Your laugh for the day

[Ironhold]

This Gospel Coalition article on vicarious baptism.

To quote them:

Likewise, we may never know precisely why the Corinthians were baptized for the dead, but we can know that the Mormon view is false.

Yes, the author literally said that.

If they don't know just what Paul meant, then how can they be sure that we're wrong?

[Guest]

Mormons are always wrong, silly. Even if they might be right, they must be wrong. 

[Guest]

This is really no different than what Byron has stated as the M.O. of all those who attack our faith.  

 

1) Anything they already believe must be the basis of all other truth.

2) Refuse to learn anything about us except that we're wrong.

3) Create conditions, criteria, and definitions so that any conversation spins back on itself to keep opposing facts from creeping in.

[Guest]

I just read the article. I really have to wonder if they did this as a joke.  Here's a synopsis.

 

He references 1 Cor 15:29 (the baptism for the dead).  "Paul uses it to defend the coming resurrection of believers."

 

It sounds like the Mormons are right.  But.

 

1)  We don't hear about it anywhere else. (Of course.  It isn't even in the Book of Mormon)

2)  It offends protestant theology. (huh???)

3)  This would refute being saved by faith alone. (Yeah, no joke).

 

Possible explanations:

 

1)  Paul's words are figurative. (If you say so).

2)  "for" does not equal "in behalf of".

 (Really? I looked up all definitions of "for" and none of the definitions that mean anything else wouldn't even make sense in this sentence and context.)

3)  However, the text gives no indications of metaphor. (You are correct.  It does not.  So what does that tell you?)

4) All scholars agree that the plain meaning is most likely.  (THANK YOU!!! He CAN be taught!)

5) Finally..... It is possible we do know why, we just don't know that we know why.  But we're certain Mormons are wrong. (I thought he could be taught?        )

 

Two principles:

 

1) The resurrection is real in Christ and in believers.  (Ok.  No problem so far.)

2) He stopped talking about the resurrection at verse 12, but keeps talking about it anyway.  (Honestly. That is what he is really saying). 

So Paul really means we're "risking death" all the time for the gospel's sake.

(I'm not really sure how he gets that if it he has already said it's not a metaphor.  And "baptized for the as good as dead" doesn't really fly.  But he's going with it.)

 

Two conclusions:

 

1) Mormons take the passage out of context because Paul was talking about resurrection, not a saving ordinance.  (Uhm...  How does that change anything given the nature of Paul's argument?)

2) Since the Corinthians apparently practiced it, baptism for the dead doesn't actually pervert the gospel, or Paul would have condemned it. (I'd get excited again.  But I'm afraid he's just setting us up for another let down.  Or I could just ask, well then why are you condemning it?)

 

Mormon view:

 

1) The Mormon view undermines the gospel.  (And THERE IT IS!     Didn't you just get done saying that it DOESN'T?  ).

2) And the two conclusions above prove it. (Whoa.  What just happened?  Did he make a self-refuting argument and then declare victory?  I???  WTF???)    

3) Mormons CAN'T be correct because that would make us wrong.  (And Mormons would be right.  So what's the problem?)

4) Then, a fairly accurate description of our belief and practice on the matter.  (As if that makes any difference... I'm guessing he gave the description to make it sound all CULT-like and stuff...  )

5) Mormons are wrong because blah blah blah blah.  (non sequitur).

6) So if the Corinthians did what Mormons do now, it is certain that Paul would not have tolerated it.

-----(And I know that if the people on Venus were to talk to the morlochs at the center of the hollow earth... Oh.  Where were we?)

-----(Basically: We don't know what Paul was thinking about the Corinthians, but we know what Paul would think about Mormons)

 

What does it mean?

 

1) Well I still don't know and we should probably take Paul's words at face value.  He apparently didn't approve, but it wasn't all that bad.  (But we can still complain about Mormons doing it because we know it's wrong when THEY do it.  )

2) Our best guess is that they didn't necessarily believe baptism was really important, but they just thought baptism was more important than we do. (Double face-palm.)

3) So because the Corinthians did something so obviously wrong Paul did nothing, which proves what a LION he was when protecting the gospel. (Triple face-palm, for when a double face-palm just isn't enough).

Edited November 3, 2015 by Guest

[Ironhold]

I'll be honest - I'm surprised that my comment made it through moderation there.