Christianity: Salvation after death?

[dawny0826]

sojourner,

Of course we celebrate water baptisms. And we believe in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, too. We see baptism as our response to the HS, and as an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace. We have heard the teachings of Christ and we believe. We think that's the best paradigm, but not the only paradigm. In this way, the life that is obedient to Christ is obedient purely because we love Jesus and want to follow him in our earthly pilgrimage, not because we want a ticket to heaven.

We approach the Bible differently...but I feel the very same as you do in what you've stated above. Thanks for sharing.

 

[sojourner]

Well, it's always a pleasure to debate with somebody who doesn't believe I'm bound for the "Lake of Fire" . I just wanted to say that I appreciate your tolerant approach to other people's beliefs.

I'm going to ask you just one quesion, and I suspect that you may not wish to answer it. But you keep saying, "we believe," and I don't know who the "we" is. Are you a Unitarian Universalist or some other denomination. I believe it would be helpful in our discussions to have some idea of your denominational affiliation (if you have one). I hope you can understand why it's a little bit frustrating for me to hear you say "we" when your beliefs are obviously not shared by all Christians.

I am universalist (small "u") by theology, not Universalist (capital "U") by denomination. The "we" I refer to is in reference to others of any Christian denomination whose theology is universalist. Universalist theology is regarded as a quite liberal theology. It is not widely held by individuals or denominations. Fortunately, my own denomination, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), offers quite a bit of latitude in interpretation and belief. Most Disciples you would encounter don't hold universalist beliefs, but the number is growing. Thanks for your interest.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

So to you, does this mean that a person living in 4th century Mongolia or in a 13th century tribal village in Africa knows Jesus Christ and will consequently be held accountable for either accepting or rejecting Him?

Hmmm...let's see... it said "...without excuse..." Now what do you think this means, " And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." Heb 9:27 KJV

What do you suppose the judgement is going to be based on?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

And does that also mean that when Christ said that unless you are baptised you cannot be saved, that he was lying, and that this requirement will be waived?

Are you speaking of water baptism or the baptism of the Holy Spirit? If you believe it to water baptism then explain how the thief on the cross made it to heaven without water baptism.

 

[Katzpur]

Are you speaking of water baptism or the baptism of the Holy Spirit? If you believe it to water baptism then explain how the thief on the cross made it to heaven without water baptism.

How do you know that he wasn't? How do you know that he was even guilty of a crime? How do you know that he made it to heaven? The scriptures say "paradise" and paradise isn't the same place as heaven.

 

[Katzpur]

Hmmm...let's see... it said "...without excuse..." Now what do you think this means, " And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." Heb 9:27 KJV

It doesn't say "immediately after this the judgment." The book of Revelation describes a judgment that will take place at Christ's Second Coming. That's not immediately after we die.

What do you suppose the judgement is going to be based on?

I suppose it's going to be based upon a knowledge and understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ, upon our commitment to Him and our faith in His power to save, and upon the ways in which we manafest this faith. That's why I believe in a truly just God who would give all of His children an opportunity to gain this knowledge and a chance to recognize their Savior before He judged them.

 

[michel]

How do you know that he wasn't? How do you know that he was even guilty of a crime? How do you know that he made it to heaven? The scriptures say "paradise" and paradise isn't the same place as heaven.

Ooops! paradise insn't the same place as heaven ? .......sorry, can you explain the difference ?

 

[Katzpur]

Ooops! paradise insn't the same place as heaven ? .......sorry, can you explain the difference ?

Sure. Jesus told the man who hung next to Him on the cross that he would see him that same day in Paradise. On Easter morning, when Mary approached Him, He told her not to touch Him because He had not yet ascended to His Father in Heaven. If He had seen the man on the cross in Paradise after both of them had died, but had not been to Heaven three days later, they couldn't possibly be one and the same. Furthermore, most Christians believe that, during the three days in which His body lay in the tomb, Jesus visited "the spirits in Prison." There He taught them His gospel, which many accepted. (I don't have the scripture references handy, but I can find them if you'd like.)

So, we know that He was in both Paradise and Prison for a three-day period of time after His death, but that He hadn't yet returned to Heaven. The Latter-day Saints believe that Paradise and the Prison are both parts of the Spirit World where the spirits of all us of go after death to await our own resurrection. For the righteous, the Spirit World will be "Paradise," a place of peace and rest. For the wicked, it will be a form of hell, where they will be made to suffer the consequences of their disobedience, but from which their is the potential of release. In the Spirit World, the gospel of Jesus Christ continues to be taught. People who did not have the opportunity to hear it during mortality will have a chance to hear it in there.

We also believe that this is what Jesus was referring to when He said that "gates of Hell will not prevail against [His Church]." He wasn't saying that the Church He established would never fall into apostasy. He was saying that the gates of Hell would not have the power to prevent His gospel from being taught. Most of today's Christians think of "the gates of Hell" as meaning something like "the powers of Satan," but to a first-century Jew (such as Peter and the Apostles), the phrase would not have carried that sinister meaning. It would have meant nothing more than "the entrance to the world of departed spirits" (or the Spirit World -- Paradise and Prison).

 

[Aqualung]

Are you speaking of water baptism or the baptism of the Holy Spirit? If you believe it to water baptism then explain how the thief on the cross made it to heaven without water baptism.

Both. And he didn't make it to "heaven." After all, we know from timothy that Jesus didn't go to heaven after he died. Jesus said, "You will be with me in paradise," but Jesus didn't go to heaven. This means that "paradise" and "heaven" are two totally different things.

 

[joeboonda]

4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
(King James Bible, Ephesians)

12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

(King James Bible, 1 Corinthians)

There is one baptism, a spiritual baptism by which we were ALL baptised into the body of Christ the moment we first believed. Water baptism is only symbolic of that.

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? 15:30 And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?
(King James Bible, 1 Corinthians)

It is not WE who are baptized for the dead, but it is WE who stand in jeapordy. Paul was referring to THEY, not WE, and he was making the point that there will be a physical ressurrection someday, not teaching about baptism.

49:7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
(King James Bible, Psalms)
1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
(King James Bible, 1 Peter)

We cannot redeem our brother, not with proxy baptism, from corruptible water, nor with indulgences, nor offerings, only the precious blood of Christ can redeem anyone.

 

[joeboonda]

BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD​

The reason Mormons do genealogical studies is so they can do proxy baptism, sealings, ordinations, endowments and marriages in the temple for the their dead relatives to help exalt or save them. LDS use I Cor. 15:29 to try to show that their concept of proxy baptism is Biblical. It says, "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?" Paul's main subject in I Cor. 15 was not baptism for the dead but "resurrection of the body." He was not giving a commandment to baptize by proxy in verse 29, but he was arguing for a belief in the resurrection of the body. History indicates that there were sects which practiced baptism for the dead. Paul may be referring to them when he said, "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead?" But notice the change in pronouns in the next verse: "and why stand we in jeopardy every hour?" Notice "they" are baptizing for the dead and "we" are standing in jeopardy. Paul does not include himself nor any Christian with those who were baptizing for the dead! Paul simply questions, "Why are they doing it if there is no resurrection? Their act indicates they believe in a resurrection, just like when jeopardizing our lives for the gospel shows that we believe in the resurrection." LDS often misquote I Cor. 15:29 saying: "Else what shall we do who are baptized for the dead if the dead rise not at all? Why are we then baptized for the dead?" But, that is not what the text says!

The LDS doctrine of baptism for the dead actually comes from D. & C. 124:29- 39; 127:5-7; 128:1-3, 17-18. President Joseph Fielding Smith said:

If a man cannot enter the kingdom of God without baptism, then the dead must be baptized. But how can they be baptized in water for the remission of their sins? It is easy to understand how they in person could believe in Christ and even obtain the spirit of repentance; but water is an element of this world, and how could spirits be baptized in it, or receive the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost? The only way it can be done is vicariously, someone who is living acting as a substitute for the dead (D. of S., Vol. II, p. 141).



​

Concerning this subject, President Wilford Woodruff said:

I look upon this portion of our ministry as a mission of as much importance as preaching to the living; the dead will hear the voice of the servants of God in the spirit-world, and they cannot come forth in the morning of the resurrection, unless certain ordinances are performed for and in their behalf in temples built to the name of God. It takes just as much to save a dead man as a living man. For the last eighteen hundred years, the people that have lived and passed away never heard the voice of an inspired man, never heard a gospel sermon until they entered the spirit-world. Somebody has got to redeem them, by performing such ordinances for them in the flesh as they cannot attend to themselves in the spirit, and in order that this work may be done, we must have temples in which to do it; and what I wish to say to you, my brethren and sisters, is that the God of heaven requires us to rise up and build them, that the work of redemption may be hastened.... I will here say, before closing that two weeks before I left St. George (Utah), the spirits of the dead gathered around me, wanting to know why we did not redeem them. Said they, 'you have had the use of the endowment house for a number of years, and yet nothing has ever been done for us. We laid the foundation of the government you now enjoy, and we never apostatized from it, but we remained true to it and were faithful to God.' These were the signers of the Declaration of Independence and they waited on me for two days and two nights.... I straightway went into the baptismal font and called upon brother McCallister to baptize me for the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and fifty other eminent men, making one hundred in all, including John Wesley, Columbus, and others; I then baptized him for every President of the United States, except three; and when their cause is just, somebody will do the work for them (J. of D., Vol. XIX, pp. 228-229).



​

However, Psalm 49:7 declares, "None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him." Furthermore, I Pet. 1:18 says we are "not redeemed with corruptible things." Are man-made temples corruptible? Is water corruptible? Are men who stand proxy for the dead corruptible? If these things are corruptible, no one can be redeemed by them. Men are redeemed only by the precious blood of Jesus Christ (I Peter 1:18-19).


Mormonism says baptism is essential to salvation and spirits cannot be baptized in water, so proxy work is required to save them. But, the B. of M. teaches that the three transfigured Nephite disciples who never died baptized mortals (B. of M. III Nephi 28:18). Would it be any more difficult for a mortal to baptize a spirit than it was for the Spirit of the Lord to baptize Adam (P. of G.P. Moses 6:64-65)? And why could not the Spirit of the Lord baptize spirits if He could baptize a mortal? Furthermore, President Joseph Fielding Smith said, "They who go into the spirit world, who hold the priesthood of God, teach the dead the everlasting gospel in that spirit world; and when the dead are willing to repent and receive those teachings, and the work is done for them here vicariously, they shall have the privilege of coming out of the prison house to find their place in the kingdom of God" (D. of S., Vol. II, p. 135). Was the LDS "priesthood authority" for baptism, ordination, marriage and so on lost when they died? According to Smith, the only thing the LDS preachers do in the spirit world is preach, while LDS mortals on earth preach, baptize, ordain, marry, and so on. Is this "eternal progression?" Why is LDS proxy baptism for the dead so important anyway since the B. of M. says, "For behold that all little children are alive in Christ, and also all they that are without the law. For the power of redemption cometh on all them that have no law; wherefore, he that is not condemned, or he that is under no condemnation, cannot repent; and unto such, baptism availeth nothing but is mockery before God, denying the mercies of Christ, and the power of His Holy Spirit, and putting trust in dead works" (Moroni 8:22-23). For further information on this text see our section entitled Baptism in the chapter on "Salvation."

Joseph Fielding Smith said that the "faith alone doctrine denies justice of God" (D. of S., Vol. II, p. 140). And Talmage calls justification by faith a "pernicious doctrine" and a "sectarian dogma" (A. of F., pp. 107, 480). LDS believe that they can do proxy work for the dead which the dead can accept by faith in the spirit world after death (D. of S., Vol. II, p. 135). But, when Christ offers eternal life by grace through faith to believers here on earth (Eph. 2:8-9), the LDS reject it, saying that it is too easy and they must work for their own salvation. The Bible warns that the "god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God should shine unto them (II Cor. 4:4).

Talmage said that we can become "vicarious saviors" of the dead (A. of F., p. 152). But, if that is true, Jesus Christ is not the only mediator between God and men as I Tim. 2:5 declares. Furthermore, Heb. 9:27 says, "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." And, II Cor. 6:2 declares, "Behold now is the accepted time: Behold now is the day of salvation." The Bible nowhere teaches that mankind has another chance for salvation after death.

LDS use I Peter 3:19-20 to support their doctrine of salvation for the dead. It says Christ "preached unto the spirits in prison," but it does not say that He preached the gospel to them as LDS claim. Nor does the text say any spirits were saved as a result of that preaching or that anyone was baptized in their behalf. Such an interpretation ignores the context which indicates that Christ's preaching was a proclamation of judgment. Mormons also use I Peter 4:6 to teach salvation for the dead. It says, "For this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead." Notice the tense of the verbs: it says the gospel was preached to men when they were alive, but they are now dead. But, LDS use this text to teach that the gospel will be preached to the dead who died without the law. The B. of M. says that is a "mockery" and "dead works" (Moroni 8:22-23). On the other hand, those who did have the law and rejected it, should not have proxy work done for them according to President Joseph Fielding Smith. He said, "The work for the dead is not intended for those who had every opportunity to receive it, who had it taught to them, and who then refused to receive it, or had not interest enough to attend to these ordinances when they were living (D. of S., Vol. II, p. 184).

If baptism is not needed by those without the law as the B. of M. says, and proxy temple work "is not intended for those who had every opportunity to receive" the LDS gospel but refused it as Joseph Fielding Smith said, then for whom are LDS doing proxy work? Mormon missionaries who "compass sea and land to make one proselyte" (Matt. 23:15) are also wasting their time if they go to people "without the law," since the B. of M. says those people are already "alive in Christ," (Moroni 8:22). From Utah Lighthouse Ministry.

 

[NoName]

Section 64 of the Doctrine and Covenants has Christ supposedly saying (in v 3) "There are those among you who have sinned; but verily I say, for this once, for mine own glory, and for the salvation of souls, I have forgiven you your sins." I suppose these guys didn't repent of their sins, and that's why Christ had to say that he forgives them anyway, this once, for his own glory. Do you put it above christ to pardon those who didn't have a chance to get baptised? After all, he would forgive these few people their sins. But now we're talking billions of people. The worth of a soul is great, and with that many souls, why don't you think Christ will, "for [his] own glory, and for the salvation of souls" waive that baptismal requirement?

 

[Katzpur]

We cannot redeem our brother, not with proxy baptism, from corruptible water, nor with indulgences, nor offerings, only the precious blood of Christ can redeem anyone.

Poor jooboonda. You just can't resist the urge to use anti-Mormon websites as your source of information, can you. Jerald and Sandra Tanner are the biggest jokes alive and you just buy into everything they say, hook, line and sinker.

I don't recall stating that we believe we can redeem anyone. Of course only Christ is in a position to do that. We have no disagreement on that whatsoever.

 

[Katzpur]

Section 64 of the Doctrine and Covenants has Christ supposedly saying (in v 3) "There are those among you who have sinned; but verily I say, for this once, for mine own glory, and for the salvation of souls, I have forgiven you your sins." I suppose these guys didn't repent of their sins, and that's why Christ had to say that he forgives them anyway, this once, for his own glory. Do you put it above christ to pardon those who didn't have a chance to get baptised? After all, he would forgive these few people their sins. But now we're talking billions of people. The worth of a soul is great, and with that many souls, why don't you think Christ will, "for [his] own glory, and for the salvation of souls" waive that baptismal requirement?

Of course Christ could pardon those who didn't get a chance to be baptized. But He never said He would, and He won't have to. By the time everyone stands before God to be judged, each person will have either received this ordinance himself, or will have received it by proxy.

 

[joeboonda]

Poor jooboonda. You just can't resist the urge to use anti-Mormon websites as your source of information, can you. Jerald and Sandra Tanner are the biggest jokes alive and you just buy into everything they say, hook, line and sinker.

I don't recall stating that we believe we can redeem anyone. Of course only Christ is in a position to do that. We have no disagreement on that whatsoever.

Insults like calling me poor and that I 'buy into", and calling them the biggest jokes alive, are no way to debate. Read the material, and debate over the information, if you would, please.

 

[Katzpur]

Insults like calling me poor and that I 'buy into", and calling them the biggest jokes alive, are no way to debate. Read the material, and debate over the information, if you would, please.

I said "Poor joeboonda," because I truly feel sorry for you. You pretend to be looking for a legitImate discussion, but that's not what you really want. I called Jerald and Sandra Tanner "the biggest jokes alive" because that's exactly what they are. No legitimate scholar -- even a non-Mormon one -- would put any stock into what they have to say. I gave up trying to debate with you a long time ago. When you can stop posting from anti-Mormon websites, look me up and perhaps we can talk.

 

[Katzpur]

I find it kind of strange that, amid everybody's insistence that baptism for the dead is a false doctrine, no one has even attempted to explain what Paul meant when he used this practice as evidence for the resurrection. I'd really like to see some debate on this topic.

 

[joeboonda]

I guess we will have to throw a big pity party for each other, lol. Don't feel sorry for me, I am just fine. Thing about the Baptism for the Dead deal, is that it is simply mentioned as something 'they' do not 'we'. It is not in a discourse on Baptism, but about the physical resurrection of the dead. It is not mentioned in the Epistles as something 'we' are to do. The epistles do warn against keeping 'endless genealogies'. Thing is the Bible says that today is the day of salvation, that it is appointed once for man to die and after this the judgement. Jesus said those who were wicked in this life will receive damnation, and those who did good, everlasting life. No one knows 'what' he preached to the spirits in prison, I have read many things about that. If you believe that people can be saved after they die, and that you must be baptized to help them, then carry on, I simply do not believe that way. This is an instance of taking one line of a verse, out of context, that is referring to something 'they' did, that we are not sure exactly what kind of baptism 'they' did, and building an entire doctrine around it. I choose to major on the majors and minor on the minors. But, hey, we believe differently on pretty much everything 'christian' to some degree, so if you think it helps, go ahead and do it. I won't knock you for it, its a nice thing to believe and do, I just don't know that it is what God intended.

 

[Aqualung]

Ah, that's a much better post! It's not a random copy-paste thing, but an actual post!

 

[joeboonda]

Thanks, the post above the post I pasted was my own too, however, if I find something informative I like to paste it so people can read and debate or learn or whatever. I get pegged as the 'anti-mormon' website guy, but, I just go mainly to Christian sites, except the Utah Lighthouse Ministry, but I feel those folks are sincere in what they do, if anyone took the time to browse it. And conrary to what has been said, I do not 'pretend to look for legitimate discussion', nor do I tell others what 'they really want'. I present my side, with all the means I have, and then get called names, like 'poor joeboonda', lol. I would rather discuss the subject at hand, that's why I don't get too involved anymore. I have been called more names on RF than I have my whole life, which is a sad commentary on this site. I have never called anyone personaly a name or said they were stupid or said what they were really intending, just the facts as I know them. It is something to consider, I present articles and verses and arguments, and get called 'anti-mormon' or 'you just don't get it', or poor joeboonda, instead of actually adressing the subject. Is this true Christian love in action? At least I give respect even if I do not agree with someone, and would never say anything mean to them personally, simply argue my case. Ah, well. I'll shut up now.