Pastor Jeff has been rather quiet lately, on his YouTube channel about LDS. He has just put out a new video, however, discussing the LDS doctrine of baptism, which he begins with the follows question, from a Church member presumably:
“@StevesterAmos: Curious to know your thoughts on 1 Corinthians 15:29, where the practice of baptism for the dead is mentioned, and the LDS look to as the basis for it?”
That is not an accurate expression of the LDS theological position on that subject, however. The LDS doctrine of baptism for the dead is not derived from 1 Corinthians 15:29; it is derived primarily from modern revelation (Doctrine and Covenants sections 124, 127, 128, 138). 1 Cor. 15:29 simply adds biblical confirmation to the LDS doctrine; but it is not the main source of the doctrine. Then he continues as follows (emphasis added):
“Hello Saints, my name is Jeff, I am a pastor in Utah, exploring everything I can about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I think it is time for us to revisit again the topic of baptism. And there is a couple reasons why I think it is a good idea. First of all, I just went through the temple down in St. George, Utah. It is only my second time going through a temple; and naturally as I am being taken through the temple, and the tour guide is explaining the baptismal font, and the various ordinances, baptism is just on my mind, I am just seeing how critically important it is, and how central it is to a lot of Latter-day Saint belief; and secondly, the topic of baptism is one of the most common topics that people will ask me about. So what I am going to try to do in this video is respond to a lot of the comments I get in the YouTube comment section; and hopefully that can clarify where the Latter-day Saint view is similar, but also different from a more common Protestant Evangelical view; so let’s dive in.
“Now the backdrop of this first question is the various times that I have communicated, that the common Protestant Evangelical belief is that baptism is a command, but it doesn’t save us; in other words, just because someone isn’t baptized, doesn’t mean that they are going to miss out on heaven, or that they are going to go to hell; which is probably why @pushaving is saying, ‘It is interesting to hear you speak of baptism as optional. I think that Jesus was pretty clear that everyone (non-children) needed to be baptized, when in Matthew 28 he commanded his disciples to: ‘19 Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am With you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.’ Now one thing I want to clarify right off the bat is, just because we don’t believe baptism saves us, doesn’t mean that Protestant Evangelicals look at baptism as optional. It is clearly a command. Jesus commands that we should be baptized, and that we should baptize others, as he is referencing here in Matthew 28, during the Great Commission. So how can we say that baptism doesn’t save us but it is still a command?”
I see some inconsistencies there. Firstly, nobody claims that “baptism saves us”. We are saved by God when we do what he says—which is not the same thing. Secondly, he acknowledges that baptism is a command; but then he goes on to say that it is not required for salvation, which doesn’t make sense. If baptism is a command, as he admits, what happens if somebody disobeys that “command”? Nothing? What is the point of God giving us a “command,” if it makes no difference whether we obey or disobey that “command”? The Bible says that we are saved by God when we do what he says:
Matthew 7:
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
And baptism is one of things that God has said; it is one of those commands. There can only be one conclusion: There can be no salvation without submitting to baptism. Now that is not the same as saying that “baptism saves us”. It is God that saves us when we do what he says—which is not the same thing. He is trying to dodge the issue by calling it “baptism saves,” which is not what is claimed. He repeats that obfuscation in the rest of the video, therefore there is no need to add more. And the words of Jesus carry more weight than the words of Paul. When Jesus says something that is unambiguous and clear, we take it as it is, we don’t modify it by an ambiguous statement of Paul. When Jesus says that no one can enter into the kingdom of heaven unless they do God’s will, or do what he says, we take that as it is, we don’t modify it with something else.
No comments:
Post a Comment