LeSellers Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 22 minutes ago, Carborendum said: If you're stuck in sin and Jesus throws you a rope and tells you to grab the rope, do you not grab the rope? When you're out, do you give credit to the rope or to Jesus? Jesus saved you, but he used the tool of the Church and all that goes with it as the tool by which to do it. Do you credit a hammer for building a house? Do you credit a wrench for fixing a car? Don't mistake the necessity of the tool as dismissing the one who used the tool. 15 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: I disagree. Jesus is not a tool used by the church. Jesus is the one throwing the rope. You misread Carb's point. The tool is the Church, not Christ. His church is both the people and the organization. Paul tells us there are apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and others. Unless a church has those specific offices, it cannot be the Church of Jesus Christ. Those offices come as part of a priesthood, His Priesthood. Without that Priesthood, it is not His Church. And, if prophets, revelation. Without ongoing revelation, it is not His church. Lehi Quote
LeSellers Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 54 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: Most people are already baptized with water 26 minutes ago, estradling75 said: In what manner did the Sinless Son of God "fulfil all righteousness" by being baptized? In addition to estradling's point, we also see in the gospel accounts that Jesus didn't just go to anyone for His baptism. He specifically sought out John. John was not the first to baptize (Jews had been baptizing for centuries), and it seems safe to deduce that he was not the only one doing so. So, why John? John had the authority of God to do it. Those others did not. The people they baptized, like your "[m]ost people" had been baptized with water, but those baptisms were not valid because the officiator was unauthorized. The LDS claim, that the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Priesthood of Jesus Christ, the Church of Jesus Christ were restored in 1830 through Joseph Smith is either true (and I know it is) or it is not. But there is a huge difference between a restoration and a reformation. The latter relies on men (and we recognize their good will and intent) to interpret scripture, but they were/are men with their own weaknesses and biases. Their products were the products of men. And, when we grant their premise, that the Catholic Church had fallen into apostasy, the very idea that they could get the Priesthood from their own efforts is incredible. A restoration, on the other hand, even through a human with the same weaknesses as the rest of humanity, does not rely on human effort: it is governed and accomplished by God. So, unless the church you belong to, or the faith you hold, has been restored by God, through a prophet, it does not have the power to baptize. And, as Peter said, "[water] baptism doth now also save us." Frankly, it's a bit scary to contemplate. Lehi Quote
tesuji Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 Tobeloved, You are right when you say no one can be saved without Jesus. As the Book of Mormon says, Quote Behold, the way for man is narrow, but it lieth in a straight course before him, and the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate; for he cannot be deceived, for the Lord God is his name. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/9?lang=eng Jesus is the gate. Through his grace and his atonement for us, the door to salvation is open to us. There is no other way to open that door However, after you get through the door, there is still the whole path before you that you must walk. Part of "walking that path" is keeping God's commandments and loving God and your neighbor. As you have identified, baptism is required. And it must be performed by someone with the official priesthood authority of God. Mormons believe this authority was lost during the dark ages after the apostles were killed, so it had to be restored in modern times. Other official ordinances much also be done, by authority. The church is the organization, set up by Christ, to help us walk the path and make sure the ordinances are done properly. Quote
estradling75 Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 12 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: That's a pretty good question. For one, God told John the Baptist that he would see the Christ before his death. Second, John the Baptist was considered to be the best of men on the earth at that time. Third, John the Baptist even admitted that he was not holy enough to baptize Jesus, but Jesus told him to. I think it is clear that John knew he did NOT have the authority, but did it because Jesus Christ told him to. We do disagree here... John was clearly foreordained to baptize Christ. He clearly had the authority, just as clearly as he felt humbled and unworthy of such a responsibility.. Having the authority to act and being humble and knowing your own limits are not mutually exclusive traits. zil and Jane_Doe 2 Quote
Jane_Doe Posted April 22, 2016 Author Report Posted April 22, 2016 1 hour ago, Tobeloved said: I wrote the question to find out is if the LDS believe that they are not able to get into the celestial kingdom without a man or men or church, but only relying 100% on the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. I see that the answer is "no"and it is clear that you will not be with Jesus, in your belief system, without the church to help you along. For the poster who mentioned that "every knee will bow and every heart confess that Jesus Christ is Lord", I do that now, each day. Right now I bow to Jesus Christ. Only Jesus Christ. Most people are already baptized with water So then the question, "why the church"? If it is about Jesus atoning for all sin. Thank you for your consideration. Christ cannot/will not save a person unwillingly: we must be come to Him. This is done through not just through talk, but through action (as James said: faith without works is dead). These actions include be baptized by those in authority (which non-LDS churches lack). Quote
Tobeloved Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 17 minutes ago, LeSellers said: You misread Carb's point. The tool is the Church, not Christ. His church is both the people and the organization. Paul tells us there are apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and others. Unless a church has those specific offices, it cannot be the Church of Jesus Christ. Those offices come as part of a priesthood, His Priesthood. Without that Priesthood, it is not His Church. And, if prophets, revelation. Without ongoing revelation, it is not His church. Lehi I do not deny that churches are wonderful organizations and do many great things. But. Where I have issue, is when there is a step between the person and Jesus Christ that much be of a church. That is my issue and really was my question from the start. Quote
Jane_Doe Posted April 22, 2016 Author Report Posted April 22, 2016 38 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: Is it thought that people who may not be LDS do not love Jesus Christ? And do not develop and refine that love throughout their lifetime? I'm trying to understand what you are saying exactly. It's not that non-LDS don't love Christ, but they are not baptized by those in authority. Quote
zil Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 9 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: Where I have issue, is when there is a step between the person and Jesus Christ that much be of a church. What do you think of the organizational structure Christ set up in the new testament? NOTE: The existence of a church, even Christ's church, does not put the church "between" a person and Christ, rather, the church exists for the purpose of assisting a person to come to Christ through the various laws and ordinances Christ himself taught. Quote
Tobeloved Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 16 minutes ago, estradling75 said: We do disagree here... John was clearly foreordained to baptize Christ. He clearly had the authority, just as clearly as he felt humbled and unworthy of such a responsibility.. Having the authority to act and being humble and knowing your own limits are not mutually exclusive traits. In fact ideally they go hand in hand Jesus Christ told him he could. That is not a man who already had authority. That is a man who was asking permission. Quote
estradling75 Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 10 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: I do not deny that churches are wonderful organizations and do many great things. But. Where I have issue, is when there is a step between the person and Jesus Christ that much be of a church. That is my issue and really was my question from the start. That is totally understandable... Difference is we believe and claim that the our church is Christ's Church and his instrument for being a house of order when it comes to performing the the ordinance of the gospel that he requires Quote
Jane_Doe Posted April 22, 2016 Author Report Posted April 22, 2016 12 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: I do not deny that churches are wonderful organizations and do many great things. But. Where I have issue, is when there is a step between the person and Jesus Christ that must be of a church. It is that step that I do not believe in. That is my issue and really was my question from the start. Christ having servant is not a wall between us and Him. Also, Christ's people and Christ's Church should be His servants and through there do His wonders. Quote
estradling75 Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 8 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: Jesus Christ told him he could. That is not a man who already had authority. That is a man who was asking permission. That is one way of reading it... Another would be that Christ knew he has the authority and was facing a John who was feeling totally and understandably unworthy to use it. But either way though John clearly ended up having the authority to do it Quote
Jane_Doe Posted April 22, 2016 Author Report Posted April 22, 2016 8 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: Jesus Christ told him he could. That is not a man who already had authority. That is a man who was asking permission. When John got the authority is a a rabbit trail. The bigger question is WHY was Christ baptized? And the answer stated clearly in scripture itself is "to fulfill all righteousness". Baptism by those in authority is a commandment and those who reject His baptism reject Him. Quote
zil Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 20 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: Jesus Christ told him he could. That is not a man who already had authority. That is a man who was asking permission. Matthew 3, Mark 1, Luke 3, John 1 make it clear: John was already baptizing. John was already claiming to have been sent by God to prepare the way for Christ. He was prophesying that Christ would come. He (John) described Christ as someone "whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose". Again, John never claimed lack of authority - quite the opposite from scripture; he claimed, as we all would, lack of worthiness. Quote 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: ... 13 ¶Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. "I have need to be baptized of thee" (John said - implying he needed this baptism of the Holy Ghost and with fire). "Suffer it to be so..." Christ said - nothing about granting authorization, "suffer it" - let it so be, allow this. Jane_Doe 1 Quote
Tobeloved Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 23 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said: When John got the authority is a a rabbit trail. The bigger question is WHY was Christ baptized? And the answer stated clearly in scripture itself is "to fulfill all righteousness". Baptism by those in authority is a commandment and those who reject His baptism reject Him. It is not a rabbit trail. It is very much a question of authority because the replies have been that the church has authority. John the Baptist ONLY baptized for repentance That is not the salvation for the forgiveness of sin that Jesus Christ brings, nor is it the same baptism that the apostles did. So John didn't even have the authority to baptize for the forgiveness of sins, because Jesus hadn't died yet. Quote
Just_A_Guy Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 Whether John had pre-existing authority, or whether his commission to baptize Jesus derived merely from Jesus' request that he perform the rite, I think we can agree that John had the authority. Caiaphas, Annas, and Pontius Pilate did not; and had any of them presumed to start baptizing people I think God would have had a real problem with that. Jane_Doe 1 Quote
anatess2 Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 38 minutes ago, Tobeloved said: It is not a rabbit trail. It is very much a question of authority because the replies have been that the church has authority. John the Baptist ONLY baptized for repentance That is not the salvation for the forgiveness of sin that Jesus Christ brings, nor is it the same baptism that the apostles did. So John didn't even have the authority to baptize for the forgiveness of sins, because Jesus hadn't died yet. This thread is very confusing with all the doubling of posts... hope it's not confusing you. I'm going to address your statement above. Baptism is an ordinance for salvation. Basically, it is the ordinance that QUALIFIES us for salvation. Jesus doesn't have to die first for a person baptized to qualify for salvation. Basically, all the covenant people that were baptized in the Old Testament times qualified for salvation before Christ fulfilled the atonement. The Old Testament baptisms and the New Testament baptisms are sourced from the same Priesthood authority and provided the exact same blessings. There is nothing different between the two... those baptized in the Old Testament qualified for salvation in the same way as those baptized in the New Testament and also in the same was those baptized with the proper authority today. Everybody has to be baptized - including those who are in uncivilized societies who haven't even heard of the name Jesus, let alone be in contact with a person with the authority to baptize while they were alive on earth since the beginning of time. They all have to be baptized with the proper authority to qualify for salvation. In the LDS Church, we perform proxy baptisms for those who have passed away without having had the opportunity to do so. Those who are already in the spirit world continue to learn and grow in their testimony of Jesus Christ and the plan of happiness. But as baptism is a mortal ordinance, it can only be done in mortality, so a living person is baptized in place of the person who has died and the person who has died will have to accept or reject the baptismal covenant. Hope this helps. Jane_Doe 1 Quote
anatess2 Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tobeloved said: It is not a rabbit trail. It is very much a question of authority because the replies have been that the church has authority. John the Baptist ONLY baptized for repentance That is not the salvation for the forgiveness of sin that Jesus Christ brings, nor is it the same baptism that the apostles did. So John didn't even have the authority to baptize for the forgiveness of sins, because Jesus hadn't died yet. This thread is very confusing with all the doubling of posts... hope it's not confusing you. I'm going to address your statement above. Baptism is an ordinance for salvation. Basically, it is the ordinance that QUALIFIES us for salvation. Jesus doesn't have to die first for a person baptized to qualify for salvation. Basically, all the covenant people that were baptized in the Old Testament times qualified for salvation before Christ fulfilled the atonement. The Old Testament baptisms and the New Testament baptisms are sourced from the same Priesthood authority and provided the exact same blessings. There is nothing different between the two... those baptized in the Old Testament qualified for salvation in the same way as those baptized in the New Testament and also in the same way as those baptized with the proper authority today. Everybody has to be baptized - including those who are in uncivilized societies who haven't even heard of the name Jesus, let alone be in contact with a person with the authority to baptize while they were alive on earth since the beginning of time. They all have to be baptized with the proper authority to qualify for salvation. In the LDS Church, we perform proxy baptisms for those who have passed away without having had the opportunity to do so. Those who are already in the spirit world continue to learn and grow in their testimony of Jesus Christ and the plan of happiness. But as baptism is a mortal ordinance, it can only be done in mortality, so a living person is baptized in place of the person who has died and the person who has died will have to accept or reject the baptismal covenant. Hope this helps. Edited April 22, 2016 by anatess2 Quote
Connie Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 On 4/20/2016 at 1:09 PM, Jane_Doe said: Her question is: "Can someone be with Jesus Christ in the highest heaven for all eternity, if they never have completed any Mormon Temple ceremonies or have had any Mormon Temple performed for them as a proxy on earth?" No, they cannot. But they can enter in one of the other kingdoms which we are told are so wonderful that they “surpass all understanding.” You might find this quote from Robert Millet helpful. He said, “While Latter-day Saints believe and teach that the highest form of salvation, or exaltation, comes to those who receive the blessings of the temple, we do not in any way believe that it is the temple, or the ordinances contained there, that saves us. Salvation is in Christ. We believe the temple to be a house of learning, of communion and inspiration, of covenants and ordinances, of service, and of personal refinement. We believe that the temple is the house of the Lord. But it is not the Lord. We look to Christ the Person for salvation.” (from Getting at the Truth, chapter 6, question 6) Quote
Tobeloved Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 2 hours ago, Carborendum said: If you're stuck in sin and Jesus throws you a rope and tells you to grab the rope, do you not grab the rope? When you're out, do you give credit to the rope or to Jesus? Jesus saved you, but he used the tool of the Church and all that goes with it as the tool by which to do it. Do you credit a hammer for building a house? Do you credit a wrench for fixing a car? Don't mistake the necessity of the tool as dismissing the one who used the tool. I did specifically ask about the or a church being mandatory. So I'm not sure this answers what I had asked. I'll cut and paste below: So then the question, "why the church"? If it is about Jesus atoning for all sin. Sorry for all the formatting underline issues, I'm new. Quote
Tobeloved Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 2 hours ago, LeSellers said: You misread Carb's point. The tool is the Church, not Christ. His church is both the people and the organization. Paul tells us there are apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and others. Unless a church has those specific offices, it cannot be the Church of Jesus Christ. Those offices come as part of a priesthood, His Priesthood. Without that Priesthood, it is not His Church. And, if prophets, revelation. Without ongoing revelation, it is not His church. Lehi I believe that Jesus said that all believers are part of the priesthood of Christ. Do you have the verses that would show that a priesthood is an office in the NT church? Quote
Jane_Doe Posted April 22, 2016 Author Report Posted April 22, 2016 @Tobeloved Let's break this down into pieces: First, a person, even Christ, must be baptized. Why? In Christ's words: "To fulfill all righteousness". This is a commandment of God, Are we clear on this part, before we advance further? Quote
Tobeloved Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 2 hours ago, LeSellers said: You misread Carb's point. The tool is the Church, not Christ. His church is both the people and the organization. Paul tells us there are apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and others. Unless a church has those specific offices, it cannot be the Church of Jesus Christ. Those offices come as part of a priesthood, His Priesthood. Without that Priesthood, it is not His Church. And, if prophets, revelation. Without ongoing revelation, it is not His church. Lehi I believe that Jesus said that all believers are part of the priesthood of Christ. Do you have the verses that would show that a priesthood is an office in the NT church? There is nothing wrong with prophets, but I don't know that we should change things because of a prophet. I guess that is the part we disagree on. 1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said: Whether John had pre-existing authority, or whether his commission to baptize Jesus derived merely from Jesus' request that he perform the rite, I think we can agree that John had the authority. Caiaphas, Annas, and Pontius Pilate did not; and had any of them presumed to start baptizing people I think God would have had a real problem with that. John did have permission to baptize Jesus, but how is that authority? Quote
Tobeloved Posted April 22, 2016 Report Posted April 22, 2016 Sorry I keep double posting. It leaves the reply in my reply box and I don't know if it posted or not. Can anyone help me understand this? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.