Is there proof?

[RipplecutBuddha]

However, you run right into the same problem as mentioned at the top of the page; a rational explanation as to why Paul would use a pagan belief to support a Christian doctrine.

If that's really your argument, then we could use the very same argument on Manistream Christianity today.

"After all, Mormons baptize for the dead...why would they do that if there were no physical resurrection? Why bother with it if the idea of a resurrection is false?"

And yes, there are several Manistream Christian groups that deny the physical resurrection today.

The point is that the resurrection is literal and real; Jesus proved it undeniably. Paul was using an accepted practice within Christianity to support a doctrine of Chrisitanity that was being called into question.

How could a false practice support a true belief? To think this way is to say that Christianity is dependant upon paganism for it's validity.

[Islander]

This is an example of where the bible fall short. These are just letters. No more, no less, to friends, acquaintances, fellow servants and the like. Paul was a Latin speaking Jew that grew up in a Greek town which makes him a perfect example of the use of language in his letters. If there is ambiguity is because some already made up their minds about the reference.

Paul is rectifying the belief by some that here is no resurrection. He is setting forth ALL the reasons why there will be a resurrection for it is ordained of God and Christ was the EVIDENCE of the resurrection. More over, if it was not true that Christ was indeed resurrected then, Paul asserts, they (the Apostles and all that testify of Christ) are false witnesses and there is no hope, what is the point, then? he states. He further concludes that if the resurrection is not a reality and all the work is in vein then why do we continue? why do we go as far as providing baptism for the dead if there is no resurrection and there is no hope?

The existence of this ordinance has been documented in ancient sources. Beyond that we must then agree to disagree.

[Dr T]

I'd agree that Jesus did prove it to many-the ressurection is real. U asked

How could a false practice support a true belief?

I think that was his point sir. The resurrection did happen period. Then if an insitution of a false practice arises how could that be irreconsilable? They can both be in existance at the same time based on one being true and the other not. I don't see the problem with understanding that concept. Sorry but I don't understand how they could not be.

[Justice]

Dr T, I understand you have your own view and opinion about what is being said. I understand that other very smart men share your view and interpretation. I appreciate that. However, I want for you to understand how I see it, and that I am looking for the faith based logic contained in Paul's words, detached from any doctrinal differences we have.

Let's back up and go slower. Let's lead into the verse in question trying to understand the purpose for Paul writing this letter to the church at Corinth. I say "let's go slow" NOT because I think you are dumb or ignorant, because I firmly believe that you have studied the Bible more than I have. As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints I conentrate my studies in the Book of Mormon. You, however, concentrate your studies in the Bible. I understand this. However, I would like you to try to understand that as a member of the Church that I am, I have to be familiar with certain stories and passages within the Bible because members of other churches question my belief of those passages. This is one of those passages. I have concentrated studies on this one passage. So, what I want you to do is, even though you have studied the Bible more than I have, please seek to understand my point of view on this passage. Set aside the learning and understanding you have of the Bible just this once, come down to my level, so you can understand my point of view of this passage.

Paul is writing TO Christians to convince the people who converted FROM pagan worship TO Christianity. He is not writing to pagans to convince them of a resurrection.

This means he is trying to convince the reader of resurrection, NOT trying to teach the reader that baptism for the dead is false.

12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

Paul is writing TO church members who do not believe in resurrection.

Can we agree on this point so far? Paul has heard that some of the converts living in Corinth (who were converted FROM pagan worship and did NOT believe in resurrection) were trying to carry their belief INTO Christianity and continue to believe that there is no life after death.

You must agree on this point before you can have eyes to see the point I am trying to make.

If you do not agree on the purpose for Paul's letter, then you will never be able to fully understand the faith based logic, which even Jesus was prone to use to confound non-believers, which Paul is using to try to confound those who claim to believe in Christ and not believe in the resurrection.

Before we move to the verse in question, let me know your thoughts on Paul's purpose for the writing this letter to the church at Corinth.

Edited March 3, 2009 by Justice

[Justice]

Dr T?

[Dr T]

Oh thanks Justice. I didn't see this so thank u for the bump. Ok, so you are saying that Paul was writing to past pagans that had become Christians. Is that right so far? Thanks. I think u might have the impression that I've studied the Bible a lot a lot. It's still a relatively new thing for me but yes I do read it and have read it. Ok, go ahead.

[Justice]

Yes, he says so right in the text.

1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

Ok, so clearly he is writing to those who have accepted (received) Christ, because that's where they stand.

From here, he bears his testimony to them from verses 2 through 11. He even said that's what he was going to do in verse 1. Read close, 1 through 11, he is bearing witness of the reality that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that He suffered for sins, died, was buried, and rose again.

Then in verse 12, he shifts gears and gets to the purpose of his letter:

12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

Very logic based question. It doesn't make any sense that some would be followers of Christ if they didn't believe that He rose from the dead, or was resurrected.

The next several verses deal with this topic, let's take a look:

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.

Look guys, if there is no resurrection (as you claim) then how is it possible that Christ is resurrected?

I think they thought Christ (God) was resurrected, but no one else would be. I think it's more of a point of "how they would spend" life after death, than that they didn't believe in life after death. It would be utterly pointless for them to join a church if they did not at least begin to believe in life after death, or a new term to them, resurrection. I tend to think they thought they would spend life after death as spirits, without a body. It might be they thought Christ would be resurrected to His body, but they wouldn't.

Ok, so, if there is no resurrection then Christ has not risen, and if so:

15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:

17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

Guys, this new faith you joined depends entirely on Christ being raised from the dead. Since Christ is raised from the dead, there MUST be a resurrection.

Then he speaks of Adam, and how Christ made all men alive after the fall.

Then he says Christ will eventually destroy even death, so there will be no more death, and no more need for resurrection.

Ok, we've made it this far and I think agree.

Now to the verse in question.

Dr T, who is he talking to?

Answer: members of the church who live in Corinth, Greece.

Who or what did these people believe before they joined the church?

They were pagan. They did not believe in God, nor that there was life after death.

Would it be reasonable for someone who does not believe in life after death, and is even struggling here to believe in a resurrection, to practice baptizing (which was a religious ordinance) those who have died, if they did not believe in life after death?

No, it doesn't sound reasonable that they would do anything for those who have died if they believe they were no longer alive.

Is it possible that Paul is speaking about a false pagan practice of baptizing for the dead that is being practiced by people who 1) do not beleive in God, and have no reason to baptize because they are not religious, and 2) do not believe that those who are yet alive even have a reason for being baptized, much less those that are dead?

It doesn't seem possible.

Since Paul was writing to the church, the church that *should* believe that Christ was resurrected, and that already practiced baptism, that he was referring to a more sacred practice of baptising for the dead who have gone on without having the ordinance performed?

Since the church taught resurrection (life after death) AND baptism, doesn't it seem MORE likely that you only misunderstand how the early saints combined 2 common practices...

...Instead of how pagans, who don't believe in God, nor in life after death, nor in baptism at all for the living for that matter, would somehow combine the 2 into a futile practice to baptize people to a God who doesn't exist for a life after death that they will not have?

Maybe there's just something about being baptized for the dead that has been lost over the years to the Christian Church in general?

I'll stop answering for you, and let you answer now. :)

Edited March 5, 2009 by Justice

[Justice]

Do you have an answer, Dr T?

[Hemidakota]

Paul is writing TO Christians to convince the people who converted FROM pagan worship TO Christianity. He is not writing to pagans to convince them of a resurrection.

Before we move to the verse in question, let me know your thoughts on Paul's purpose for the writing this letter to the church at Corinth.

I would redefine it as 'the Saints' of the church in that area.

[Dr T]

Hi and thanks again Justice. I didn't see this until just now. That was a good reading and your reading about pegans not believing in the resurrection. I understand what u are saying there. What though, if people joined a church body (and they were members that knew about baptism and the resurrection) that instituted such a practice and Paul was addressing it then? Kind of an example of a group of people going off on their own and developing something that made sense to them but was not found elsewhere. LDS do it now and it's part of your custom now and temple work which has been taught to u so it makes sense that you think it's something that ought to be continued.

[darrel]

Hello Dr. T,

The important thing to remember about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is that our faith is based on the fact that God the Father and Jesus Christ His son are The same yesterday, today and forever, unchangable and eternal in nature. I would think you would agree with us on that.

The restoration of Christs Gospel through Joseph Smith established that fact in God's instructions given to Joseph Smith in the grove of trees and in revelations thereafter.

Our belief is based on God's teachings through His Apostles and Prophets both ancient and modern, not our own concepts. We did not start our own traditions. We teach what was taught by God through His Prophets and Apostles from the creation.

Edited March 7, 2009 by darrel

[Dr T]

Ok, thanks for that thought Darrel :)

[JohnnyRudick]

If the spiritual interacts with the earthly in any way, it should leave traces of it's activity. For instance, if Jesus himself were to show up in Tokyo, where there would be plenty of eyewitnesses to see it, that would leave proof. If God gives someone information, and that person had no possible way to access that information on their own, then thats proof as well (I.E. the location of buried treasure).

And since in religion God seems to show lots of activity in our world, where is the proof?

I will place here some of what I have written before in other places on this site *I do that alot:D it saves time and fingers:p)

to Korihor.

If there is a God, and there is.

And if he had children, and He does.

He would speak to them. And He does.

I have read just about everything you have and have heard all the arguments.

I imagine you must breath just about every anti-Mormon publication written.

The things I see written by you has the spirit of these publications as the underlying foundation.

You cannot know the truth of God by the knowledge of man.

This Truth only comes by the Holy Ghost.

He must bear witness to you of this truth.

You must wish to have this witness before you can receive it and then

choose to not only believe it but Love the Truth that was witnessed to

you.

God has declared the truth of what I have testified and I speak not of my own knowledge.

I could quote the many Scripture that declare this Truth but you would not believe it anyway.

I pray in the name of Jesus Christ that a witness will come to you to

show you the Truth but then the "ball is in your court". Do with it as

you will or as many do, continue to rail against the truth you know.

The Church scares you as you know if there is a True Church, this is it.

I testify to you "science4life" that Jesus is the Son of our Heavenly Father, and He was sent here to die on the cross of crucifixion for the sins of all that will believe in Him.

He set up His Church with Peter, James and John during His life on this earth and passed this Church calling on to Paul.

Just as the leaders of the Church in Jesus' day (the Jewish Elders)threw away the gospel by time of the meridian of this life of Man on this earth, the leaders as a whole on Earth, threw away the Gospel and diluted and corrupted it to the point that God made a way for the Restoration of the Gospel in these Last Days.

Joseph Smith was visited by both the Father and the Son and the way was set in the young boy Joseph to receive the Dispensation of the beginning of the Fullness if Times through those of whom Jesus set up His Church, Peter, James and John. And the one of whom He was ordained, John the Baptist and of course His Father. This Fullness of the Kingdom is working it's way to the End.

Learn, receive and Hold out my friend:)

Bro. Rudick

Edited March 7, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Afterthought, Sheesh! I do that alot:-] Oh, and Spelling:-(

[Faded]

My question is this: is there any proof that the Book of Mormon was inspired by God or from God in origin?

And also, can any of you show me proof that Jesus is the son of God?

Just curious.

Therein lies the dilemma -- spiritual and religious things cannot be proven, nor can they be proven false.

The underlying point is that by exercising faith in things that cannot be seen that are true, we grow. It's a lot like lifting weights or exercising. It is by such faith that God is what he is, and it is for this reason, among other reasons, that we live by faith in this life.

[Connie]

"We are not required to prove that The Book of Mormon is true or is an authentic record through external evidences, though there are many. It never has been the case nor is it so now that the studies of the learned will prove The Book of Mormon true or false. That has to come by the power of the Spirit."

-Ezra Taft Benson

[skippy740]

May there NEVER be "proof"!

Why? "Proof" would "belittle" my testimony.

"Proof's" would always be ridiculed anyway.

Those things that are spiritual are answered in a spiritual way.

Those things that are temporal & secular are answered in that way.

[Justice]

Na, I think you're grasping at straws, Dr T, and it sounds like you now know it.

You had a theory, one that is shared by many non-LDS, and it is clear that it is a stretch at best.

The most simple and straightforward answer is that he was speaking to them about an ordinance they performed in the temple. It is a sacred ordinance, and that's why it's not written about much. But, it was the PERFECT analogy for him to use because it strikes at the heart of their non-belief in the resurrection.

[JohnnyRudick]

Here are thoughts from David Guzik:

a. Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead to not rise at all? What was being baptized for the dead? It is a mysterious passage, and there have been more than thirty different attempts to interpret it.

i. The plain meaning of the original language is that some people are being baptized on behalf of those who have died. Paul’s point is “If there is no resurrection, why are they doing this? What is the point if there is no life after death?”

ii. Significantly, Paul does not say, “we baptize for the dead,” but asks what will they do who are baptized for the dead, and Why then are they baptized for the dead? Therefore, Paul is referring to a pagan custom of vicarious baptism for the dead. “Paul simply mentions the superstitious custom without approving it and uses it to fortify his argument that there is a resurrection from the dead.” (Mare)

iii. Paul certainly does not approve of the practice; he merely says that if there is no resurrection, why would the custom take place? The Mormon practice of baptism for the dead is neither Scriptural nor sensible.

iv. Paul’s point is plain: “The pagans even believe in the resurrection because they baptize for the dead. The pagans have the sense to believe in resurrection, but some of you Corinthian Christians do not!”

There are soooooo many posts in this thread that answer this if you will just sift through them.

I love the way so many are so knowledgeable and can come in and explain the truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ:)

Paul is using a pagan falsehood to prove a truth?

Note where he places this in his letter.

1 Corinthians 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and

become the firstfruits of them that slept.

1 Corinthians 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came

also the resurrection of the dead.

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ

shall all be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the

firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

1 Corinthians 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have

delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall

have put down all rule and all authority and power.

1 Corinthians 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all

enemies under his feet.

1 Corinthians 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is

death.

1 Corinthians 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet.

But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest

that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

1 Corinthians 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto

him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put

all things under him, that God may be all in all.

1 Corinthians 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized

for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then

baptized for the dead?

You are right.

He does not condone it.

Yet he does not condemn it either.

Why do you decide to take the latter?

It is like the Bible corrector who feels he/she must pick the contrary text as the confirming text just couldn't be right.

Plus everybody. . .

OK, nuff said.

Bro. Rudck

[Maxel]

I think this thread might be partly responsible for poor Dr T's decision to take a break from LDS.net. Just my personal guess...

Anyway, I think it's ironic that people are still responding to the OP when he hasn't posted for over 10 days.

[aranyborju]

Ok, this thread has run its course and I am going to close it down. Whats that? You have to be a Moderator to do that? Don't I feel sheepish.