says to baptize (immerse) everyone in my teachings. We are to be immersed in the resurrection, not water, to become saved.

Ok. I was pointing out those verses in connection with salvation beyond the grave.
 

Orontes

Master of the Horse
Paul talks about being enslaved, giving an excluded middle, slave to righteousness or slave to sin. I cannot, I have no choice in this matter, I cannot worship Satan. I just cannot do so. My nature is changed, if you prefer, and I follow my nature.

I don't know if LDS theology addresses middle knowledge or God's inability to do evil. I believe God acts however He wishes, however, God's nature is good. He has free will but only can do what is consistent in Himself.

By the way, I must be misunderstanding how you would call a salvation to Heaven system "an evil system"? What I mean by that is not that I'm making a pejorative remark against you but rather that my free will cannot be more powerful than God's free will, can it?

Would it be better to simply say that the bus driver stops for us and says, "Next stop, Heaven!" I was on a bus the other day where someone asked to be let out in a dangerous place mid-block, and the bus driver said, "We have to go to the next stop. That is the rule."

Per Paul, you're reading too much into the metaphor that comes from the Book of Romans. Paul is not making a point about Aristotelian logic on non contradiction. His focus is on the meaning of conversion. Most Protestants completely misunderstand Romans because they mine it to try and reinforce a particular sectarian stance as you are doing by sliding back into the Calvinist mode that you've demonstrated previously.

I think your position: you do not have a choice in the matter of righteousness, is an absurdity. It's absurd because righteousness is a moral positioning. As such, there must be free will, meaning an opposing option must always be possible. Your assertion therefore is a non sequitur.

Mormonism does not have a set position on Middle Knowledge. Few Mormons know anything about Molianism. I can only speak for myself. Middle Knowledge is wrong headed. It fails as it falls victim to the reification fallacy. It also fails as it would require the elimination of libertarian fee will that is essential for a moral universe. Given there are moral beings that exist, it must be rejected as flawed.

I call an automatic salvation to Heaven system evil because those subject to it are no longer a moral agents. They are simply automatons or slaves. It is a repudiation of the entirety of morality. The previously discussed syllogism that ties into your other comments on things would be overturned as neither Deity or men could be properly labeled as good, meaning the need to be good would be impossible.

To your question on free will: free will is an absolute. It cannot be overturned from without. One can bend another to their will. One can compel another or even kill another, but that is through intimidation or force, that is not an overturning of the Other's free will. Free will is by definition free. For example, Lucifer can be opposed to Deity forever. He may be constrained at some point to no longer be able to act on his opposition, but his will remains his own. Neither God or any power can force one to be good. This is one of the reasons a soul turning toward Christ is so valuable. It is a free act.
 

Thanda

Well-Known Member
Per Paul, you're reading too much into the metaphor that comes from the Book of Romans. Paul is not making a point about Aristotelian logic on non contradiction. His focus is on the meaning of conversion. Most Protestants completely misunderstand Romans because they mine it to try and reinforce a particular sectarian stance as you are doing by sliding back into the Calvinist mode that you've demonstrated previously.

I think your position: you do not have a choice in the matter of righteousness, is an absurdity. It's absurd because righteousness is a moral positioning. As such, there must be free will, meaning an opposing option must always be possible. Your assertion therefore is a non sequitur.

Mormonism does not have a set position on Middle Knowledge. Few Mormons know anything about Molianism. I can only speak for myself. Middle Knowledge is wrong headed. It fails as it falls victim to the reification fallacy. It also fails as it would require the elimination of libertarian fee will that is essential for a moral universe. Given there are moral beings that exist, it must be rejected as flawed.

I call an automatic salvation to Heaven system evil because those subject to it are no longer a moral agents. They are simply automatons or slaves. It is a repudiation of the entirety of morality. The previously discussed syllogism that ties into your other comments on things would be overturned as neither Deity or men could be properly labeled as good, meaning the need to be good would be impossible.

To your question on free will: free will is an absolute. It cannot be overturned from without. One can bend another to their will. One can compel another or even kill another, but that is through intimidation or force, that is not an overturning of the Other's free will. Free will is by definition free. For example, Lucifer can be opposed to Deity forever. He may be constrained at some point to no longer be able to act on his opposition, but his will remains his own. Neither God or any power can force one to be good. This is one of the reasons a soul turning toward Christ is so valuable. It is a free act.

Well said!
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Where does it say that?

Here it is in the NKJV:

"There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him."

Note the specific indicator "not the dirt off your flesh," my paraphrase for what means "washing in water" but "through the resurrection". The word for baptize means immersion, not sprinkling or aspersion, and we are to be immersed not merely in water which gets dirt off of us but in the resurrection.

Again, please do note the emphasis on the resurrection of Christ and not on our works in any way.

Thank you sincerely.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Per Paul, you're reading too much into the metaphor that comes from the Book of Romans. Paul is not making a point about Aristotelian logic on non contradiction. His focus is on the meaning of conversion. Most Protestants completely misunderstand Romans because they mine it to try and reinforce a particular sectarian stance as you are doing by sliding back into the Calvinist mode that you've demonstrated previously.

I think your position: you do not have a choice in the matter of righteousness, is an absurdity. It's absurd because righteousness is a moral positioning. As such, there must be free will, meaning an opposing option must always be possible. Your assertion therefore is a non sequitur.

Mormonism does not have a set position on Middle Knowledge. Few Mormons know anything about Molianism. I can only speak for myself. Middle Knowledge is wrong headed. It fails as it falls victim to the reification fallacy. It also fails as it would require the elimination of libertarian fee will that is essential for a moral universe. Given there are moral beings that exist, it must be rejected as flawed.

I call an automatic salvation to Heaven system evil because those subject to it are no longer a moral agents. They are simply automatons or slaves. It is a repudiation of the entirety of morality. The previously discussed syllogism that ties into your other comments on things would be overturned as neither Deity or men could be properly labeled as good, meaning the need to be good would be impossible.

To your question on free will: free will is an absolute. It cannot be overturned from without. One can bend another to their will. One can compel another or even kill another, but that is through intimidation or force, that is not an overturning of the Other's free will. Free will is by definition free. For example, Lucifer can be opposed to Deity forever. He may be constrained at some point to no longer be able to act on his opposition, but his will remains his own. Neither God or any power can force one to be good. This is one of the reasons a soul turning toward Christ is so valuable. It is a free act.

I understand.

I believe I was saved while imperfect and that I'm still imperfect. I still have my free will, and because of my nature, good and bad, I act, good and bad in deeds and works. That is, I'm still imperfect but have received the perfection offered from Jesus's death and resurrection. I used my free will to receive the gift of God, a freely offered gift.

What I don't understand from your post is the concept of "an automatic salvation system". I chose to receive a gift. In your system, aren't you choosing to do works as well as receive a free gift? Aren't those both non-automatic and reliant upon the free will choices of the recipients?

Not trying to be a pedant here, just seeking to understand. If we've spent too much time on these issues, I can drop it.
 

Orontes

Master of the Horse
Here it is in the NKJV:

"There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him."

Note the specific indicator "not the dirt off your flesh," my paraphrase for what means "washing in water" but "through the resurrection". The word for baptize means immersion, not sprinkling or aspersion, and we are to be immersed not merely in water which gets dirt off of us but in the resurrection.

Again, please do note the emphasis on the resurrection of Christ and not on our works in any way.

Thank you sincerely.


You've misunderstood this scripture.

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: -1 Peter 3:22-23​

There is reference to the Flood and eight being saved by water, then baptism is presented that is also saving. This saving is then qualified: it's not simply getting one's body clean by going into the water (recall the word baptism means to immerse) but in and through the resurrection of Christ. In other words, one can't just dunk themselves in water and have any effect. The ritual has potency through Christ and one's turning to the same.
 

Orontes

Master of the Horse
I understand.

I believe I was saved while imperfect and that I'm still imperfect. I still have my free will, and because of my nature, good and bad, I act, good and bad in deeds and works. That is, I'm still imperfect but have received the perfection offered from Jesus's death and resurrection. I used my free will to receive the gift of God, a freely offered gift.

What I don't understand from your post is the concept of "an automatic salvation system". I chose to receive a gift. In your system, aren't you choosing to do works as well as receive a free gift? Aren't those both non-automatic and reliant upon the free will choices of the recipients?

Not trying to be a pedant here, just seeking to understand. If we've spent too much time on these issues, I can drop it.

An automatic salvation system reference is based on your earlier comments. You have stated you "have no choice in the matter" "you nature has been changed" and have had issues with simply agreeing in your bus/salvation analogy that one could get off the bus. If one cannot leave, they are bound/ captured. Since your stance is the bus is to salvation and heaven, riders are bound for heaven regardless of will or action. This is where all the problems reside. It repudiates free will and morality. If you hold one maintains their free will (which means one can choose differently) then the problems go away. Can one get off the bus?
 

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
I believe I was saved while imperfect and that I'm still imperfect. I still have my free will, and because of my nature, good and bad, I act, good and bad in deeds and works. That is, I'm still imperfect but have received the perfection offered from Jesus's death and resurrection. I used my free will to receive the gift of God, a freely offered gift.
And suppose you were to stop believing in Jesus Christ entirely? What if you came to believe He was a complete fraud? What do you believe would be the result of your disbelief? Would you still be saved because you believed at one time?
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Orontes responded to Billiardball (post # 189) " You've misunderstood this scripture.

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: -1 Peter 3:22

There is reference to the Flood and eight being saved by water, then baptism is presented that is also saving. This saving is then qualified: it's not simply getting one's body clean by going into the water (recall the word baptism means to immerse) but in and through the resurrection of Christ. In other words, one can't just dunk themselves in water and have any effect. The ritual has potency through Christ and one's turning to the same.



Orontes, I agree with your point here and think it is well made.

Even the greek/koine points out in vs 21 that "the like figure" means “Baptism, [which] corresponds (αντιτυπον) to this, now saves us” (or "saves you”, depending upon which base text one uses).

The phrase, “the answer of a good conscience” should be “the REQUEST (επερωτημα) for a good conscience” (as in a thing sought for) if one is using the common koine usage, and also best retain the symbolism of removal of "stain", "dirt", or “filth” as both a physical and moral symbol in the early Christian symbol set.

Kudos for that historical point.

Clear
τωφινεδρω
 
Last edited:

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Thanda – I apologize that I only have a couple of minutes to comment. I like your principle that the gospel (the ευαγγελιον, the “good” or “true” message) includes all aspects of Christs message that prepares mankind for and ultimately delivers them into a social heaven, fully prepared to live in such a place. In early Christian worldview, Baptism was only part of the early Christian gospel, but, it was a profoundly important part of this process of preparing mankind for and ultimately delivering them into a social heaven.

Justin Martyr circa 151 said : "As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit [Matt. 28:19], they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).

As a youth, I grew up in a Christian church that had little knowledge and understanding regarding Christian baptism. Part of the congregation believed baptism was somehow important for some vague reasons and others had no knowledge of its import and felt no need to undergo “tubbing”,(as our minister called baptism). The minister himself did not have knowledge enough to possess any strong opinion either way. So, once a month he would baptize those who wanted it and did not pressure those who did not want baptism. It was simply an unknown subject to such Christians. We had lost the knowledge of such things.

Part of the value of studying the Early Judao-Christian texts is to gain a clearer view of the characteristics of the earliest Christianities; their doctrines and practices. Study of early texts reveals the evolution of doctrines and practices and clarifies those things that have been lost to modern Christianities. Such loss of prior knowledge and change in doctrines and practices has always occurred. Moses laments that the Children of Israel “will abandon me and choose to follow the idols of the gentiles…they will worship the false gods…they will violate every sacred assembly and covenant Sabbath the very ones I am commanding them today to observe." (The Words of Moses 1Q22).


The phenomenon of changing and evolving orthodoxies applies to ordinances as well. For example, regarding baptism, Barnabas observed : “concerning the water, it is written with reference to Israel that they would never accept the baptism that brings forgiveness of sins, but would create a substitute for themselves." (Bar 11:1). This same principle of changing doctrines applied to ancient Christianity just as it applied to the Jews as Paul indicates regarding the Galatians : “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.” (gal 1:6) The Christianities today who no longer understand the original import and essence of Baptism, have simply repeated the same mistake as Israel made and as the Galatians and other Christian forefathers made in the loss of important knowledge.

The Catechumens (or early converts to Christianity) were supposed to be taught many things BEFORE baptism : “Let the one who is to be instructed in piety be taught before baptism: knowledge concerning the unbegotten God, understanding concerning the only begotten son, and full assurance concerning the Holy spirit. 2 Let him learn the order of a distinguished creation, the sequence of providence, the judgment seats of different legislation, why the world came to be and why man was appointed a world citizen. 3 Let him understand his own nature, of what sort it is. Let him be educated in how God punished the wicked...5 And how God, though he foresaw, did not abandon the race of men, but summoned them at various times from error and folly into the understanding of truth....6 Let the one who offers himself learn during his instruction these things and those that are related to them." (Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers - # 8 Instruction for the Catechumens - AposCon 7.39.2-4) The import of having such knowledge before baptism was partly because baptism represented a covenant made with God and one was to know the choice and commitment one was making before making the covenant associated with baptism.


BAPTISM WAS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND NECESSARY TO THESE ANCIENT CHRISTIANITIES

Early Christianity taught that “Baptism is a great thing, ...Because if people receive it they will live” (The gospel of Phillip). In his vision of the church as a Tower built upon a lake of water, Hermas asks the angel, “Why is the tower built upon water, madam?”, the angel replies “it is because your life was saved and will be saved through water.” (Her 11:5) This descent into the water of Baptism, was associated with a great blessing and thus it was taught: “... blessed are those who, having set their hope on the cross, descended into the water, because he speaks of the reward “in its season” (Bar 11:8)


Using similar symbolism used in the present example in 1 Peter 3:21, Barnabas also explained one meaning underlying this scriptural symbolism : “By this he means that while we descend into the water laden with sins and dirt (ρυπου), we rise up bearing fruit in our heart and with fear and hope in Jesus in our spirits.” (Bar 11:11). The increase in hope was connected to the promise and covenant within the ordinance. Because it was a covenant, it was offered only to those who were WILLING and WANTING (and thus “worthy”) to make such a covenant. Thus the officer of the guard, Annaias “being learned in the law, came to know our Lord Jesus Christ from the sacred scriptures, which I approached with faith” could claim he “Was accounted worthy of holy baptism”. (The Gospel of Nicodemus - Prologue)



TO THESE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS, BAPTISM WAS A SYMBOL OF A COVENANT BETWEEN GOD AND MANKIND

Just as a seal was a symbolic “Hallmark” or sign that authenticated, confirmed, or attested to a thing, Baptism was seen as a similar symbol : “For before a man,” he said, “bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead, but when he receives the seal, he lays aside his deadness and receives life. The seal, therefore, is the water; so they go down into the water dead and they come up alive. Thus this seal was proclaimed to them as well, and they made use of it in order that they might enter the kingdom of God.” ( Her 93:34)

Though baptism was a physical ritual, the ritual was simply a symbol of a spiritual reality. The critical thing that was happening was invisible. The covenant itself was NOT the physical ordinance, but rather it was the internal commitment and changing of the heart of the person. The physical ordinance is merely a sign that a covenant was made. Though the physical ritual was imitated repeatedly by later Christian counterfeits, the actual covenant that took place within the heart; the authority to perform the ordinance; and the associated internal conditions could not (and still cannot) BE imitated nor counterfeited. The commandments and the ordinances of the Lord were always “written on the tablets of your hearts” (I Clement 2:8) and the Lord knows our hearts....



AUTHENTIC BAPTISM WAS ASSOCIATED WITH AUTHENTIC REPENTANCE


In the authentic covenant, one may claim : “And he shall wash my soul with a laving from the land, And he shall raise me on wings upwards to dwellings. And shall set me in the treasure-house of the Father, where no thieves shall loiter.” (Govishn Ig Griv Zindag)


However, Christian counterfeiters became willing to baptize those unfit and unwilling as though God could be fooled into giving the Gift of the Holy Ghost to those who were simply “made wet”. They did not commit to have FAITH, to become HUMBLE and importantly, to REPENT of their sins before authentic baptism. The authentic promise was made : “...in the TRUTH of Your covenant…to cleanse ONESELF from uncleanness…and THEN he shall enter the water..." (A BAPTISMAL LITURGY 4Q414) The counterfeiters lacked faith, repentance and sincerity, yet still complained (both then and now) when they have no holy Ghost.

If the convert did not uphold his side of the covenant of Baptism by humility and authentic repentance before undergoing the ordinance of baptism, then the Lord was under no obligation to uphold his side of the covenant of cleansing and bestowal of the Holy Spirit. The sequence was very important in this case (and in other cases). “ ...and there are the two commandments: Unless they are performed in proper sequence they leave one open to the greatest sin. It is the same with the other commandments. " (Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs - Napthali 8:9)


The authentic sequence was always to cleanse oneself by sincere and humble repentance, before baptism, thus it was said in that order : “...in the truth of Your covenant…to cleanse oneself from uncleanness…and then he shall enter the water (A BAPTISMAL LITURGY 4Q414)

This is not to say one could not become humble and repent later, merely that the ordinance, was of no benefit without Faithful humility and repentance. It was because there were qualifications to the authentic covenants he was willing to submit to, Annanias said he was “accounted worthy” of baptism.

The same principle was true of the counterfeits that was true of the honest refusals. The outward ordinance, by itself, had no efficacy and was good for nothing. The authentic ordinance itself could never be of benefit to those who refused to humble themselves in repentance, and who did not honestly make the covenant to God that was associated with baptism. Of those refusing authentic entry into the society of believers it was taught : “ceremonies of atonement cannot restore HIS innocence, neither cultic waters HIS purity. He cannot be sanctified by baptism… - for only through the spirit pervading God’s true society can there be atonement for a man’s ways…and so be joined to his truth by his Holy Spirit, purified from all iniquity…only thus can he really receive the purifying watersand be purged by the cleansing flow - (CHARTER OF A JEWISH SECTARIAN ASSOCIATION 1QS, 4Q255-264a, 5Q11)


Anciently the counterfeit ordinances were noted and those involved were warned : “If one goes down into the water and comes up without having received anything and says, “I am a Christian,” he has borrowed the name at interest. But if he receives the Holy spirit, he has the name as a gift. He who has received a gift does not have to give it back, but of him who has borrowed it at interest, payment is demanded". (The gospel of Phillip)


How many times have the atheists and others without faith in revelation from God claimed “I’ve prayed but received no answer.” and then conclude the principle themselves are at fault, never mind that they “unplugged the machine.” One simply cannot counterfeit the authentic covenant and commitment God requires for the baptismal covenant to be in full force and for the tangible blessings which accompany authentic baptism to be manifest.

I had not intended on dwelling on how Baptism became abused and relegated to “forgotten things” in the more modern Christianities, however, as I review the early texts, the texts themselves seemed so often to dwell on such things in an increasingly resigned and unfruitful attempt to prevent this ordinance from abuse and dishonor among Christian schisms and later theories as they abandoned early doctrines and practices and developed the various new theories and practices which characterized apostasy.

At any rate, I like the clear, coherent, logical, rational and historically consistent approach and presentation of early Christian worldviews. I like restorational theology and do not think that the many modern theories have any advantage over the earliest and more authentic Christian worldviews. The realization that the LDS had returned to and re-adopted these early christian principles has been the most profound historical discovery for me since it placed Jesus' and his sacrifice and its effects back into a more authentic, more reasonable, and more understandable prophetic context than the modern theories produced by the later theologians.

Good journey Thanda


Clear
τωφυδρτω
 
Last edited:

Orontes

Master of the Horse
Orontes responded to Billiardball (post # 189) " You've misunderstood this scripture.

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: -1 Peter 3:22

There is reference to the Flood and eight being saved by water, then baptism is presented that is also saving. This saving is then qualified: it's not simply getting one's body clean by going into the water (recall the word baptism means to immerse) but in and through the resurrection of Christ. In other words, one can't just dunk themselves in water and have any effect. The ritual has potency through Christ and one's turning to the same.



Orontes, I agree with your point here and think it is well made.

Even the greek/koine points out in vs 21 that "the like figure" means “Baptism, [which] corresponds (αντιτυπον) to this, now saves us” (or "saves you”, depending upon which base text one uses).

The phrase, “the answer of a good conscience” should be “the REQUEST (επερωτημα) for a good conscience” (as in a thing sought for) if one is using the common koine usage, and also best retain the symbolism of removal of "stain", "dirt", or “filth” as both a physical and moral symbol in the early Christian symbol set.

Kudos for that historical point.

Clear
τωφινεδρω


Cheers
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
You've misunderstood this scripture.

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: -1 Peter 3:22-23​

There is reference to the Flood and eight being saved by water, then baptism is presented that is also saving. This saving is then qualified: it's not simply getting one's body clean by going into the water (recall the word baptism means to immerse) but in and through the resurrection of Christ. In other words, one can't just dunk themselves in water and have any effect. The ritual has potency through Christ and one's turning to the same.

I guess it depends on whether Noah and the eight were saved to Heaven by embarking in the ark or saved figuratively by being in the ark and a type of the death and resurrection of Christ.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
An automatic salvation system reference is based on your earlier comments. You have stated you "have no choice in the matter" "you nature has been changed" and have had issues with simply agreeing in your bus/salvation analogy that one could get off the bus. If one cannot leave, they are bound/ captured. Since your stance is the bus is to salvation and heaven, riders are bound for heaven regardless of will or action. This is where all the problems reside. It repudiates free will and morality. If you hold one maintains their free will (which means one can choose differently) then the problems go away. Can one get off the bus?

Why don't we use the Bible terminology of a deposit? Ephesians 1 says the Spirit comes to a believer as a deposit for the day of redemption. The Holy Spirit cannot be "returned" and indwells the believer permanently. He cannot go to Hell with the "ex-believer" so assurance... is sure.

Or put another way. I can smoke a cigarette than later regret doing so. The regret cannot make me move backward through time to remove the nicotine miraculously from my lungs. I can be a drug addict and do meth and then later, choose to stop, and still have physical fallout from a former addiction.

I trusted Christ for salvation years ago. I'm going to Heaven as the recipient of salvation even if I decide I want to go to Hell later.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Thanda – I apologize that I only have a couple of minutes to comment. I like your principle that the gospel (the ευαγγελιον, the “good” or “true” message) includes all aspects of Christs message that prepares mankind for and ultimately delivers them into a social heaven, fully prepared to live in such a place. In early Christian worldview, Baptism was only part of the early Christian gospel, but, it was a profoundly important part of this process of preparing mankind for and ultimately delivering them into a social heaven.

Justin Martyr circa 151 said : "As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit [Matt. 28:19], they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).

As a youth, I grew up in a Christian church that had little knowledge and understanding regarding Christian baptism. Part of the congregation believed baptism was somehow important for some vague reasons and others had no knowledge of its import and felt no need to undergo “tubbing”,(as our minister called baptism). The minister himself did not have knowledge enough to possess any strong opinion either way. So, once a month he would baptize those who wanted it and did not pressure those who did not want baptism. It was simply an unknown subject to such Christians. We had lost the knowledge of such things.

Part of the value of studying the Early Judao-Christian texts is to gain a clearer view of the characteristics of the earliest Christianities; their doctrines and practices. Study of early texts reveals the evolution of doctrines and practices and clarifies those things that have been lost to modern Christianities. Such loss of prior knowledge and change in doctrines and practices has always occurred. Moses laments that the Children of Israel “will abandon me and choose to follow the idols of the gentiles…they will worship the false gods…they will violate every sacred assembly and covenant Sabbath the very ones I am commanding them today to observe." (The Words of Moses 1Q22).


The phenomenon of changing and evolving orthodoxies applies to ordinances as well. For example, regarding baptism, Barnabas observed : “concerning the water, it is written with reference to Israel that they would never accept the baptism that brings forgiveness of sins, but would create a substitute for themselves." (Bar 11:1). This same principle of changing doctrines applied to ancient Christianity just as it applied to the Jews as Paul indicates regarding the Galatians : “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.” (gal 1:6) The Christianities today who no longer understand the original import and essence of Baptism, have simply repeated the same mistake as Israel made and as the Galatians and other Christian forefathers made in the loss of important knowledge.

The Catechumens (or early converts to Christianity) were supposed to be taught many things BEFORE baptism : “Let the one who is to be instructed in piety be taught before baptism: knowledge concerning the unbegotten God, understanding concerning the only begotten son, and full assurance concerning the Holy spirit. 2 Let him learn the order of a distinguished creation, the sequence of providence, the judgment seats of different legislation, why the world came to be and why man was appointed a world citizen. 3 Let him understand his own nature, of what sort it is. Let him be educated in how God punished the wicked...5 And how God, though he foresaw, did not abandon the race of men, but summoned them at various times from error and folly into the understanding of truth....6 Let the one who offers himself learn during his instruction these things and those that are related to them." (Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers - # 8 Instruction for the Catechumens - AposCon 7.39.2-4) The import of having such knowledge before baptism was partly because baptism represented a covenant made with God and one was to know the choice and commitment one was making before making the covenant associated with baptism.


BAPTISM WAS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND NECESSARY TO THESE ANCIENT CHRISTIANITIES

Early Christianity taught that “Baptism is a great thing, ...Because if people receive it they will live” (The gospel of Phillip). In his vision of the church as a Tower built upon a lake of water, Hermas asks the angel, “Why is the tower built upon water, madam?”, the angel replies “it is because your life was saved and will be saved through water.” (Her 11:5) This descent into the water of Baptism, was associated with a great blessing and thus it was taught: “... blessed are those who, having set their hope on the cross, descended into the water, because he speaks of the reward “in its season” (Bar 11:8)


Using similar symbolism used in the present example in 1 Peter 3:21, Barnabas also explained one meaning underlying this scriptural symbolism : “By this he means that while we descend into the water laden with sins and dirt (ρυπου), we rise up bearing fruit in our heart and with fear and hope in Jesus in our spirits.” (Bar 11:11). The increase in hope was connected to the promise and covenant within the ordinance. Because it was a covenant, it was offered only to those who were WILLING and WANTING (and thus “worthy”) to make such a covenant. Thus the officer of the guard, Annaias “being learned in the law, came to know our Lord Jesus Christ from the sacred scriptures, which I approached with faith” could claim he “Was accounted worthy of holy baptism”. (The Gospel of Nicodemus - Prologue)



TO THESE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS, BAPTISM WAS A SYMBOL OF A COVENANT BETWEEN GOD AND MANKIND

Just as a seal was a symbolic “Hallmark” or sign that authenticated, confirmed, or attested to a thing, Baptism was seen as a similar symbol : “For before a man,” he said, “bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead, but when he receives the seal, he lays aside his deadness and receives life. The seal, therefore, is the water; so they go down into the water dead and they come up alive. Thus this seal was proclaimed to them as well, and they made use of it in order that they might enter the kingdom of God.” ( Her 93:34)

Though baptism was a physical ritual, the ritual was simply a symbol of a spiritual reality. The critical thing that was happening was invisible. The covenant itself was NOT the physical ordinance, but rather it was the internal commitment and changing of the heart of the person. The physical ordinance is merely a sign that a covenant was made. Though the physical ritual was imitated repeatedly by later Christian counterfeits, the actual covenant that took place within the heart; the authority to perform the ordinance; and the associated internal conditions could not (and still cannot) BE imitated nor counterfeited. The commandments and the ordinances of the Lord were always “written on the tablets of your hearts” (I Clement 2:8) and the Lord knows our hearts....



AUTHENTIC BAPTISM WAS ASSOCIATED WITH AUTHENTIC REPENTANCE


In the authentic covenant, one may claim : “And he shall wash my soul with a laving from the land, And he shall raise me on wings upwards to dwellings. And shall set me in the treasure-house of the Father, where no thieves shall loiter.” (Govishn Ig Griv Zindag)


However, Christian counterfeiters became willing to baptize those unfit and unwilling as though God could be fooled into giving the Gift of the Holy Ghost to those who were simply “made wet”. They did not commit to have FAITH, to become HUMBLE and importantly, to REPENT of their sins before authentic baptism. The authentic promise was made : “...in the TRUTH of Your covenant…to cleanse ONESELF from uncleanness…and THEN he shall enter the water..." (A BAPTISMAL LITURGY 4Q414) The counterfeiters lacked faith, repentance and sincerity, yet still complained (both then and now) when they have no holy Ghost.

If the convert did not uphold his side of the covenant of Baptism by humility and authentic repentance before undergoing the ordinance of baptism, then the Lord was under no obligation to uphold his side of the covenant of cleansing and bestowal of the Holy Spirit. The sequence was very important in this case (and in other cases). “ ...and there are the two commandments: Unless they are performed in proper sequence they leave one open to the greatest sin. It is the same with the other commandments. " (Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs - Napthali 8:9)


The authentic sequence was always to cleanse oneself by sincere and humble repentance, before baptism, thus it was said in that order : “...in the truth of Your covenant…to cleanse oneself from uncleanness…and then he shall enter the water (A BAPTISMAL LITURGY 4Q414)

This is not to say one could not become humble and repent later, merely that the ordinance, was of no benefit without Faithful humility and repentance. It was because there were qualifications to the authentic covenants he was willing to submit to, Annanias said he was “accounted worthy” of baptism.

The same principle was true of the counterfeits that was true of the honest refusals. The outward ordinance, by itself, had no efficacy and was good for nothing. The authentic ordinance itself could never be of benefit to those who refused to humble themselves in repentance, and who did not honestly make the covenant to God that was associated with baptism. Of those refusing authentic entry into the society of believers it was taught : “ceremonies of atonement cannot restore HIS innocence, neither cultic waters HIS purity. He cannot be sanctified by baptism… - for only through the spirit pervading God’s true society can there be atonement for a man’s ways…and so be joined to his truth by his Holy Spirit, purified from all iniquity…only thus can he really receive the purifying watersand be purged by the cleansing flow - (CHARTER OF A JEWISH SECTARIAN ASSOCIATION 1QS, 4Q255-264a, 5Q11)


Anciently the counterfeit ordinances were noted and those involved were warned : “If one goes down into the water and comes up without having received anything and says, “I am a Christian,” he has borrowed the name at interest. But if he receives the Holy spirit, he has the name as a gift. He who has received a gift does not have to give it back, but of him who has borrowed it at interest, payment is demanded". (The gospel of Phillip)


How many times have the atheists and others without faith in revelation from God claimed “I’ve prayed but received no answer.” and then conclude the principle themselves are at fault, never mind that they “unplugged the machine.” One simply cannot counterfeit the authentic covenant and commitment God requires for the baptismal covenant to be in full force and for the tangible blessings which accompany authentic baptism to be manifest.

I had not intended on dwelling on how Baptism became abused and relegated to “forgotten things” in the more modern Christianities, however, as I review the early texts, the texts themselves seemed so often to dwell on such things in an increasingly resigned and unfruitful attempt to prevent this ordinance from abuse and dishonor among Christian schisms and later theories as they abandoned early doctrines and practices and developed the various new theories and practices which characterized apostasy.

At any rate, I like the clear, coherent, logical, rational and historically consistent approach and presentation of early Christian worldviews. I like restorational theology and do not think that the many modern theories have any advantage over the earliest and more authentic Christian worldviews. The realization that the LDS had returned to and re-adopted these early christian principles has been the most profound historical discovery for me since it placed Jesus' and his sacrifice and its effects back into a more authentic, more reasonable, and more understandable prophetic context than the modern theories produced by the later theologians.

Good journey Thanda


Clear
τωφυδρτω

Clear,

Can you balance your view with Paul's statements that he forgot who he baptized and came not to baptize but to preach the gospel?
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
1) Speaking to Orontes, Billiardsball said : “Why don't we use the Bible terminology of a deposit? Ephesians 1 says the Spirit comes to a believer as a deposit for the day of redemption. “ (post # 196)
Billiardsball, can you offer the actual text/verse you are referring to and give us the context and interpretation your theory applies to whatever verse you are referring to?


2) Billiardsball said : “Can you balance your view with Paul's statements that he forgot who he baptized and came not to baptize but to preach the gospel? “ (Post # 197)
Billiardsball, can you tell us what actual texts/verse you are referring to and give us context and interpretation your theory applies to whatever verse you are referring to?


3) RE : Billiardsballs' Theory : " I trusted Christ for salvation years ago. I'm going to Heaven as the recipient of salvation even if I decide I want to go to Hell later. " (Post # 196)

Orontes :

This modern theory of God, rewarding the evil with heaven


I very much agree with your points regarding the amoral/immoral nature of Billiardsballs' modern Christian Theory of this new "easy believism" where Billiardsball need not repent, and Billiardsball need not trust in God, and Billiardsball need not even try to obey God, and Billiardsball can do all manner of despicable evil such as torture and raping small children and other indescribably evil acts, yet then tell himself that he will still be placed in heaven by a just God. It feels like the type of promise Satan would make : : " It is ok to believe that you will go to heaven, as long a you DO what I, satan, want you you to do, and DO NOT DO what God wants you to do. " In fact, I'll even show you how to re-interpret scriptures so as to support this belief so you can justify (i.e. "make appear just") this belief."


The theory rewards despicably evil individuals with heaven

The theory that defiant, evil, and completely unrepentant Christian versions of unrepentant Jeffrey Dahmers, Hitlers, Stalins and others who may continue to hate, despise and defy God, yet still be guaranteed heaven if they had a moment in their youth when they sincerely believed in Jesus as a personal savior, but then quickly dropped this temporary belief to live a life of evil and destruction and oppression and terror will get to then enter heaven WITH all of their faults is a silly modern theory that is not without it's terrible moral effects.

The theory cannot reward the original evil person (or spirit) but must switch it to another person
Either the theory is stuck with this irrational and illogical and unjust situation where it rewards the original evil person with free will, or there must be some sort of a "bait and switch" built in where God must, against their evil and defiant free will, remove the original evil personal character and personality within that person, and place an entirely different personality and character in them, and then save this new character and personality with it's different will, that is not, in fact, the old one with it's evil characteristics. This is not a saving of the original person at all. A different personal will and character is created and THAT person is saved. One then falls into multiple philosophers complaints, for example, : Why God did not simply place the second person with it's "good" spirit into the world instead of the first one that could not be saved? Why not give the original person all knowledge and experience without causing immense suffering? etc, etc.

If one saves the original evil person, then the concept of what heaven is like, must change
If heaven is to be inhabited by thousands of oppressive and evil individuals, then it cannot be a place of eternal Joy and eternal Harmony.

As I mentioned earlier, I do not think the new Christian theories with their new interpretations have any advantage over the earliest Christian beliefs with the earliest interpretations.

Clear
τωσεσεσεω
 
Last edited:

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
1) Speaking to Orontes, Billiardsball said : “Why don't we use the Bible terminology of a deposit? Ephesians 1 says the Spirit comes to a believer as a deposit for the day of redemption. “ (post # 196)
Billiardsball, can you offer the actual text/verse you are referring to and give us the context and interpretation your theory applies to whatever verse you are referring to?


2) Billiardsball said : “Can you balance your view with Paul's statements that he forgot who he baptized and came not to baptize but to preach the gospel? “ (Post # 197)
Billiardsball, can you tell us what actual texts/verse you are referring to and give us context and interpretation your theory applies to whatever verse you are referring to?


3) RE : Billiardsballs' Theory : " I trusted Christ for salvation years ago. I'm going to Heaven as the recipient of salvation even if I decide I want to go to Hell later. " (Post # 196)

Orontes :

This modern theory of God, rewarding the evil with heaven


I very much agree with your points regarding the amoral/immoral nature of Billiardsballs' modern Christian Theory of this new "easy believism" where Billiardsball need not repent, and Billiardsball need not trust in God, and Billiardsball need not even try to obey God, and Billiardsball can do all manner of despicable evil such as torture and raping small children and other indescribably evil acts, yet then tell himself that he will still be placed in heaven by a just God. It feels like the type of promise Satan would make : : " It is ok to believe that you will go to heaven, as long a you DO what I, satan, want you you to do, and DO NOT DO what God wants you to do. " In fact, I'll even show you how to re-interpret scriptures so as to support this belief so you can justify (i.e. "make appear just") this belief."


The theory rewards despicably evil individuals with heaven

The theory that defiant, evil, and completely unrepentant Christian versions of unrepentant Jeffrey Dahmers, Hitlers, Stalins and others who may continue to hate, despise and defy God, yet still be guaranteed heaven if they had a moment in their youth when they sincerely believed in Jesus as a personal savior, but then quickly dropped this temporary belief to live a life of evil and destruction and oppression and terror will get to then enter heaven WITH all of their faults is a silly modern theory that is not without it's terrible moral effects.

The theory cannot reward the original evil person (or spirit) but must switch it to another person
Either the theory is stuck with this irrational and illogical and unjust situation where it rewards the original evil person with free will, or there must be some sort of a "bait and switch" built in where God must, against their evil and defiant free will, remove the original evil personal character and personality within that person, and place an entirely different personality and character in them, and then save this new character and personality with it's different will, that is not, in fact, the old one with it's evil characteristics. This is not a saving of the original person at all. A different personal will and character is created and THAT person is saved. One then falls into multiple philosophers complaints, for example, : Why God did not simply place the second person with it's "good" spirit into the world instead of the first one that could not be saved? Why not give the original person all knowledge and experience without causing immense suffering? etc, etc.

If one saves the original evil person, then the concept of what heaven is like, must change
If heaven is to be inhabited by thousands of oppressive and evil individuals, then it cannot be a place of eternal Joy and eternal Harmony.

As I mentioned earlier, I do not think the new Christian theories with their new interpretations have any advantage over the earliest Christian beliefs with the earliest interpretations.

Clear
τωσεσεσεω

1. NIV - Eph 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

I'm unsure how "a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance" needs further clarification...? The question here is whether a believer has assurance or may turn away from salvation. "When you believed" you were marked with Him who is in you, a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance.

2. NIV - 1 Cor 1:13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. 18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Paul cannot remember whom he has baptized in Corinth beyond Crispus, Gaius, and the house of Stephanas because Jesus sent him to prioritize the gospel, for the message of the cross is the power of God. I would think that implies that baptism has limited power.

3. I cannot become a Jeffrey Dahmer nor can they after salvation. From the NIV 1 John 3:14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love each other. Anyone who does not love remains in death. 15 Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.
Rather I was thinking of Paul who longed to be allowed to sacrifice his salvation and go to perdition for Israel. NIV Romans 9:1 I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel.

Paul could wish that he were lost, but he couldn't be. He had assurance.

I'd sum my case as perfection is either continually maintained or it is imperfection. Paul was imperfect but guaranteed salvation after trusting Jesus. A young person who has sincerely trusted Christ could walk away for a time--often they return when they get older, you've likely known people like this--but cannot become a stone killer, because we know that no murderer has eternal life.

You are concerned, and justly so, with evil people going to blessing. Yet could not a Dahmer be saved after they were in prison? Yes? No?

Thanks, Clear.
 

Orontes

Master of the Horse
I guess it depends on whether Noah and the eight were saved to Heaven by embarking in the ark or saved figuratively by being in the ark and a type of the death and resurrection of Christ.
Sorry to have been away.

I don't think a literal or figurative reading is pertinent in this case. The larger point is that the baptism referred to is tied to water as is illustrated by the context of the verses.
 
Last edited:
Top