There was a time in my life when I listened to this talk almost every day. It became my credo; my pattern for a life I longed for. Henry B Eyring became my hero, and with him as a guide, I could become like the Savior.
This clip was raw and vulnerable; and it hit me like nothing else had. Becoming as a child is the only way to become like our Redeemer, Jesus Christ!
https://t.co/38Nr6s374J
For the last time, PAUL ISNT WRITING TO PAGANS. He’s writing to the church. If he had a problem with baptism for the dead, he would have said “don’t do that.” He brought it up to show them that the practice means nothing if one doesn’t believe in the resurrection. There’s no point to baptizing the dead if there is no resurrection. It provides a way for the dead who never heard of Jesus to accept Him.
I can’t explain it any better. You are free to reject it. But you can’t change my mind on this. God has spoken through Joseph Smith that He wants every one of His children to have the opportunity for baptism. That’s why we (and the Corinthian saints) do (did) it.
No we don’t. Living people are baptized for, or on behalf of, the dead.
I misspoke about who they is referring to. It is the people that are being baptized for the dead. That changes nothing. Paul’s main concern is that they are teaching that the resurrection is real (most of the chapter speaks of this). He then points out a contradiction. If they don’t believe in the resurrection, what is the point of baptizing for the dead if the dead don’t rise. He’s correcting the problem of rejecting the resurrection. No where did Paul question the action of baptizing for the dead. If baptizing for the dead was the problem, he would have said “don’t do that.” He said no such thing.
You’re bringing our present world/language/understanding to the text. That’s a bad way to interpret scripture.
I can see this will go nowhere. Back and forth like this isn’t productive. My understanding is not based solely on the Bible, while yours is. We are going to see things differently because of this. I wish you the best.
I am trying. But you are coming to the text with assumptions that are not supported by the rest of the text. History isn’t simple because we don’t have the full picture.
For example, first Corinthians could be second Corinthians because Paul mentions a previous letter to them we don’t have.
@eStream_@bing_TX@Primary_Pianist That’s from a Christian apologist. Of course he’s going to see it that way. Any peer reviewed papers to support that?
@eStream_@bing_TX@Primary_Pianist That’s an assumption. You have to look through Paul’s letters to see if he does it multiple times.
What you’re doing is reading what you want into the text.
@eStream_@bing_TX@Primary_Pianist You’re making a claim that “they” refers to pagans in Corinth. You have to back that up. It’s not supported by the text. It’s much more likely to refer to his audience.
Paul writes to the Corinthians for a lot of problems they were having. But do you want to know one thing he didn’t say:
“Baptism for the dead?!?! Who came up with that nonsense??”
@iamjml@Primary_Pianist Feel free to look it up. As far as anybody knows, the Corinthians(pagan society) were the only ones who did it.
Mystery cults.
characterized by initiation rites, vows of secrecy, and a focus on personal salvation and a better afterlife.
Sound familiar?
I’ll rephrase. It was broad and vague. Meant to rage-bate rather than generate actual discussion.
Democrats won’t even ponder the possibility that abortion is morally wrong. They focus on the margins and seek exceptions for the 1% of cases. It’s a full-blown religion of a different kind.
@Haywire1120@RickWritesNow@michcooley@SenMikeLee So in order for the pro-life position (not killing unborn children) to be valid, we have to hold a legit funeral for every miscarriage? That’s what it would take for you to respect our position?